Huckabee and Obama pull ahead

It's starting to get interesting......

Reason for optimism in '08

Dem presidential candidates have raised nearly twice as much as Republicans this year.

'Cause I've got a crush on Obama

The reason why- his unequivocal opposition to torture.

"To lead the world, we must lead by example. We must be willing to acknowledge our failings, not just trumpet our victories. And when I'm President, we'll reject torture - without exception or equivocation; we'll close Guantanamo; we'll be the country that credibly tells the dissidents in the prison camps around the world that America is your voice, America is your dream, America is your light of justice."

Finally!

In Defense of Brian Baird

At a September 21 town hall meeting in Olympia that resembled more of a flogging in the town square than a community dialogue, Congressman Brian Baird commented, "The people who scare me the most are the people who are certain on either side (of the Iraq debate). It was absolute certainty that got us into this mess."

Ever since Congressman Baird returned from a recent visit to Iraq and mentioned that he had seen signs of progress, he has been savaged by constituents in his district as well as anti-war activists nationwide. He has been called a trained monkey of the Bush administration, a puppet of Dick Cheney and worse. Moveon.org has even aired ads in his district challenging his stance.

But given that Congressman Baird clearly and consistently opposed the war from the outset, is his stance a flip-flop or an honest appraisal of the current situation and a recognition of our nation's responsibility to the Iraqi people?

General David Petraeus’ report on the war in Iraq has been greeted with predictable responses from the right and the left. The pro-Bush faction has made dubious claims of progress (how legitimate can reports be that assess sectarian violence based on whether someone was shot in the back of the head?). While the usual suspects at moveon.org and DailyKos have blasted Petraeus for misleading, if not betraying the American people, and ramped up calls for a quick withdrawal.

Everyone seems to have an opinion on whether the United States should withdraw or maintain its force from Iraq, but who really knows?

It is conventional wisdom now that we were drawn into the war under false pretenses. Images of mushroom clouds and claims of Iraq’s ties to Al Qaeda were either exaggerated or fabricated outright. Even Alan Greenspan is now acknowledging the role of oil in the decision to go to war.

Regardless of how we got into the war, do we not have a responsibility to fix the mess we created? Do we not, as a nation, still owe a debt to the Iraqi people? Whether you supported the war or not, can the United States just walk away?

As Colin Powell famously commented to President Bush, misstating a Pottery Barn store policy, “If you break it, you own it.”

Well, we’ve clearly broken it, but would a rapid withdrawal make things better?

The last time we abandoned the Iraqis to their own devices, a bloodbath ensued. That was 1991, just as the first Gulf War was ending. After urging the Kurds and the Shiites to rise up against Saddam and saying we would back them up, President George H.W. Bush stood by while as many as 150,000 Shiite Iraqis were massacred by Saddam’s Army.

In the current war, conservative estimates suggest at least 73,000 Iraqi civilians have been killed. Other estimates suggest that over 300,000 have died. More than two million Iraqis have been displaced. Today, we face a challenge like the one facing Bush 41 at the end of the first Gulf War. If we abandon the Iraqis again, how many more will be slaughtered?

Seven soldiers recently penned an op-ed in the New York Times arguing the futility of continuing the war. They argued,

"Counterinsurgency is, by definition, a competition between insurgents and counterinsurgents for the control and support of a population. To believe that Americans, with an occupying force that long ago outlived its reluctant welcome, can win over a recalcitrant local population and win this counterinsurgency is far-fetched."

Two of those seven are dead now. Maybe they were right.

Meanwhile, General Petraeus, the guy who literally wrote the book on counterinsurgency operations, thinks we need more time. Petraeus is certainly not immune to political pressure, but is he engaged in a modern-day Pickett’s Charge of sending American men and women to their certain death? Would he be advocating for the continuation of a war that he knows is not winnable?

Either way we need a more honest discussion about the war, not more of the name-calling like that which Congressman Baird has faced. It would be especially nice if the Bush administration would finally admit that things are not going as rosy as they continually claim.

The administration lost all credibility years ago, but that doesn't change the question of what we should do now. Congressman Baird's sobering words about those who are certain are worth examining.

Bush Grows Up

By nominating Michael Mukasey to be the next Attorney General and sparing us an ugly nomination fight, President Bush has finally shown some maturity and decency. Karl Rove has indeed left the White House.

Is Gonzales a liar or an idiot?

The excruciatingly painful performances of Alberto Gonzales before the Senate Judiciary Committee are evidence that the Attorney General is either an absentee leader of the Justice Department or a moron.

How many Monica Goodlings are there?

If this moderately attractive alumna of a fake law school had this much power, how many others are there sabotaging our federal agencies?

Exposed for what they truly are

It’s hard to tell what President Bush ultimately stands for- other than tax cuts for the rich and war for the poor- but one thing that is abundantly clear is that he is a ruthless partisan. Despite carrying himself as someone who would “change the tone” in Washington, President Bush more closely resembles Tony Soprano than a conciliatory politician.

At every turn during his presidency, Bush and his cronies have looked for opportunities to knife their political adversaries. Like a prison inmate facing a life sentence, they act as if they have nothing to lose attacking heroes like Max Cleland, eviscerating environmental policies, and ridiculing Congress.

Indeed, the most galling aspect of the Gonzales-US Attorney scandal is the fact that the attorneys were fired AFTER the Republicans got their derrieres handed to them in the last election. One might think the administration would be chastened after their evil plan to take over the world had been sidelined, but no, they take one more outrageous liberty on their way out of office. Who knows what else they’ll ram down our throats before they exit the White House?

She's in

If nothing else, it will be an interesting cultural experiment.