Democracy: The Fable

Yes, "high-minded" is exactly the phrase that comes to mind when I think about the Bush administration's foreign policy. Spot on.

Wasn't one disastrous Allawi government enough? Iraq doesn't need a Grover Cleveland.

Joe,

What happened? You were so well up until your persistent need to classify anyone that has an opinion contrary to yours as "blather of the blogosphere." You cannot honestly believe that there is no one in the government who would like to see Allawi in power. How about the famous Cheney cabal? You say the CIA is against this. Fine, I take both you and Ignatius at your word, but you are assuming that the US government has a unified position on this. As your posting above illustrates there were factional disputes between State and the CIA before. We know Cheney’s opinion of the CIA. What makes you think that it is all cleared up and they are all functioning with the same goal in mind?

“David Ignatius has a fascinating column this morning, in which it is claimed that Condoleezza Rive and Nancy Pelosi--now there's a duet!”

Looks more like a type-o you goober...

Matt Yglesias has an interesting take on the Ignatius column.

http://matthewyglesias.theatlantic.com/archives/2007/08/the_ignatius_cycle.php

I don't see why you think "The fact that Allawi has hired a DC lobbyist is seen as evidence of this. Nonsense." How come we suddenly heard frequent mentions of Allawi by serious Senators and others as an improvement on Malaki? I had not heard Allawi mentioned in a very long time, suddenly he was everywhere. Atrios has an interesting post detailing Allawi's last election campaign.

Ignatius said, "Allawi said he is trying to gather support for a new coalition of Kurds, Sunnis and secular Shiites as an alternative to the Shiite religious coalition that installed Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki in power. Some commentators see Allawi's recent decision to hire a Washington public relations firm as a sign of the Bush administration's support, but the opposite is probably the case. If Allawi had U.S. government backing, he wouldn't need the lobbyists."

I read this to indicate that he thinks Allawi hired the firm to persuade the Bushies that he is now the man for the job, rather than your take that we think it's a done deal.

Once again we Americans have gone about this bass ackwards. You do not remove a government and establish a democracy. You establish the democracy and then change the government. The two most successful revolutions in history, in America in 1776 and in Britain in 1688 established democratic principles and converted the population into believers first. Then they changed the government. The two greatest failed revolutions, in France in 1789 and Russia in 1917, removed the government and then had no democratic institutions and no popular understanding of democracy. While the lot of the people improved, each nation ended up with strongmen.

The population has to want a democracy. In America in 1776 the popular cry was "no taxation without representation". In Russia in 1917 it was "Peace and Bread". The people of Iraq do not know what a democracy is and supporting a democratic government is not a priority. There is no unified vision of the future. This is why we cannot "give" them a democracy and why, even if we could, they could not "keep" it.

Overall you are on target. The Allawi stuff is on a par with earlier stuff about another savior the exotic ex-banker Chalabi (who is sitting pretty in Baghdad looking after oil interests). Frankly, I feel David Ignatius has been off his game for sometime now. I don't know where he stands on Iraq and Iran. It seems to depend on the latest whispers from the usual suspects in Washington. With August holidays he has been receiving pretty thin gruel so his soup is tasteless.

Joe - Interesting post.

Here is my issue with it: You spend the first part of the column talking about how naive it was to insist that the Iraqis elect their own leaders without interference from the United States and then you describe blogosphere speculation that the CIA would try to replace a government as 'blather' and 'spy movie paranoia'. This does not jibe. You appear to be routing for some type of involvement and then you deride the bloggers who think that something like that may be in store.

But I take your point that somebody who has CIA support probably does not need a lobbyist. But one could get CIA support with the help of a lobbyist, no?

As for the 'spy movie paranoia' comment itself, well, I cannot believe that you are unfamiliar with the work of the US government in South and Central America, Iran, etc. Please give me some indication that you are; blink twice or something. Otherwise this comment section will become over-run with detailed lists. There is broad historical precedent for this.

And, finally, a note about the Hamas victory. No, I am not defending Hamas or the people that voted for them. But you must admit that any chance of a successful government was hobbled by the US and Isreal when they froze all Palestinian government funds and blockaded all of their roads. Granted, this was done because that government refused to recognize Isreal, but to say that it was the fault of unadulterated democracy seems a bit myopic to the outside forces that directly contributed to the chaos.

Joe, I think that most of the blogosphere is saying the same thing about Allawi/Maliki as you are. I know it's fun to accuse the blogosphere of "blather", but you're wrong here.

Sounds to me like Ignatius is just repeating what he's been told by the lobbyists Allawi hired, just as he once repeated what he was told by Robert Blackwill, then Jafari, etc etc etc...Whatever. He's a VSP.

"There's been a fair amount of blather in the blogosphere that the U.S. is now trying to install Allawi as Nouri al-Maliki's replacement. The fact that Allawi has hired a DC lobbyist is seen as evidence of this. Nonsense. As Ignatius writes, if the CIA were actually backing an Allawi-led coup, he wouldn't need a lobbyist."

This misses the point. The lobbyist (apparently Haley Barbour's group) isn't to convince the Iraqi people that Allawi is the guy. Nor is the job of the lobbyist to make the case to the Bush Administration or the American People. The target of the lobbying effort is people like Joe Klein and David Ignatius. The lobbying effort is to rehabilitate Allawi's reputation within the DC beltway. It also helps to cement beltway opinion that the ousting of Maliki is just a bold, realistic, political move by the Bush Administration.

I believe the Kuwaiti Royal family organized a lobbying effort in '91 to help ensure US participation in the Gulf War. That lobbying effort also was done with full knowledge of the Bush Administration. Such political lobbying is done all the time. If you are going to depose an executive you'd better have a good media strategy.

Consider another example. Defense contractors advertise in local DC media. The average citizen isn't going to buy a tranport plane or whatever that particular contractor sells. Moreover the contractor can easily contact the requisite congressional representatives and staffers for individual briefings. Those ads are aimed at the larger DC media in an effort to create a positive image for the corporation. There's nothing wrong with it; its smart business.

It is foolish, however, to observe that Allawi contracted Haley Barbour's group, to observe Philip Zelikow's recent activities (http://tinyurl.com/yu627w) and to have no comment. Perhaps nothing is going on, but the Bush Administration does roll new products out after Labor Day.

The CIA is an agency of losers.

All the claims they say are provable false.

This one is not different from the others.

The CIA is one of the weakest agency in the world, with a "legacy of ashes".

No one should listen to these nuts.

The Plame case, the WMDs case...

What a bunch of losers. I'm not surprised Joe Klein agree with them.

Joe - I forgot to mention that the Ignatius column itself appears to be the result of the lobbying firm the Iyad Allawi hired. I am not pretending to know if Ignatius received money himself (although there is a history of conservative pundits being paid to write what they are told). But the people he talks to probably were.

ivb is correct to ask:

"How come we suddenly heard frequent mentions of Allawi by serious Senators and others as an improvement on Malaki?"

See, here is the thing: What the Progressive blogosphere appears to be saying is that we are watching a coup happen in slow motion. First, money is smuggled to Allawi...check. Second, hire lobbying firm...check. Third, Have lobbying firm pay/bribe politicans to speak out on behalf of client in exchange for campaign financing...check. Fourth, have conservative media write columns about the politicians who are speaking out on behalf of client...check. Fifth, rinse and repeat until there is enough political pressure for action...we will see.

Of course, this is different than the traditional CIA coup method. But it is no different than what the GOP has done with the system of lobbyists and politicians here in America.

"spy movie paranoia about coup attempts"?

Oh man. Man oh man.

I would not be surprised if the CIA, or other instruments of the US were trying to depose al-Maliki. For those of us old enough to recall Vietnam, we remember that the US did the same things there; conducting sham elections, deposing governments, all in a desperate attempt to find one that was competent. So long as our presence in Iraq is required (which the Bush Administration thinks we are) we will always be meddling in their politics because we can never leave with a victory unless we leave behind a stable government.

The only way we will leave a "stable" government behind in Iraq is if a building full of horses-asses counts as a stable.

sean s.

Wow, it was Nancy Pelosi's fault. I never saw that coming. How many anonymous administration staffers did he talk to to come up with that? This has to be the biggest political stretch in history and yet, Mr. Ignatius fell for it hook, line, and sinker. Just when I think I have seen the worst drivel ever coming out of the Washington Press corp, Ignatius steps up and spouts this. What a maroon.

Burn, Burn, a payback Burn Notice for Tenet getting scorched? and more Intel Contractors being used? and Pelosi going to Damascus while symbolically holding the purse strings and maybe the future of the FISA bill?

Personally, Rice operates in the fantasy world of academia where all variables but one can be controlled in a lab. Maybe she should go bail out the NFL while making Vick and Dog Fights [extraordinary rendition experience] legal and acceptable.

Or maybe Rice could just get the DoS up to some level of acceptable functioning in the neighborhoods.

paradox: Interesting that you should use a 1917 Russia reference, since Rice is an USSR expert.

Terrapin: Like the references to such things as Iran-Contra, etc. with the same old players and Hamas. Seems we don't control the world 'cash flow' and weapons deals despite McConnell's software, etc.

Did you see that the Congress actually publish his OWN report to shoot at Petraeus's back !!

The Democrats don't only lie and call for retreat, they also try to silence the US army !

Do the Democrats forget that if the US are in danger because of the Iraq pullout, people will vote for a party that secure them ?

Not a cut-and-run party ?

Jesus, how Democrats can be so stupid, I will never understand.

The Ignatius column is just another crappy attempt to silence Petraeus's good news coming from Baghdad.

I will pray that the next Flight 93 will hit the Capitol this time, the people in Congress do not deserve to be defended

joe - Wow. That comment was so hyperbolic that I expected it to be snark. You realize that you just wished for the violent murder of our elected officials, right? Why do you hate America?

The Congress has every right to publish a report on the war in Iraq. Calm down and grow up.

Joe --

A good number of Republicans are part of Capitol Hill. Your good wishes regarding another Flight 93 will incinerate a lot of fellow Republicans.

You, sir, are a defeatist Republican. When things don't follow the Republican way, you decide to incinerate everything and blame the other person for it.

You and your ilk should not have access to the levers of power since you are obviously incapable of running a government and exhibit values contrary to democracy.

joe: "The Democrats don't only lie and call for retreat, they also try to silence the US army!"

Actually, joe, the report will be written by the White House* with input from various sources including Petraeus and Crocker.

joe: "I will pray that the next Flight 93 will hit the Capitol this time.."

That's a pretty sick sentiment, joe. You'd be better off spending your prayer time in therapy.

*http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/
la-fg-pullback15aug15,0,4840766.story?
page=2&track=mostviewed-storylevel

"There's been a fair amount of blather in the blogosphere that the U.S. is now trying to install Allawi as Nouri al-Maliki's replacement.
The fact that Allawi has hired a DC lobbyist is seen as evidence of this. Nonsense. As Ignatius writes, if the CIA were actually backing an Allawi-led coup, he wouldn't need a lobbyist."

Really? Whatever the CIA wants done, gets done without any support needed from politicians, at all? Is that how you think things work?
You (and Ignatius) have answered SOME bloggers' spurious conjecture with an equally spurious argument, and dismissed the entire discussion about Allawi as irrelevant.

Allawi was originally supported and financed by a contingent of the CIA empowered with explicit support from Cheney and his neocon partners to make the public case for regime change in Iraq with the intent of installing Allawi as a puppet to the neocon plans of an unregulated free-market economy, immediate unregulated access to oil reserves and the establishment of bases in the heart of the region to project US military power there for the next 50 years (the PNAC published this scheme in 1998).

Allawi lost his postion as interim PM (and thus lost his immediate usefulness to the CIA/Neocons) because despite an election campaign backed by these interests, he still need votes for local legitimacy, which he failed to get in part becuase of US backing and in part because he was seen as a "carpetbagger".

But Allawi, despite having lost his poriginal "job" has been provided charity by various neocon think tanks as an Iraq "expert". Now that Maliki has become the scapegoat for the Iraq failure, the neoncons, who never admit a mistake and who never learn anything, I looking for another regime change to salvage their vision, and Maliki is ready to step up again. To succeed however, he needs US political support--not CIA support---and in the current political climate he has to work very hard to get it---hence the lobbying! Duh!
Now how can someone with no particularly significant source of income afford the hundreds of thousands given to Haley Barbour already? Allawi refuses to disclose the source. Is that legal? It's at least interesting, but because Ignatious is the last word on the subject and bloggers are paranoid fantasists, there's nothing mpore to research and nothing more to say.

The CIA probably isn't in the picture anymore, but Allawis neocon pals are and have a vested interest in getting their friend back into play in Iraq--to "prove" their policies and world view (and continue to make money without accountability in the process).

"The mistakes of the Bush Administration are spectacular enough. There is no need to encrust them with spy movie paranoia about coup attempts (and now, finally, after four years of bitter experience, I'd guess that the CIA and U.S. military have a pretty clear sense of Allawi's profound unpopularity in Baghdad). "

Right! And the invasion of a country "justified" by the threat of non-existent WMD's and fake collsion between Hussein and Al Qaeda, in which the White House, the State Department, the Pentagon and a CHeney-pressured CIA colluded was just a paranoid fiction concocted by spy-movie fans, was it? And the paying of journalists to promote false stories was just fantasy? The illegal tapping of US communications by the NSA with the help of AT&T (and others)is just the plot from "The President's Psychiatrist" starring James Coburn?

(Oh and on the subject of paranpoia: the voting problems in Ohio were simply bad organization? How about the "terror alert" in Warren County--pop. 5,000-- that required Blackwell to lock away the voting machines until after the election and then announce verbally a victory for Bush? Was that just a clerical error? Or the tens of thousands of pro-Bush votes registered in a town with a population of a few hundred, most of whom voted for Kerry--and the win was STILL given to Bush? I guess that was just "a glitch"? ).

No there's absolutely no reason to suspect Allawi or our government of anything but sheer honesty and good will.

Rather than taking the opportunity to highlight bloggers who are indeeed off-base and then projecting that ALL bloggers are therefore wrong on this subject and then blithely claim that Ignatious is therefore right, why don't you actually do some research on the subject---I'd suggest TPMMuckraker for lobbying info and NewHoggers for deep Iraq info for a start. Juan Cole as well and then just follow their links and references for a while.

This is how responsible bloggers do things.

Maybe in your job you don't have the time to do the research and develop the analysis--but lots of responsible bloggers have the time and make the time to do it every day--for nothing. They can be a valuable resource for you. And then maybe you'd hear less about how poor so many "legitimate" journalists are about determining facts and providing informed analyses, instead of making blithe statements from which you build spurious arguments and deliver fatuous naive opinions.

The one thing you got right was "Point 1" about the establishment of Democracy: pithy and sage. Well done. The rest? Obviously I'm unimpressed.

As far as I know, Nancy Pelosi doesn't have the authority to direct the CIA. She can put in polite requests to the State Department, I'm sure, but I don't believe she has the power to cause or prevent the CIA from doing anything.

Other than that, interesting if basic stuff.

My favourite bit about the Ignatius piece is that the Oh-So-Serious pundit himself wrote this after the election:

"The most important fact about Maliki's election is that it's a modest declaration of independence from Iran."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/25/AR2006042501650.html

Oh man. I didn't even read to the end. "There is no need to encrust them with spy movie paranoia..."

Somewhere, Jay Carney is cleaning coffee off his keyboard and groaning, "Not again..."

Joe, what makes you think that democracy requires these prerequisites?

When our country was founded, we had, with the exception of slavery, three things:

1. Durable peace
2. Reasonable level of equity (again, leaving out slavery) among citizens
3. A uniting principle (the desire to see the British out & change the laws)

Iraq foundered because of a much simpler set of conditions: we attempted by war to impose our version from the outside, and the Administration was corrupt in it's implementation. We, as suppliers of the uniting principle, didn't do much more than make ourselves targets in an area where history is replete with lessons about this.

And as for the Palestinian elections, you seem to overlook two obvious facts:
1. Hamas won and would have won anyway. What was a postponement going to do anyway? Give them time to "fix" that election? THEN where's the democracy? Israel never gave anything to Abbas or the Palestininans to enable them to see any benefit in voting for him. Instead, they voted to fight. Give the Paleistinians credit for knowing what they were in for.
2. The elections were held in a war zone. Real smart. I'm sure ALL elections held in war zones can pass muster!

Our foreign policy is based on middle-management strategy suitable for the production floor but certainly not adequate for the job at hand.

It should be pointed out that neither change in strategy or any other "smoke and mirrors" solutions you guys propose would have made "victory" possible.

It seems you are pointing at an individual tree in the forest and saying "THIS is why..." when the rest of the forest has already burnt down around you!

Oops. I posted as "Anonymous".

that was my post.

Anonymous, you must admit however that "chaos and the aggrandizement of the better organized elements, which usually means religious extremists" has pretty much been the result of the last few US elections...

Just reminding eveyone that my post as Anonymous should have been 'Keven Bennett'.

I agree if you are implying that the Administration has helped grow religous extremeism, whether Christian, Jewish, or Muslim by their conduct.

They didn't pursue policies that would preempt religous extremists, not at all. Al Queda played a big part, maybe the largest part in actually getting secterian violence started, but we gave Al Queda PLENTY of ammo to use for this purpose.

We'be got to get rid of these guys before they drag us into other wars.

Ahem.

Predictably disingenuous and fatuous. The other posters have made all the relevant points.

Why the willful naivity and ahistorical reasoning? Why the insistent disregard for the facts? Not a little suspicious...

Joe,

Please don't quote Ignatius. It only intensifies his delusions of competence.

To Keven - I think Joe Klein's looking in the right places with those prerequisites. For countries with democratically-elected leaders that have reverted to more authoritarian leadership - Germany in the Weimar period, Venezuela under Chavez, Russia post-1991, Lebanon, and Haiti come to mind - there has been a severe lack of one or more of those characteristics. The democracies that have been established in formerly authoritarian regimes that fared reasonably well - to name some examples, the US; Germany and Japan post-WWII; Turkey - all had reasonably decent amounts of the qualities he mentioned.

You're right that "Sense of national identity and common purpose" could be added to that list. But that alone isn't enough to make sure the democracy survives. Germany certainly had that, and that didn't stop the slide. So does Russia, but Putin's still taking his country backwards.

Mixed bag here, Joe...

1. "Rice's faith in democracy is touching, but it has been fairly disastrous."

Don't understand. Rice on democracy is like the GOP on family values. She picks and chooses when she wants to have faith in what is preached. Venezuela? Not so much. Iraq? Sort of, at least a couple of years ago. Palestine? A little. America? Yee-ha. Russia? No comment.

Like all Bush's sycophants, she talks a good game when it comes to democracy. But she has little clue what it takes to build a democracy, and she'll happily cut to undemocratic methods if it suits what she views as America's interests.

2. "having an election doesn't mean you have a democracy". This whole graf is good... better organized seems basically synonymous with better armed, and certainly religious fundamentalists seem to have a lock on both those descriptions.

3. You final graf sucks. A large part of the "blather" has been to clarify whether Zelikow was an objective analyst for CNN. The rest of it was inspired by the increasingly hostile tone directed at Maliki, coming from both sides of the aisle. The blather didn't just emerge from nothing. It was a response to the latest DC dogmatism, so it's a bit rich for you too diss bloggers (none of whom you name) who have discussed what has been very much in the news.

And who says only the CIA might be pushing Allawi's case? Why not the Pentagon, the OVP, or some nefarious pocket of the Bush administration, often oblivious to the realities in Iraq, that we haven't yet discovered? And you offer zero insight about that big BGR consulting gig to bolster Allawi... Maybe in your service as a journalist you might find out WHO is paying BGR, and WHAT the PR is supposed to achieve - perhaps political acquiescence here that by installing Allawi, so Bush can get another mulligan in Iraq?

If your argument instead is that the political temperature in DC will have no bearing on the future of internal Iraqi politics... well, sh*t, that would be a touching display of faith that who is in charge in Iraq has nothing to do with DC politics.

The idea that neocons in the Bush administration -- of all people -- allowed the House minority leader, Nancy Pelosi from San Francisco, no less, to dictate their policy in their Dream Project To Remake The World is so completely absurd as to be beyond laughable.

That they are floating this theory, and using Ignatius to do it, tells you all you need to know about how they really think Iraq is going, and David as well.

Joe, Catching up with my Glenn Greenwald reading. His post yesterday on Bush's speech about Iran (which Linda mentioned yesterday) makes me think more than ever that all this about the political or military situation in Iraq hardly matters. The administration has moved on. The whole column provides a lot of information.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/08/29/iran/index.html

Bush --
"Iran's actions threaten the security of nations everywhere. And that is why the United States is rallying friends and allies around the world to isolate the regime, to impose economic sanctions. We will confront this danger before it is too late."

****
And, NPR just reported that we found some Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, over 10 years old -- in the UMOVIC office in New York. Who knew?

Tel,

Russia is an equity and uniting principle issue, Weimer Germany was an equity issue, Venezuela is an equity issue, Lebanon was a lack of a unifying principle, and Haiti is an equity issue.

The European recovery after WWII was because all three were present, Japan and Germany had their former regimes as unifiers, resources and infrastructure and NASCENT institutions to ensure equity, and a lasting peace afterwards. The Turks are still in developement, there are authoritarian aspects but the uniting principle appears to cut across religions and equity is not a serious issue there. I think they will make it.

Joe Klein got it wrong. Sorry, but leaving out durable peace is a very BIG omission on his part. In all the cases you mentioned, democracy evolved AFTER their respective wars - just as ours did.

IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH!
IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH!
IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH!
IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH!
IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH!
IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH!
IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH!
IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH!
IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH!
IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH!

How dare we force other cultures to have democracy? There is no political system better than others and we have to respect all people and their political beliefs so we have no right to make anyone do anything.

I think the NPR finding is irrelevant. We have already done an intensive GROUND search and never found any - and the Iraq Survey Group has already been shut down.

These reports pop up every year or so, and it stands to reason there would be samples in 1996 because UN teams were doing much the same thing the Survey did immediatly after the first gulf war - everyone knew Saddam had WMD during that war.

No news there, so PLEASE don't saddle us with yet another revival of Justification #1 of Why We Got Sucked Into A Pointless War By Megalomaniac Idiots.

Uh, Joe, you do realize that lobbyists lobby members of congress, not the CIA. As pointed out, the sudden chatter among congressmen about Allawi is the result. The CIA could put Allawi on the throne, no question, but how long he stays on that throne is dependent on support for him back home. You're a babe in the woods.

How dare we force conservative culture to be heterosexual? There is no sexual persuasion better than homosexuality and we have to respect all conservatives and their men's room tricks so we have no right to make anyone do anything.

The problem doesn't lie in convincing other cultures to adopt democracy. Infact thats probably a great idea. The problem lies in the fact that we are really bad at doing it.

Nancy Pelosi along with Condi Rice convinced the Bushies to abandon their plan to influence the Iraqi election?
Nancy Pelosi???
History is being re-written as we watch.

"I think the NPR finding is irrelevant. We have already done an intensive GROUND search and never found any - and the Iraq Survey Group has already been shut down."

Kevin --
So sorry! I didn't indicate I thought it was funny. Indeed these were old ones. It just amused me that they (like my former Senator Santorum) could say, See, they found them. Unfortunately, they found them in New York, not Baghdad.

Of course it is irrelevant, however, the oh-so liberal NPR has led two top of the hour headlines with it. Sigh.

How dare we force conservative culture to be heterosexual? There is no sexual persuasion better than homosexuality and we have to respect all conservatives and their men's room tricks so we have no right to make anyone do anything.

Check the Tucker Quote of the Day: Tuck and run from what you said and then what you said to change what you said and now it's the evil weevils in the blogosmear. lol like Joe in the Morn n' Dan. 1-2, cha, cha, cha.

Joe,

Aren't you embarassed that Time makes you share a blog with a dishonest hack:

"TOO DUMB TO BE SELF-GOVERNING:: It happened so fast on today’s Morning Joe that we didn’t even have our tape running! Joe Scarborough showed a large, tabloid photo of Hillary Clinton with fund-raiser Norman Hsu— and he said that her rival Democratic campaigns have been urging him to push the story. And just like that, his co-host for the week, Ana Marie Cox, said that Hsu funneled money to the Paw family, of Daly City. (Sorry— we can’t offer quotes.) She stated it without qualification, as if it were an established fact. It was left to Scarborough’s second co-host, the alert Tamron Hall, to say the offense was alleged."

http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh083007.shtml

Do you really want to swim in that sewer?

Get out while you can.

The post four above this one "How dare..." is not mine.

Keven Bennett

ivb,

Yup. I'll admit to a little "density" on that one!

it seems odd that Rice and Pelosi should be paired because, in fact, the argument is ludicrous--it's just the latest meme, "blame Al-Maliki," being advanced without any real support, sort of like all the other justifications Ignatius floated. Somehow Pelosi and Rice got "the Decider" to support the wrong version of actual democracy--we should have been secretly promoting a different version of actual democracy.

It's just a variant of the incompetence dodge tat war supporters, like Klein, keep clinging to. "We would have won if..." No wonder Joe thinks it's fascinating--it's another tool for keeping the "serious" critics in influence. Meanwhile, the rest of us, who were right about the war from the start, will ust go "blather" some more.

Joe,

I have to agree that linking Nancy Pelosi with the Administrations' ambitions in Iraq isn't really too believable.

Are you going to say next that Rove is an under cover Democrat who has been the hand inside the glove pulling the strings on the Republican "puppets" involved in this rather hideous stage-play we've had shoved down our throats since 2000?

Forsooth!

Actually it was mine!
And I'll say it again!

How dare we force conservative culture to be heterosexual? There is no sexual persuasion better than homosexuality and we have to respect all conservatives and their men's room tricks so we have no right to make anyone do anything.

How dare we force conservative culture to be heterosexual? There is no sexual persuasion better than homosexuality and we have to respect all conservatives and their men's room tricks so we have no right to make anyone do anything.

Coming in as part of the green eye-shade class, I'd like to interject some hard-core reality about this war that I always seem to be alone in recognizing (we are truly fiscal fools as an electorate).

That is- 3 BILLION BORROWED DOLLARS A WEEK IS NOT SUSTAINABLE!!

The editorial pages at the WaPo have acknowledged that Bushco would love to spend us into oblivion to destroy Social Security and any social welfare program.

The war is against America, folks. It's a war against Bush's biggest target- the poor and middle classes.

I'm not sure that forcing elections in the countries mentioned has led to "disaster" so much as it has revealed where the middle of popular public opinion is in them.

Yes, what has been revealed by these elections has certainly been inconvenient and did surprise and dismay the many fools in the Administration and the Middle East punditry and Israeli government.

Funny how if you make war on other people, they may want to wage war on you in return. Who could have anticipated that???

Hypocrisy is a feature, not a bug, in conservative "morality". Will you f---ing liberals finally stop your guffaws and amazement, it's gone on long enough!!! I'm tired of it!

Oh, I've heard Mary Cheney had a little boy recently. Why haven't I seen a mention of it, let alone any pictures, on Fox News or Townhall, or any of my other media without liberal bias?

IVB,

So you think a guy seeking nuclear weapons is not dangerous. How about a guy who said on several occasions that he would use one? How about a guy that threatens to wipe a nation off the map?

Oh, but you are right he is just seeking energy silly me. However, you know, it is curious he chose to use Heavy water plants (which also enable him to make weapon grade platonium) instead of Light water (that do not). You are right we should not question a terrorist turned President at his word right?

Some argue that is a cultural thing and that threats by them are not to be taken in context. I for one thing that is absolute BS and I always listen and listen carefully to someone who is threatening my life.

I don't care what Ahmadinejad says, I am much more interested in what he does. Everything points to him wanting to make nuclear weapons. He is in many ways already at war with us making covert attacks on Iraq with the Iranian guard. Iran is making the IEDs that have killed 48% of our soldiers. Threatened us by saying he had 50,000 suicide bombers to send to the US and Israel if they are attacked. It is very alarming because he playing both sides of the fence meaning he is unpredictible. Has a fundamentalist Islamic regieme in power of that government which basically gives them a pass to lie to western governments. I mean the list goes on and I could sit here all day but the fact of the matter is ... I agree Iran is currently the most dangerous.

We are no matter what anyone says finally getting a grip in Iraq. Diplomatic concessions in the last two weeks show there is effort to reach comprimise. Even Sadhr is talking cease fire.

Although I know you guys don't want our military to succeed because it is evil in your eyes.
We can't win in Iraq because that would make Dems look like they really have no clue and point out their beholdeness to the bloggers, netroot, left wing nut job, defeatists. Not able to make sound, devisive decisions, and just waiting for the next opinion poll so they can get it to their focus group and determine which direction to start spinning.

Oh and to be more specific we did find WMDs they found Sadam did have 500 shells of sarene gas. Fourteen scud missles with ranges exceeding their range agreement. Still this left more than a hundred unaccounted for.

http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/5/17/170427.shtml

Joe,
The Nancy Pelosi part doesn't add up, but I knew one day the problems in Iraq would placed on a Democrat!!!

Anon -- Obviously your only interpretation of events is via the right prism and I doubt I could change your mind about anything. I suggest you read the Greenwald column I linked above. The idea of our attacking Iran is appalling to me.

"The groundwork for an attack on Iran is so plainly being laid in the same systematic way as the attack on Iraq was and by the same people. Last week, Djerejian read and then dissected the full "trip report" issued by Pollack and O'Hanlon following their return from Iraq. In addition to including even more propaganda-bolstering claims about Iraq than was found in their Op-Ed, Djerejian noted that the report also recites the most mendacious aspects of the administration's case for war against Iran, including the truly idiotic accusation regarding "Iran's ability to supply al-Qa'ida" -- an accusation so absurd that nobody other than Joe Lieberman has been willing to voice it until now. Yet now it issues from our most Serious Democratic, "liberal" foreign policy "scholars": Iran is arming Al Qaeda.

The true danger here is that even if there would be marginally more political opposition to an attack on Iran than there was for an attack on Iraq -- and surely there would be, perhaps considerably more opposition -- those who favor an attack are still politically strong within the administration. And there simply are no factions which would oppose such an attack that are anywhere near strong enough to stop one. Who and where are they? What are the political factions which have sufficient political strength and who are willing to risk political capital to stop such a confrontation?

By stark and dispositive contrast, those who are pining for an attack on Iran -- from the Weekly Standard to the AEI and various generic warmongers of the Dick Cheney/National Review strain, as well as our most pious evangelical Christian warriors -- are zelaous adherents, True Believers. Bringing about a military confrontation with Iran has always been, and continues to be, their paramount priority.

The two most extremist factions when it comes to the Middle East -- Israel-centric neoconservatives and Christian evangelicals -- have long been telling the President that stopping Iran is his most important mission, the ultimate challenge that history will use to judge his strength, character and conviction. And it is beyond question that those are the groups who continue to hold the greatest sway over the decision-making process of the Commander-in-Chief himself.

Who is going to match the zeal and influence of these warmongers in order to stop them? The notion of attacking Iran may be insane, but it is not considered such by our mainstream establishment. Those who muse about it openly -- Lieberman, McCain, Giuliani, Kristol, Max Boot -- are not considered fringe extremists or unserious radicals, even though they are. Their views are comfortably within what is considered to be the realm of serious and responsible foreign policy advocacy.

As we march step by step with barely a debate towards a confrontation with Iran -- one that neoconservatives have long been proclaiming is inevitable -- are there any meaningful efforts to avert this? We frequently hear the slogan from war critics about Iraq that "hope is not a policy." The same is true with regard to preventing an attack on Iran."

And, regardless of what you think, from magisterludi above -
"That is- 3 BILLION BORROWED DOLLARS A WEEK IS NOT SUSTAINABLE!!"

Our armed forces can't sustain operations beyond spring according to those defeatocrat generals.

Today's news from the IAEA is that Iran has been more cooperative, but of course the US doesn't believe it because it doesn't fit in with the bomb them, bomb them narrative your folks support.

"We can't win in Iraq because that would make Dems look like they really have no clue and point out their beholdeness to the bloggers, netroot, left wing nut job, defeatists."

Wrong. We can't win in Iraq because conservatives like you refuse to step up and enlist and our military is too small to do the job. Yes, we hate America and want to see us fail(we also hate babies and Jesus) so naturally we don't serve. WHAT IS YOUR EXCUSE? I'm gonna guess you won't answer.

Joe "I wanna be a KOSSACK too, please please let me be a KOSSACK" Klein:

"(Of course, the Bush insistence on pristine elections didn't extend to the cities of Ohio, where insufficient voting machines were provided and created long, long lines of discouraged Democrats.)"

You really think that you are going to appease your KOS KLOWN KRITICS with drivel like that?

Please.

So basically if you are not in the military you cannot support the war Max(imum ignorance) Thrax?

Do you even realize how stupid that is?

That is like saying you cannot support your local police force when because you are not a cop.

Or, how about this... you'll really like this...

Do you support homosexuals in the military?

Now if you are a good little tolerant liberal then you have to.

Are you a homosexual? Are you in the military.

No? Then you cannot support homosexuals in the military you intolerant so called liberal. Time to turn in your Democratic Underground decoder ring.

How dare we force conservative culture to be heterosexual? There is no sexual persuasion better than homosexuality and we have to respect all conservatives and their men's room tricks so we have no right to make anyone do anything.

Meanwhile, back to our topic (or something there about):

"Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time." -- Sir Winston Churchill

"Democracy is the worst form of government. It is the most inefficient, the most clumsy, the most unpractical. ... It reduces wisdom to impotence and secures the triumph of folly, ignorance, clap-trap, and demagogy. ... Yet democracy is the only form of social order that is admissible, because it is the only one consistent with justice." -- Robert Briffault, Rational Evolution (The Making of Humanity) ch. 15 (1930)

Democracy is not a fable; it is the only really just form of government. It is the most just because, when governments blunder, it's the people who pay the price, therefore it's only just that the people have the power. They will blunder, for sure. But so do Kings and Generals; but when the King screws up, they usually escape the worst consequences of their blunders.

To the extent that Iraqi's have a democracy, they're getting what they asked for. They revel in their sectarian hatreds, so they have a sectarian war. Blaming this on the US intervention ALONE is to say that Iraqis are an incompetent people. Perhaps they are, but I doubt they think they are. They just never learned how to live together in peace, it may be they've never had to before.

Should the US have left Iraq under a dictatorship? Yes, and I bet the Iraqi's wish we had. Yet, ironically, that is not a blameless choice either; to say that Iraqi's should live in a dictatorship is to say they are not competent to rule themselves, they need a Strongman.

Ironically, the Bush Doctrine is fundamentally Romantic; treating the Iraqi's as more civil than they actually are. I am sure the Iraqi's Bush met in Washington were very cultured people; but Bush never asked himself the critical question: did they actually represent the Iraqi people. Clearly they did not.

Iraq simply lacks the institutions and mind set necessary to make democracy work peacefully. Why this is is something I leave to others to guess at, but it's manifestly obvious that they lack these. And it's manifestly obvious that Bush et al. should have known this. But, locked in romantic, neocon delusions, they ignored the facts until it was too late. I suspect their stubborn insistence on remaining is as much about being True Believers as the unwillingness to admit to errors. Dogma is more powerful than pride even.

"Imposing Democracy" is a logical impossibility; one cannot be forced to be free, one can simply be left to one's own devices, which is often calamitous. It certainly has been in Iraq. We Americans have democratic expectations that go back to Runnymede, 788 years ago, and we still struggle to keep our democracy alive. Having no experience with it; Iraqi's had no idea what to do, so they reverted to form and used it as a tool for seizing power.

The disaster in Iraq is IN PART the fault of the Bush Administration. It is also in the remaining part, the fault of Iraqis. Bush was trapped in his neocon fantasies and information they never verified. Iraqis are trapped in their medieval grudges.

I'll close with one more quote, one of my favorites, by Peter de Rosa, who wrote about the Irish (my ancestry) who looted Dublin during the 1916 Easter Uprising:

"Slaves for so long, they saw freedom only as the right to rob others."

Could be Baghdad, 2002.

sean s.

sean - you are wrong wrong wrong.

the iraq disaster is all the fault of bush and the neocons. Iraq would have peace if only saddam had been left in power. all the suffering is war crime and due to the bush and his evil plans for halliburton stock options.

impeachment now is the only way to bring the justices the iraqis deserve!

Anon wrote:

"Or, how about this... you'll really like this...

Do you support homosexuals in the military?

Now if you are a good little tolerant liberal then you have to.

Are you a homosexual? Are you in the military.

No? Then you cannot support homosexuals in the military you intolerant so called liberal. Time to turn in your Democratic Underground decoder ring."

that is going to leave a mark...
damn.

Joe, you're an old Washington hand, can you comment on the Nancy Pelosi angle of the story? I just don't understand what role Pelosi would have had in guiding CIA policy in 2005. This seems to me like an effort to spread the blame around, but maybe I'm being too cynical for once.

"So basically if you are not in the military you cannot support the war Max(imum ignorance) Thrax?"

Oh, so tell us courageous hero, how do YOU support the war without actually fighting it? Is you posting here part of the strategy? You feel the jihadis will run and hide(in much the same way you run and hide from military recruiters) when they see your fiery rhetoric? I'm quite sure history will record that it was wingnut blog comments that turned the tide. Or are you doing more to 'support the war'? Tell us all about it, amaze us w/ your commitment and super patriotism Anon!

Not to pander too much to the Obama wing of liberal dolts, but let me get this straight:

You now ADVOCATE your once loathed CIA's meddling with foreign politics?

Have you cleared that with Martin Sheen, yet?

Or Ollie North?

Or IS this just a Trojan horse, to make up for the DNC's latest round of People's Army fundraisers feigning as foreign co-nationals?

Fair and open elections -- not the Hamas or Chavez ones (where the neighbor gets a gun to the head if he doesn't vote for the retro-Stalinist 1 Party candidate of no choice) -- are the present, and the future, of world peace. Not perfection, not an end to differences -- but indeed the only viable option (ask Sir Winston).

Don't be so damn quick to weasel away from Freedom In Progress, warts and all, instead of shilling for the UN's usual standard of Rwandan stupidity.

BTW: Something the Gaza voters did for the world, even if the lefty loon prissy press never could, was to remove any doubt as to the broad, foaming dog hatred of Israel, the U.S., and the greater West, by and for the henchmen running the sands of the Islamist nut compounds into the dark ash heaps of failed history. Yes liberals, they hated us before 9-11, before Iraq II, before Hillary even. At least since Munich. Actually longer.

But I digest.

Where the hell was Joe Wilson's vaunted MisState Department, during all this?

Oh, right.

AWOL back in DC behind the desks, again.

Oh well.

CYRUS VANCE HAPPENS.

Cellblock Secrets...by Question Hillary

BIG NEWS BREAKING: Closeted Republican Senator(is there another kind?) Larry Craig, may be making an extended vacation here at the ole gray bar motel. Craig announced today that he will look into taking back his guilty plea and going to trial! Oh, we know exactly what happened in that men's room, we already have lots of Republicans in here so we know the scoop. So dear reader, you may be thinking that w/ the buzz around the impending arrival of Rick Renzi, no one is even thinking of saggy old Larry, but boy would you be wrong! Oooooogaaaaaa! THERE'S GONNA BE A NEW BELLE OF THE BALL...MARK MY WORDS!

Much to the deeeelite of the prison paramours, it appears that Democrats will continuing their investigation of Alberto Gonzalez. Could the Lyin Latin Lawyer be a headin' this way? Tongues are wagging and those tobacco stashes are growing in anticipation of a bidding war for the corrupt one.

So who were those lovebirds seen canoodling near the library Saturday nite? Sources say it was none other than D Wing celebrity couple Randall 'Duck' Cunningham and La Familia shot-caller Jesus Villegas. Last week 'the Duck' told us he and Jesus were hot and heavy and committed to a monagamous relationship though he did add "We have an understanding that if Rick Renzi ever shows up he gets a pass". Well Jesus may be a prison big shot but he'll have lots of competition for the beauticious Renzi should he show, and sources are saying its looking more and more likely every day. Stay tuned!

Interesting doings at the Friday movie night at the gym. In attendance were Cell BLock 6's power couple Jack Abramoff and Otis Stackhouse. Abramoff who was donnin’ denim 'n' a scruffy punim, and the utterly gorgeous bodybuilder Otis sat in the back while giving new meaning to the phrase 'public display of affection. Yowza! However, no sooner did the sexalicious couple start their couplings than who should walk in? That's right Hector Guzman, he of the 22 inch biceps! Readers will remember that Jackie and Hector were hot n heavy for a while until Hector ran out of cigarettes and a little bird tells me that Hector has regretted trading the bikini waxed Abramoff for 2 packs of Lucky Strikes. Life and regret are a beooootch girlfriends!

Later that Friday nite at the dance, none other than Bob Ney was seen dancing with himself, his shirt tied up higher on his ample torso than usual. Ole Bob was gyrating and bumping and grinding and generally making a scene of himself. Seems that Mr. Ney was doing all he could to show the aforementioned Otis stackhouse just what he's missing. Oh dear reader you didn't forget that Otis and the Neyster were quite the item for a while did you? Those of you in the know remember that Otis lost interest in Bumpin Bobby Ney after acquiring the mantastic Jack Abramoff for ciggies...OH THE FICKLE HEART!

That's all for now but there'll be lots more to come as the buzz builds for the arrivals of Rick Renzi,John Doolittle and Tom Delay. Oh yes they are a kinky bunch here as there's lots of talk of tag teaming father and son, the oh-so-DILFY Ted Stevens and his son, the smooth and shaven Ben Stevens. The times are just as exciting here at Cellblock Secrets as they've ever been, as prosecutors around the country continue to feed these hungry, hungry men w/ more of that delicious GOP flesh. YUMMERS!

"...Of course, the Bush insistence on pristine elections didn't extend to the cities of Ohio, where insufficient voting machines were provided and created long, long lines of discouraged Democrats..."

Nixon won in 1960, and Ford in 1976.

But you knew that.

Max Ignorance - thank you for making my point.

Back to the DU with you as I make it a point to own a libtard only once a day (otherwise it's just too hard on your self esteem and I don't want to be cruel.)

"...Cellblock Secrets...by Question Hillary..."

Otis, you REALLY need to get laid.

See if your butt buddy Barney's going to be staying in town this weekend, eh?

Next!

PS: The surge IS working -- and Russ Feingold IS irrelevant.

It has been tough for conservative white guys, and many of them tell me that the fighting technique of falling to the ground, curling into the fetal position and yelling that you're a hemophiliac doesn't work anymore. I guess people aren't as concerned about hemophilia as they used to be.

So I developed a fighting technique for conservative males called 'Con-Fu'. Its basic structure is this:
Once things get heated and it looks like it might turn to violence, simply repeat "Its cool man, its cool" or "I don't have a problem with you, its cool". If this does not stop your opponent, drop to your knees, unzip his pants, insert his pen!s into your mouth and bob like crazy. You have about 10 seconds for the initial shock and surprise to wear off. At the end of the 10 second window, your opponent should be aroused by now if you do it right. Go to park or airport men's rooms to practice if you feel you need it. If done correctly, you can finish your opponent in 30 seconds or less. Conservative guys who've ever had sex w/ a woman....er, conservatives who've had sex will know that after climax, the last thing on your mind is a fight. Now your opponent is ready for a nap, to to give you a serious beatdown. That's it in a nutshell.

If the libs spent as much time on their 7-11 employment applications as they do dissing our troops and legally elected leaders?

Hell, a few of them might even make it to age 60.

"...It has been tough for conservative white guys..."

Impostor Otis thinks the 3rd world is defending freedom, the world over?

I guess Katrina wiped away more than just ugly houses in his bad neighborhood.

"...It has been tough for conservative white guys..."

Impostor Otis thinks the 3rd world is defending freedom, the world over?

I guess Katrina wiped away more than just ugly houses in his bad neighborhood.

=================================

Apparently, his being a gay male nurse in Nolins leaves a lot of time on both his hands.

So to speak.

"Having a democracy depends on strong public institutions, the rule of law, freedom of the press, a solid middle class."--Joe Klein

Actually, it would probably be more accurate to say that a meaningful democracy must be circumscribed by either a written constitution (as in the US) or longstanding traditions (as in the UK).

The author is correct about one thing, however: Merely "having an election" is not interchangeable with having a functioning democracy.

Kos Klowns We ...BYE

I havn't heard a word "dissing" troops. And as for "legally elected", the less said the better. And Katrina, BTW, is the national shame of the filthy spawn you worship.

QAQH:
Do you have a thing for Otis? Hmmmm... Maybe MORE than just your "honesty" and willingness to "shoot from the hip" are showing? Don't ask, don't tell...

Or is that me just being "divisive"?

to all .. this isn't a "blog" as I understand it, it's a "BBS" or something equally archaic, where a topic is introduced, delayed conversation ensues, multiple debates and exchanges take off on their own tangets and the instigator (in this case Tumulty) ignores the entire process.
No attempt on the "blog" author's part to either maintain the original subject or address pertinent subjects raised by commenters. As a professional journalist, Tumulty and the rest of the crew at Time here have other stories to write and deadlines to meet (as indeed they should). I don't see how professional reporters can do their traditonal jobs and actively participate in a blog at the same time.

This is quite the farce IMHO at might wxpalin why som many of these corporate blog articles asre so shallow--the posts are an adjunct to the journalists essential work. IMHO this blog and the rest of them appear to be a complete waste of everyone's time--journalists and commenters alike.

After this brief foray, I;; go back to writing to editors and commenting at professionally-run blogs as well as responsibly-run individual non-professional blogs.

So, Joe, if Allawi doesn't mean to influence Beltway opinion in an attempt to get the PM job, why would he spend all that money for a top lobby group?

Admit that maybe the press-- who after all are "lobbied" as hard as the Congress -- might not be the best judge of how well such manipulation might work on them.

Your notion that the CIA would just install someone if they want is the stuff of spy stories, actually. Allawi knows all about that method, and apparently prefers the turning American Beltway opinion method better, and he should know what works.

Your cynicism is blinding you to the actual cynicism here. And your reflexive dismissal of anything in the blogosphere means that you've stopped judging issues on their merits, which isn't really all that useful.

But your point that elections aren't democracy is so true... there is a lot more involved. After all, the Soviets had elections. And if it's true that the CIA or the Beltway regulars or whoever have more to say about who leads Iraq than the Iraqis, the simple fact of elections doesn't matter much.

If the cons spent as much time enlisting and fighting for their country in a time of war as they do dissing liberals?

Hell, we might even WIN the war in eye-raq.

It makes me wonder, when one writes of the core constituancy (...conservative white guys...) of the Republican party, they beoome inflamed by the description, which isn't by any means racist, reverse, or otherwise.

I've noted that QA has a habit of trotting a Black moniker/character out when he/she is trying to deliver some sort of insult - much in the same spirit as the invokation of Willie Horton. And in particular, whenever the Katrina comes up.

I would wonder:
Why does QA think that being tagged with a Black moniker insulting? Is it perhaps QA percieves that being Black is insulting? If so, QA, aren't you by definition conveying the very same racist message you accuse others of somehow conveying?

And what does the Third World have to do with this? Does QA think that Black Americans are "3rd World"?

The Administations' treatment (continuing) of the situation in NO is more reminiscent of the third world if you ask me.

Pretty pointy ponderings, if I say so...

And Britisher is right!

Hell if we spent half as much time actually putting our money where are mouths are(no pun intended) and fighting this war as we do trolling for gay sex in men's rooms...we would DEFINITELY be winning the war in eye-raq, but we're pussies. Oh well.

Hell if we spent half as much time actually putting our money where are mouths are(no pun intended) and fighting this war as we do trolling for gay sex in men's rooms...we would DEFINITELY be winning the war in eye-raq, but we're pussies. Oh well.

In my humble opinion the greatest blog out there is the Daily Kos. I go there for their expert commentary and crystal clear views on all germane subjects. I would advise all of you to join.

To call Ignatius' column interesting - instead of disingenous, ignorant, delusional - is, of course, a measure of respect from one made D.C. dolt to another. The idea that Iran had to ship Shi'ites to Iraq (which was floated in the column - shifting the propaganda goals, for in 2005, we were assured by the likes of Ignatius that the election in Iraq was one of the fairest in the world, ever) could only be swallowed whole by people like Klein, who have lost the ability to distinguish between lies and truth long ago, as they wallow in the muck of the Conventional Wisdom, trying to keep in step with the D.C. kewl kid set. As Atrios points out, plenty of money was spent to elect Allawi. As Ignatius doesn't point out, the election was held right after a little American enacted war crime named Fallujah, in which the U.S. army, with Allawi's approval, Grozny-fied a city of 300,000, and dispersed most of that population - without, of course, any provision for its food and shelter - to the four winds. Then, killing most of the young men left, the American terrorists, I mean high command, proclaimed that they had broken the back of the insurgency. I'm sure Klein felt a patriotic flutter when he heard those words. And after this stunning display of disregard for Iraqi life, Allawi lost with a mere 12 percent. And he only controlled the media, too, poor guy.

Ignatius should know better - he reported from Lebanon in 1983 - but he is a serious guy, meaning he is a serious warmonger, in the good graces of the 'serious' politicos with whom Klein has 'serious' conversations about Iraq. To engage in such conversations, Short Term Memory loss is a must.

Why, one wonders, is our press corps this bad? It seems to be systemic.

Although we use democratic means, we are in fact a Constitutional Republic based upon natural rights. If we insist on using “Democracy” to name our form of government, Joe misses other institutional prerequisites for a successful Democracy that should be mentioned - property rights, decentralization of political authority, and the fact that the rule of law applies first and foremost to our elected representatives and the officials they appoint to carry out the supreme law of the land. We must also remember why our Bill of Rights was insisted upon even when the Constitution included democratic procedure from the onset. The Anti-Federalist's fears were and are arguably well founded with any kind of reasoned political analysis, mostly irrelevant to the folks/party holding the office of the President, Congress, or the Supreme Court.

Joe is right about the difficulty in forcing our form government upon a people that not only have no ideological foundation for our type of government, but are conditioned to totalitarian rule as with Imperial Japan and Nazis Germany. As with Japan and Germany, the longer we wait the more costly it will become in all imaginable measures. r/ Mark

To paraphrase Winston Churchill, democracy is the most maddening and worst form of government -- except for every other kind.

The silly notion that we should be considering some sort of quasi-Mussolini alternative for Iraq is not only damn stupid, but exceedingly dangerous.

This sort of yap candy addicted academic waste of good trees and clean electrons, but for the sake of more media meddling in something they can't possibly grasp intellectually or historically, proves again why we need solid, objective third party oversight for not only our private and public sectors, but our limp media sector as well.

The press simply fails to do their job, time and time again, other than to enable terrorism and all the other bleakest mental defectives on the planet.

What a legacy.

Libs still discussing their unionized flaming MOR killer nurse gayness today?

What a shocker.

Maybe the mayor of Sexy Chocolate Town can help bus them back to Berzerkley where they really belong, eh?

BTW, the wars in Oakland, NOLA, Filthydelphia, and Dee-troit IS long lost. We need to withdraw our troops now, and send in the lockstepping Barney Frank Brigades, that seem to have a grasp on the urban blight sicheeayshun.

So to speech.

Quiet Riot indeed.

Leave to old Anonymous Klein to slime anyone that at any time has gone into the fray against tyranny, anarchy, and leftist duplicity.

Typical, and sad, given the late date.

Erika here / Et ici ma lumière….

I’m happy when a passing cloud invites me
to smile in the darkness of a melody, while
the sunshine fades away recalling a pleasure
and a delicate care; I’m glad to describe you
in the light of a feeling and always, when a
candle arrives, your magical dream discovers
a fate…..

In the light of a fine day / Good morning Princess.

Nel cuor della
notte, quando un dolce
respiro richiama
il sapor di un’intensa
emozione, nell’oscuro
di un canto, odo i
ritorni di una magica
quiete, ed un soffio
perpetuo nel chiaror
d’un pensiero, come
augello festoso
al sopire di un pianto.

In the light of a fine day / Good morning Princess.

In the dead of
night, when a
charming breath
discovers the taste
of an intense emotion,
and sometimes, a
magical care returns
on your sensitive
hand, and always,
Louise, like water
in stream, a delicate
sight reappears in
the darkness…..