MAKE IT STOP, PLEASE!

The wingnuts are at it again, this time claiming that Haditha was a set-up by Al Qaeda. The proof they offer isn't but that won't stop them. I expect Sean Hannity will spew this soon.

A FREEPER GOOFS UP AGAIN

I won't link directly to it but a Freeper thinks he has debunked the kid who did the Democrat reply to Pres. Fredo's veto of SCHIP.

Thers at Whiskey Fire tears the Freeper post into teeny-tiny pieces.

JUDT & WILL: ON THE SAME PAGE

(h/t to Atrios)

Tony Judt has an interesting op-ed in the NY Times that challenges the "liberal hawks" and spells out one consequence of this immoral war:

The case for liberal interventionism — “taking a stand” — had nothing whatever to do with the Iraq war. Those of us who pressed for American-led military action in Bosnia and Kosovo did so for several reasons: because of the refusal of others (the European Union and United Nations) to engage effectively; because there was a demonstrable and immediate threat to rights and lives; and because it was clear we could be effective in this way and in no other.

None of these considerations applied in Iraq, which is why I and many others opposed the war. However, it is true that United States military intervention in urgent cases will be much harder to justify and explain in future. But that, of course, is a consequence of the Iraq debacle.

Four years ago, George F. Will made essentially the same observation:

So unless the public is convinced that the government is learning from this war
-- learning how to know what it does not know -- the war may have made the
public less persuadable, and the nation perhaps less safe.

"WE HAVE MET THE ENEMY AND HE IS US"

This is the headline:

Knowing the Enemy Difficult in Iraq
Oct 7, 10:17 PM (ET)
By KATARINA KRATOVAC

PATROL BASE HAWKS, Iraq (AP) - When U.S. sentries fatally shot three guards near an Iraqi-manned checkpoint south of Baghdad, they thought they were targeting enemy fighters planting roadside bombs, according to the American commander of the region.

Maj. Gen. Rick Lynch, commander of the 3rd Infantry Division that controls territory south of Baghdad, stressed the investigation was continuing but said initial results showed that U.S. troops fired on the checkpoint after spotting what appeared to be enemy forces planting roadside bombs.

"We are not looking to see who made a mistake but rather see what we can learn from that particular event," Lynch told The Associated Press Saturday during a whirlwind tour of patrol bases in the area.

Lynch said it's critical to "better coordinate between coalition forces, Iraqi security forces and concerned citizens," as he calls the vigilante-style groups that have sprouted up across the country to fight extremists.

Here's a clue for Gen. Lynch:

Lopezromo, who was not part of the squad on its late-night mission, said he saw nothing wrong with what Thomas did.

"I don't see it as an execution, sir," he told the judge. "I see it as killing the enemy."

He said Marines consider all Iraqi men part of the insurgency.

DRUDGE REPLACEMENT

Bill Cunningham replaced Matt "The Eggman" Drudge, at least on KNST in Tucson. Tonight, he has Sean Hannity as a guest.

GOLDSMITH ON THE HOSPITAL VISIT

Jack Goldsmith was head of the Office of Legal Counsel at the DOJ and recently testified¹ before the Senate Judiciary Committee. He supported the testimony of former deputy AG James Comey and FBI Director Mueller about the infamous hospital visit Abu Al Gonzales paid to the ailing John Ashcroft. Note that all 3 accounts contradict Gonzales' sworn testimony.

EXCERPTS:

SEN. SPECTER: Professor Goldsmith, on the Terror Surveillance Program, you say that there were some aspects that you could not find legal, what can you tell us about the incident in Attorney General Ashcroft's hospital room, you write in your book that Ms. Ashcroft stuck out her tongue at Attorney General Gonzales and Chief of Staff Andrew Card when they left the room, what happened to provoke that?

MR. GOLDSMITH: Just to make the record clear, that particular statement is not from my book sir, it's from an interview I believe. But I did say that certainly. And so would you like to know about what happened in the hospital room?

[SNIP]

SEN. FEINSTEIN: Okay. Would you please go to the hospital room that Senator Specter started to ask you about and quickly give us the statement of facts as you saw them and exactly what happened, what your concern was and why you were there?

MR. GOLDSMITH: Yes. It was a classified program that my office had been reviewing round the clock for several months. There was a -- the program had to be authorized on Thursday, March 11.

The week before -- after months of work, I determined that I could not find a legal basis for certain aspects of the program. I had been informing the attorney general and the deputy attorney general for a while about this, and about the time I made this decision, the attorney general was -- got -- became very ill, so Jim Comey became the acting attorney general.

And to make a long story short, we'd -- he advised the White House about the justice department's decision and the -- just fast forwarding to Wednesday what happened was that as Jim Comey testified, he got word that two people from the White House, Judge Gonzales and Andrew Card were coming to seek to, in effect, have the attorney general overrule Jim Comey. And so Jim Comey rushed to the hospital.

He, through the command center of the justice department, contacted me since it was my legal analysis essentially that was at the bottom of all this. I rushed to the hospital, we rushed into the room, we arrived a few minutes before Mr. Card and Mr. Gonzales did -- I'm rushing through this quickly, but I'm happy to tell you more details if you like.

The attorney general looked terrible, I hadn't seen him in a week, but he'd lost a lot of weight, he had -- I did believe that he'd had an operation the day before. He looked very weak, very tired and ashen, and he didn't seem to have any strength at all.

But after a couple of minutes after we entered the room, Mr. Gonzales and Mr. Card entered the room, only Mr. Gonzales spoke. He asked the attorney the -- Mr. Ashcroft, he asked how he was doing, and then he asked -- he basically said, he was there to seek authorization for the program, at which point, Attorney General Ashcroft sort of lifted himself off the bed and color came into his cheeks, and he sort of came to life, and he gave a -- just a couple of minutes speech in which he said that he didn't -- in which he said he shared the justice department's concerns, the concerns that Mr. Comey and I had conveyed.

He said he didn't appreciate being visited in the hospital under these circumstances and he said that Mr. Comey in any event was the acting attorney general, and that was it, and he fell back into the bed and looks terrible again and then the two gentlemen left the room.

¹Federal News Service
October 2, 2007 Tuesday
HEARING OF THE SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE;
SUBJECT: PRESERVING THE RULE OF LAW IN THE FIGHT AGAINST TERRORISM;
CHAIRED BY: SENATOR PATRICK LEAHY (D-VT);
WITNESS: JACK LANDMAN GOLDSMITH, HENRY L. SHATTUCK PROFESSOR OF LAW, HARVARD LAW SCHOOL, CAMBRIDGE, MASSACHUSETTS;
LOCATION: 226 DIRKSEN SENATE OFFICE BUILDING, WASHINGTON, D.C.

SECTION: CAPITOL HILL HEARING

HEWITT ATTACKS SEN. ORRIN HATCH!!!

Huge Ego Hewitt wrote a vicious attack on Hatch, a Republican Senator who, as of 2006, has a lifetime rating by the American Conservative Union of 89.9! (100 = perfect) Here's the attack:

With as many as six appointments to the Supreme Court in the next eight years (six Ruth Bader Ginsburgs!) a Hillary Court would be like a Hillary presidency--a radical Bench to back up a radical Administration.

This is an attack because Hatch suggested Ginsburg to then-President Clinton!

WHAT HATH GATES WROUGHT?

In addition to getting rid of that partisan fool Gen. Pace, Gates is sweeping out the neo-con fanatics in the DoD and appointing non-ideological flag officers, such as Adm. Fallon, to command positions. A good question is what persuaded Pres. Fredo to nominate a SECDEF who was part of the original Iraq Study Group and did not share Fredo's "vision" of the Middle East?

New military leaders question Iraq mission
By Nancy A. Youssef and Renee Schoof | McClatchy Newspapers
Posted on Thursday, October 4, 2007

WASHINGTON — Four and a half years after the nation's top military leaders saluted and fell in behind President Bush's pre-emptive invasion of Iraq, their replacements are beginning to question the mission and sound alarms about the toll the war is taking on the Army and the Marine Corps.

The change at the Pentagon is striking but little-noticed, in part because Defense Secretary Robert Gates, a longtime veteran of the CIA, is quiet where his predecessor Donald H. Rumsfeld was not.

"It's part of a sea change," said Loren Thompson, a military analyst at the Lexington Institute, a national-security research center in Washington. "The ideologues have been replaced by managers who view Iraq not as a cause, but a problem to be solved."

Gates, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Michael Mullen, Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England, Undersecretary for Intelligence Gen. James Clapper and other top officials also are concerned that the war may be crippling the military's ability to respond to other crises.

Although Democrats in Congress have been powerless to halt or even slow the war, six developments have combined to produce growing resistance, even within some parts of Bush's own administration, to the president's unrelenting emphasis on staying the course in Iraq:

3. A shift, completed this week, in the military's top uniformed leadership from administration loyalists to officers who are more concerned about the growing strains on the military.

4. Mounting evidence, in a variety of official reports in recent weeks, that Iraqi forces won't be prepared to take over from American troops in significant numbers until late next year at the earliest, and that Iraqis have made little progress toward political reconciliation.

The outgoing chairman of the joint chiefs, Marine Gen. Peter Pace, a loyal advocate for administration policies, used the word "freedom" eight times in his final remarks as chairman. Mullen didn't use it once in his first speech Monday as the new chairman.

After Mullen was sworn in, he sent a letter to the military that spelled out a vision of the Middle East markedly different from the one the administration has hailed. Mullen didn't talk about how the two wars could spread democracy and freedom in the region, as Pace did until the final minutes of his two-year tenure as chairman.

ANOTHER INSTALLMENT OF WHAT THE SOLDIERS THINK

A band of survivors returns from Iraq

For 15 months, their platoon was sent where the violence was worst. Many lost friends or faith in their mission, but 'at least we made it alive,' said one soldier.

By Alexandra Zavis, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
October 6, 2007

Their 3,700-strong 3rd Brigade, 2nd Infantry Division, based at Ft. Lewis, Wash., lost 48 soldiers in all, and nearly 650 were injured.

"That's a pretty steep price to pay," Col. Steve Townsend, the brigade commander, said as soldiers packed up his plywood headquarters at a sun-baked base called Warhorse, on the northwest outskirts of Baqubah. "I'd like to think it's been worth it. We'll see. I think the jury's out on that."

Spc. Chris Martin, a medic, ... "I came here feeling I could do great things. Not just bring all my guys home . . . but do something for people," he said. "I failed." ... he is disillusioned with the political leaders who sent them to Iraq.

"They have made some companies into Fortune 500 companies," he said. "But otherwise, we have just put a lot of flags on coffins for what will inevitably be nothing but a giant mess."

NOT RECESSION == "vibrant and strong economy"

Our talk radio president has a unique view of the economy: If we're not in a recession, then we have "a vibrant and strong economy." This is the same kind of logic he uses when talking about Iraq: If there isn't afull scale civil war, then there is substanatial progress.

The LA Times lets us know that the streets aren't paved with gold:

...the economy is not creating jobs quite as fast as the population is expanding...

....the Labor Department's revision downward of job-creation data from the 12 months ended in March. The department reported that the economy created 297,000 jobs fewer than initially reported, and most of that reduction -- 217,000 -- was in the private sector.

OH GOD, MORE BROOKS BS

In a pre-emptive post-mortem of the impending collapse of the GOP, David Brooks of the NY Times writes:

Over the past six years, the Republican Party has championed the spread of democracy in the Middle East.

As many others have noted, this "bring Democracy" meme is essentially an excuse for the miserable failure of the Iraq War. As Colin Powell pointed out, the primary motivations for invading were WMD and Al Qaeda, not re-shaping the Middle East.

Marc Armbinder notes that some conservatives have decided to make a strategic retreat to the glory years of Raygun. This will fail for many reasons but I will only note 3 here:

1) Sean Hannity thinks it is a good idea
2) The Raygun years were a bad joke at best
3) The people involved: "former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, and conservative activists Brent Bozell and Gary Bauer."

John Cole of Balloon Juice has a nice reply to Brooks that hits a key reason why the GOP has alienated so many:

For starters, people got tired of being associated with these drooling retards. [Jonah Goldberg, Pam of Atlas Shrugs] Then, when they realized that these drooling retards had ideological allies running the show in the Bush administration and then began to experience their idiotic policies, they moved from disgusted to outright hostile.

Like me. It had nothing to do with Burke, and everything to do with what the party had become. A bunch of bedwetting, loudmouth, corrupt, hypocritical, and incompetent boobs with a mean streak a mile long and no sense of fair play or proportion.

There are many people who will follow these idiots, enough to make Fats Limbaugh and Sean Hannity rich and even keep Mark Levin and Tammy Bruce on the air, but it's not enough for a national political party.

TOO LITTLE, TOO LATE

Just like Teh Surge, the criminal Bush regime takes corrective actions years too late. That's the cost of ideological purity, AKA Loyal Bushism.

Rice Issues New Rules for Blackwater USA
Oct 5, 10:58 PM (ET)

By MATTHEW LEE

WASHINGTON (AP) - Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice ordered federal agents on Friday to ride with Blackwater USA escorts of U.S. diplomatic convoys in Baghdad to tighten oversight after a shooting in which private guards are accused of killing 13 Iraqi civilians.

She also ordered video cameras installed in Blackwater vehicles.

The new rules initially will apply only to Blackwater details because the initial recommendations cover just Baghdad, where the company operates. This could be expanded to include the other two firms, Dyncorp and Triple Canopy, which work in the north and south of Iraq, McCormack said.

I can bet some of the wingnuts will be claiming that the Blackwater scandal is nothing more than a conspiracy by the liberal media, moonbats, appeasers, Dhimiicrats, etc. Just to push back a little, here's a little information:

Blackwater faulted by U.S. military: report
Fri Oct 5, 2007 5:24pm EDT

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. military reports from the scene of a shooting incident in Baghdad involving security contractor Blackwater indicates its guards opened fire without provocation and used excessive force, The Washington Post reported on Friday.

Citing a senior U.S. military official, the Post said the military reports appear to corroborate the Iraqi government's contention that Blackwater was at fault.

"It was obviously excessive. It was obviously wrong," a U.S. military official speaking on condition of anonymity told the newspaper.

THEY ALWAYS LIE, THEN LIE ABOUT THE LIES

Fats Limbaugh's denials about smearing anti-war troops is reminiscent of other lies from the criminal Bush regime. Here's one whopper from Cheney involving one of the lies told about Saddam and 9-11.

TRUTH:
CHENEY: Well, what we now have that's developed since you and I last talked, Tim, of course, was that report that's been pretty well confirmed, that he did go to Prague and he did meet with a senior official of the Iraqi intelligence service in Czechoslovakia last April, several months before the attack. (12/9/2001)

CHENEY:
From CNBC, 6/17/2004
BORGER: Well, let's get to Mohamed Atta for a minute because you mentioned him as well. You have said in the past that it was, quote, "pretty well confirmed."

Vice Pres. CHENEY: No, I never said that.

BORGER: OK.

Vice Pres. CHENEY: I never said that.

15 EACH MONTH

A couple of days ago I was listening to Slots Bennett's show and someone made reference to all the progress in women's rights in Afghanistan and Iraq because of U.S. actions. This is an odd notion of progress because in many ways, there has been either no progress or the situation has deteriorated. Over 3 years ago, in Afghanistan's Herat province, "women are burning themselves to escape abuse" and it is unlikely the situation has changed very much.

In the Great Neo-Con Laboratory for Democracy (Iraq), McClatchy reports that women in the South are being terrorized by religious fundamentalists:

In Basra, vigilantes wage deadly campaign against women
By Jay Price and Ali Omar al Basri | McClatchy Newspapers
Posted on Thursday, October 4, 2007

BASRA, Iraq — Women in Basra have become the targets of a violent campaign by religious extremists, who leave more than 15 female bodies scattered around the city each month, police officers say.

Maj. Gen. Abdel Jalil Khalaf, the commander of Basra's police, said Thursday that self-styled enforcers of religious law threatened, beat and sometimes shot women who they believed weren't sufficiently Muslim.

"This is a new type of terror that Basra is not familiar with," he said. "These gangs represent only themselves, and they are far outside religious, forgiving instructions of Islam."

Often, he said, the "crime" is no more than wearing Western clothes or not wearing a head scarf.

The violence is displacing the few members of religious minorities in the area. Fuad Na'im, one of a handful of Christians left in the city, said Thursday that the way his wife dressed made the whole family a target.

Back in August, the Washington Post also reported that the situation in Basra is not at all good:

As British Leave, Basra Deteriorates
Violence Rises in Shiite City Once Called a Success Story

By Karen DeYoung and Thomas E. Ricks
Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, August 7, 2007; A01

Three major Shiite political groups are locked in a bloody conflict that has left the city in the hands of militias and criminal gangs, whose control extends to municipal offices and neighborhood streets. The city is plagued by "the systematic misuse of official institutions, political assassinations, tribal vendettas, neighborhood vigilantism and enforcement of social mores, together with the rise of criminal mafias that increasingly intermingle with political actors," a recent report by the International Crisis Group said.

As recently as February, Vice President Cheney hailed Basra as a part of Iraq "where things are going pretty well."

LIMBAUGH: A PATTERN OF LIES AND DECEPTION

Fats Limbaugh lies over minor matters and larger ones and Snopes points out his "shyness" about his pilonidal cyst, the reason he wasn't in the Vietnam draft, is similarly dishonest. Scoobie Davis has the transcript:


GREG: It started out telling the story of how when Vietnam happened, he went down to the recruiting station and signed up with his two best friends, John J. Pershing III and Fred Smith, the founder of Federal Express. Now that’s the kind of gravitas that gave me a chill up my spine. And I’m wondering if in the debates with Bush, he might ask Bush just off-the-cuff “Where were you when you were supposed to have shown up for duty in Mississippi and you didn’t show up for that year?”--in the national guard when he dodged the Vietnam draft. And Rush you never mentioned how you dodged the Vietnam draft.

LIMBAUGH: I didn’t

GREG: Yes, you did. You claimed you had a boil on your butt— [Limbaugh mutes Greg]

LIMBAUGH: No, you see, that’s part of popular mythology that is out there that I have not whined nor complained about, Greg. But that is just a bunch of internet BS and hyperbole. Never happened. Was not the cause, wasn’t the case.

ANOTHER PEAK AT NOISE MACHINE TACTICS

The wingnuts think nothing of using pressure and the tactics of personal destruction to strike back at news media figures they don't approve of. Via Yeas and Nays, I find that Chris Matthews came clean about the criminal Bush regime:

After praising the drafters of the First Amendment for allowing him to make a living, he outlined what he said was the fundamental difference between the Bush and Clinton administrations. The Clinton camp, he said, never put pressure on his bosses to silence him.“Not so this crowd,” he added, explaining that Bush White House officials -- especially those from Vice President Cheney's office -- called MSNBC brass to complain about the content of his show and attempted to influence its editorial content. "They will not silence me!" Matthews declared.

WINGNUT WEB TIDBIT

This was at the end of John O'Neill's whoring for Limbaugh piece at Human Events:

Mr. O'Neill is a Houston attorney who clerked for Chief Justice William Rehnquist during the Supreme Court's October 1974 term.

Who knows what kind of maggots have infested our government after almost 7 years of Pres. Fredo?

OUR LOUSY NEWS MEDIA

The wingnuts love to accuse the NY Times and CBS News as exemplars of liberal bias in the media and after reading a post on DKos, I thought I'd post of couple of tidbits that show otherwise.

First, the Times:

(Via Gandhi --> Portland Indy Media --> FAIR)

From a panel discussion in Washington, D.C. sponsored by Northwestern’s Medill School of Journalism (11/4/04).

Audience Member: I was wondering if you felt there was a difference between balanced reporting and objective reporting? And the thing that kind of sticks in my mind frequently is when President Bush on the stump would frequently pull out the "global test" that John Kerry mentioned in the debate, but he would completely twist the meaning of the whole phrase around. . . . Essentially, what I feel like was a lie that the president just stated . . . was never objectively reported on. . . .

[snip]

Elisabeth Bumiller (New York Times): That’s why it’s very hard to write those, because you can’t say George Bush is wrong here. There’s no way you can say that in the New York Times. So we contort ourselves up and say, “Actually”— I actually once wrote this sentence: “Mr. Bush’s statement did not exactly . . . ” It was some completely upside down statement that was basically saying he wasn’t telling the truth. And I got an email from somebody saying, “What’s wrong with you guys? Why can’t you just say it plainly?” But there’s just—

Loren Ghiglione (Medill School of Journalism, Moderator): Why can’t you say it plainly?

Bumiller: You can’t just say the president is lying. You don’t just say that in the . . . you just say—

Ghiglione: Well, why can’t you?[laughter from the audience]

Bumiller: You can in an editorial, but I’m sorry, you can’t in a news column. Mr. Bush is lying? You can say Mr. Bush is, you can say. . . .

[Murmuring and laughter continue from audience.]

Bumiller [to audience]: And stop the fussing! You can say Mr. Bush’s statement was not factually accurate. You can’t say the president is lying—that’s a judgment call.

Second, CBS News:

From Kagro X at Daily Kos -


And then, after all this, Couric tells a National Press Club audience:

• The rationale for the war was b.s.
• The war was a mistake
• Invading Iraq was ridiculous since the terrorists were in Afghanistan and Pakistan
• Iraq had no connection with Al Qaeda
• Bush botched the war
• Disbanding the Iraqi military was a disaster and...
• She would "feel totally comfortable saying any of that at some point, if required, on television."

"If required."
What the @#*%& does that mean? If required?

And she's not even done!

The former "Today" show anchor traced her discomfort with the administration’s march to war back to the aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks.
"The whole culture of wearing flags on our lapel and saying ‘we’ when referring
to the United States and, even the ‘shock and awe’ of the initial stages, it was
just too jubilant and just a little uncomfortable. And I remember feeling, when
I was anchoring the ‘Today’ show, this inevitable march towards war and kind of feeling like, ‘Will anybody put the brakes on this?’ And is this really being properly challenged by the right people? And I think, at the time, anyone who questioned the administration was considered unpatriotic and it was a very difficult position to be in."

AN ECHO CHAMBER

That's the term one should use to describe a major symptom of the dysfunctionality in the Executive Branch, noted previously in other contexts here and here, that led to the creation of the torture memos. Jack Goldsmith, a real conservative, testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday and although the transcript isn't currently available, his prepared testimony is.

In my opinion, the Bush administration was excessively secretive
inside the Executive branch when it came to the production and receipt of legal advice. For example, the controversial interrogation opinion of August 1, 2002, was not circulated for comments to the State Department, which had expertise on the meaning of torture and the consequences of adopting particular
interpretations of torture.

This extreme internal secrecy was exacerbated by the fact that the
people inside the small circle of lawyers working on these issues shared
remarkably like-minded and sometimes unusual views about the law.
Close-looped decisionmaking by like-minded lawyers resulted in legal and political errors that would be very costly to the administration down the road. Many of these errors were unnecessary and would have been avoided with
wider deliberation and consultation.

FATS TIDBITS

Fats complained last Friday that no one from the MSM contacted him to get his side of the story but that's another Big Fat Lie, as ThinkProgress demonstrates.

Brian McGough, the disabled anti-war vet that Fats compared to a "suicide bomber," wanted to air his rebuttal on Limbaugh's hometown station but was refused by a VP at the station. The reason: it would "conflict with the listeners who have chosen to listen to Rush Limbaugh." Well, I choose to listen to him and it wouldn't conflict with my beliefs and I wonder how many listeners in Palm Beach feel the same way? Of course, Limbaugh may also have been behind this. Randi Rhodes once said she was told by a Clear Channel executive that her show could not be syndicated because Limbaugh said he would jump networks if that happened. I suspect Fats was worried that Randi would would expose his daily lies.

McGough appeared on Countdown and issued this challenge to the Fat Boy:

I’d really like to say and to reiterate what I’ve said before: Ask me or any other members of VoteVets.org to come on your program and talk to you and tell you how we feel. Don’t just talk bad about us, and when we say ‘hey, that’s not right,’ try to talk bad about us again. And think before you open your mouth.

"9-11" Giuliani was on Insannity's radio show today and also came to Limbaugh's defense. Mark "Foamer" Levin went on the attack and called Wesley Clark a "buffoon."

SO, WHAT WAS THIS ABOUT DEMS NOT CARING?

One of the many wingnut attack memes is that Democrats don't care about the Iraqi people, especially our allies among them. Well, you know it's crap and here's one reason why:

Clearing the Way for Iraqi Refugees
Monday, Oct. 01, 2007
By MICHAEL WEISSKOPF/WASHINGTON
TIME Magazine

Among the millions of Iraqis who have fled their homeland, there are about 10,000 who have been designated "persecuted" by the United Nations. ... But their path to the U.S. has been inordinately complicated, and a new Senate bill, expected to pass this week, is aimed at removing many of the hurdles.

Sponsors of the measure, led by Ted Kennedy, attached it to the huge defense authorization bill that is expected to pass this week.

ROBERTSON'S CBN NEWS LIES FOR LIMBAUGH

If you watch the video clip at the link, you'll see that CBN spliced together segments that weren't consecutive on Fats' show. Pete Hegseth, a war whore, says it is clear from the clip that Limbaugh is referring to fakes like Jesse Macbeth.

THE LATEST RATINGS FROM TALKERS MAGAZINE

There's not much change since Fall 2006. The 2 biggest changes: (1)Glenn Beck has picked up another 1.25 million listeners, perhaps due to his CNN show; (2)Mark Levin has picked up 0.75 million.

ANOTHER TRY AT REDSTATE

I've re-registered at RedState and I wonder how long it will take before I get banned again? While there, I noticed a surprising number of posts by GOP Congress Critters. These are all in defense of Fats Limbaugh:

Feigned Democrat Outrage
By Congressman Roy Blunt

The Democrats Attack Rush To Cover Their Mistake
By Rep. Vito Fosella

Sign the Petition - StandwithRush.com
By Rep. Eric Cantor

Attack on Limbaugh is Attack on Free Speech
By Congressman Mike Pence

Why let the truth get in the way of a good story?
By Rep. Marsha Blackburn

Allegations Against Limbaugh Are Ludicrous!
By Rep. Scott Garrett

It's Not Really About Rush, It's About Talk Radio
By Congressman Jack Kingston

First, I was surprised that RedState has that much esteem among the GOPers; second, and much more important, this is another indication of how important Fats Limbaugh is to the wingnuts. In itself, that's a startling admission of weakness because Limbaugh has peaked and can only go downhill from now on.

I was listening to Hannity today and after his dishonest defense of Limbaugh, he warned his conservative listeners that there would be many more attacks by the Left in the future, especially as we near the elections in November. This might be wishful thinking on my part but I seemed to detect a bit of fear in Hannity and I think that's a good thing: no longer can these gasbags count of getting away with their lies and smears without some people standing up to them.

UPDATE:

The Hutt also was there -

I wonder who General Petraeus and his troops think is most supportive?
By Fred Thompson

FREDDIE THE HUTT SEEMS OUT OF IT

I found this at Memeorandum and it has a nice summary of the gaffes "Raygun II" has made so far. When will all these mistakes add up in the wingnuts minds?

ANOTHER FRED GAFFE
Posted: Wednesday, October 03, 2007 1:23 PM
by Domenico Montanaro
From NBC’s Joel Seidman

Not only has he misspoken or said he didn't know about Terri Schiavo, or the controversy about oil drilling in the Everglades, or that he was unaware that a federal judge had ruled that lethal injection procedures in his home state of Tennessee were unconstitutional, last night in Iowa he said that the Dems controlled congress when John Roberts went through his confirmation hearings for Chief Justice.

WE'RE GETTING NEAR MONTY PYTHON TERROTORY

Josh Marshall makes this great find about the absurd length we've taken outsourcing: (Excerpts)

A few days ago the State Department released what it called a "first blush" report on the Blackwater incident in Baghdad, a report which largely exonerated the Blackwater personnel involved.

The report was written out of the State Department's Bureau of Diplomatic Security, the folks who hired Blackwater to provide security for US diplomats in Iraq. But it turns out that the State Department employee who interviewed the Blackwater folks and wrote the report, Darren Hanner ... well, he wasn't a State Department mployee. He was another contractor from Blackwater.

So yes, you've got that right. We've now reached what can only be called the alpha and the omega of contracting accountability breakdown ridiculousness. We're outsourcing our investigations of Blackwater to Blackwater.

MEANWHILE, BACK IN IRAQ...

(You remember, the war the gasbags like Limbaugh and Hannity LOVE TO DEATH!) The good news for today is ASSASSINATION and CHOLERA.

Ambush Injures Polish Diplomat in Iraq
Oct 3, 4:49 PM (ET)
By KIM CURTIS

BAGHDAD (AP) - A daring ambush of bombs and gunfire left Poland's ambassador pinned down in a burning vehicle Wednesday before being pulled to safety and airlifted in a rescue mission by the embattled security firm Blackwater USA. At least three people were killed, including a Polish bodyguard.

The diplomatic convoy was hit by three bombs and then attackers opened fire in the Shiite-controlled Karradah district. Polish guards returned fire as the injured ambassador, Gen. Edward Pietrzyk, was pulled from his burning vehicle. At least 10 people, including four Polish security agents, were wounded.

WHO: Cholera Outbreak in Iraq Spreading
Oct 3 06:50 PM US/Eastern

GENEVA (AP) - The toll of people infected with cholera in Iraq has risen to 3,315, the World Health Organization said Wednesday.

The number of confirmed infections compares with 2,758 cases reported Sunday by the U.N. health agency. The death toll of 14 has been unchanged in recent days, WHO said.

The outbreak first detected Aug. 14 in Kirkuk in northern Iraq has now spread to half of the 18 provinces in the country.

The agency said the Iraqi government has taken steps to curb the disease, but that the overall quality of water and sanitation is very poor, which greatly facilitates cholera contamination.

Cholera is a gastrointestinal disease that is typically spread by drinking contaminated water and can cause severe diarrhea that, in extreme cases, can lead to fatal dehydration.

MORE ON FATS

MediaMatters has the video clip of Slots Bennett whoring for Limbaugh. MM also wants us to contact our local stations and let them know what we think about Fats.

Today, Fats repeated his lies about his "phony soldier" outrage. About MediaMatters, he claimed "they are the liars, they are the frauds" and asserted that "the timeline is not relevant." It's not relevant because it shows that he is lying about the context of his remarks.

Fats then sequed into an attack on Global Warming and sounded just like Michael Savage. Here is the transcript from his site:

(Excerpts)

RUSH: All right. On this program, over the course of the recent past, one of the ways I've attempted to alert people to the real truth behind manmade global warming is that it is a hoax being presented as a religion. The only difference between global warming and any other major religion is that its god is tangible. (It's the earth.) ... Global warming is nothing more than a disguised liberal plot to advance their politics, just like Mrs. Clinton's SCHIP program for kids is a Trojan horse to get us into universal health care on the guise that we're only doing it "for the children." So global warming is simply a masked and camouflaged way to get liberals to where they want to be: power over as many aspects of your life as possible.... If you get rid of "organized" religion -- and they're not going to succeed, but this is who these people are. If you get rid of "organized" religion, it sets the stage for unorganized religion, which is what global warming is. ... If you don't believe in God, you have no meaning in your life, and you will thus search for meaning, and you will find it anywhere. Most people, even atheists, want religion of some kind in their life. Hello, global warming, as a substitute -- apparently unrecognized and not even organized -- religion. ... The global warming people essentially are atheists. You cannot believe in the God of Creation and believe manmade global warming. You just can't.

Now, what would Fats say about all the Evangelicals who take Global Warming seriously? Are they also "phony"?

ANOTHER HANNITY TALKING POINT BITES THE DUST

On his radio show, Hannity has been crowing about how unpopular Congress and he suggests that means people don't like and blame the Democrats. Once again, the truth is far different. From the WaPo (10/2/07):

By a 2 to 1 margin, those who see little accomplishment in Congress's first nine months blame the inaction on Bush and the GOP more than they do the majority Democrats. Fifty-one percent place primary fault with the president and congressional Republicans, and 25 percent on the Democrats. Among independents, 43 percent blame Republicans, 23 percent Democrats and nearly three in 10 blame both sides equally.

FATS LIMBAUGH IS A COWARD!

Wesley Clark let us know what a chickenshit Limbaugh is:

Last week, Rush Limbaugh labeled any American soldier who supports an end to the war in Iraq as "phony." We challenged Limbaugh through an email campaign to invite VoteVets.org's Jon Soltz to his show and repeat these same insults to an Iraq war veteran's face. Over 10,000 people responded and emailed Rush -- but to our disappointment, he has refused to respond to our request.

Fats can have Karl Rove on but not a veteran? How does that make any sense? WHAT IS RUSH AFRAID OF?

A LITTLE MORE ON SLOTS BENNETT

Digby actually saw Slots on The Situation Room and like Fats Limbaugh, he's also apparently on the verge of losing it:

I just watched Bill Bennett quivering with outrage that Media Matters has "smeared" Rush Limbaugh; according to him Rush didn't actually say that soldiers who spoke out against the war were "phony soldiers." Wolf, uninformed about the details as usual, looked taken aback and somewhat frightened by Bennett's wild-eyed defense, and left it up to Donna Brazile to present the facts. (She did quite well although she would have been better if armed with the details on this one.) What was interesting is that Bennett then more or less issued a veiled threat that they'd better be careful not to push this thing too far or the "betrayus" thing would haunt the Democrats forever. He was more animated than I've seen him in years.

I bet he was animated because part of his livelihood is at stake. If Fats goes down, he knows his ratings will slump and he may even be taken off the air. Now, he has other sources of wingnut welfare money but this would at least hurt his inflated ego.

Here's the relevant transcript from CNN:

BENNETT: I'm willing to criticize Republicans and conservatives when they have it wrong. You've heard me do it on the show a number of times. Not this time. When you shoot at a king, and he is the king of talk radio, you better get him. They didn't get him here. The argument was that he used the phrase "phony soldiers." He was talking about a phony soldier. The A.P. ran a story called "phony soldiers." ABC three days before rush's comments ran a story called "Phony Soldiers." He was talking about a guy who was lying. He was not a corporal in the Army and didn't get a Purple Heart. That's the guy Rush was talking about. Media Matters left that out. I have been savaged by Media Matters unfairly. They did it this time. There is plenty to disagree with Rush if you are on the left. This isn't -- this was not fair. Let me tell you why. The Petraeus thing has really hurt the Democrats. They say it doesn't and it was all fair. But this thing is not going away. This is a soldier, commander in the field. And it really stung and they are looking for revenge.

BENNETT: He took on Jack Murtha. He did not call Jack Murtha a phony soldier. He took Jack Murtha on on the merits of the argument. That's an entirely different case. He can take on Rush Limbaugh, he can take on George Bush, take on Jack Murtha. Name calling was about a phony soldier.

BENNETT: All you have to do is listen to the show. And it is perfectly clear. Crystal clear. Couldn't be clearer who he is talking about.

HELP PUSH BACK AGAINST LYING LIMBAUGH

Gen. Wesley Clark (Ret.) has organized a petition to have Fats removed from the Armed Forces Radio Network. Sign here.

PAUL HACKETT ON FATS LIMBAUGH

This is from a couple of years ago. Hackett was on the Ed Schultz show and here's the audio. Highlight: "fat-ass drug addict"

(h/t to CuriousAlbert at AOL)

MAYBE IT'S THE ENTIRE GOP, NOT JUST FATS LIMBAUGH

I know the GOP will be with us for a long time but they seem to be sinking hard and fast. One of their major spokesmen has rightfully been criticized for smearing soldiers, a crucial part of their base is thinking of going 3rd-party and Americans seem to prefer Democrats over the GOP on just about any issue you can imagine.

Now I learn that Business is also getting fed up with the GOP and that comes from a solid newspaper, the WSJ.

GOP Is Losing GripOn Core Business Vote
Deficit Hawks Defect As Social Issues Prevail;
'The Party Left Me'
By JACKIE CALMES
October 2, 2007; Page A1
Wall Street Journal

Some business leaders are drifting away from the party because of the war in Iraq, the growing federal debt and a conservative social agenda they don't share. In manufacturing sectors such as the auto industry, some Republicans want direct government help with soaring health-care costs, which Republicans in Washington have been reluctant to provide. And some business people want more government action on global warming, arguing that a bolder plan is not only inevitable, but could spur new industries.

In the Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll in September, 37% of professionals and managers identify themselves as Republican or leaning Republican, down from 44% three years ago.

Hedge funds last year gave 77% of their contributions in congressional races to Democrats, up from 71% during the 2004 election, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonpartisan analyst of campaign finances. Last year the securities industry gave 45% of its money to Republicans, down from 58% in 1996, the center said.

Overall, Democratic presidential candidates have raised more than $200 million this year, about 70% more than their Republican rivals.

Here are some interesting graphs from the WSJ article:

YEAH, LIMBAUGH'S A "VICTIM"

Carl Hulse of the NY Times ("Limbaugh Latest Victim in War of Condemnation") thinks Limbaugh has been victimized by the current environment. As Hulse puts it,

The back and forth on the Petraeus advertisement and, now, over Mr. Limbaugh’s remarks, illustrates how both parties are turning miscues into fodder in the run up to the 2008 elections, particularly in the absence of serious legislative accomplishment when it comes to the war.

The Limbaugh furor is just the latest episode in how each side has sought to paint the other as unpatriotic or unsympathetic to the military by focusing public attention on various comments that lawmakers might wish they had phrased differently or could take back.

What Limbaugh said wasn't a miscue; he has attacked anti-war soldiers before, notably Paul Hackett. Hulse does mention the basic facts of this case but presents them in a "he said, she said," moral equivalency manner:

After the liberal media watchdog organization Media Matters sounded the alarm about his comments, Mr. Limbaugh said on subsequent shows that he was talking about only one discredited man who claimed to be a wounded veteran. “I was not talking about antiwar, active duty troops,” he insisted.

Yet analysts for Media Matters noted that Mr. Limbaugh’s first reference to the discredited man came nearly two minutes after his plural reference to phony soldiers.

I may be too close to the liberal side here but I do spend time listening to wingnut radio and in that arena, Democrats are attacked, lied about and smeared all the time. They are especially attacked for "not supporting the troops." Hulse seems to portray this as an evenly balanced game of partisanship when in fact the GOP has a huge lead, in part because the GOP stays in lockstep with the Noise Machine, of which Limbaugh is a major component. Hulse does note this difference but fails to draw the obvious conclusion:

More than 40 Democratic senators signed a letter sent Tuesday to the company that syndicates the radio show, asking that Mr. Limbaugh’s remarks be repudiated.

But no Republican senators signed the letter, highlighting a significant difference between the responses to the MoveOn advertisement and the Limbaugh comments. The Republican-backed plan to condemn the Petraeus advertisement drew substantial Democratic backing in the House and Senate, while Democrats have been unable to splinter Republicans on Mr. Limbaugh.

MORE FATS DEFENDERS

MediaMatters finds that Slots Bennett comes to Limbaugh's defense by using a variant of the context argument:

The argument was that he used the phrase "phony soldiers": He was talking
about a phony soldier. The AP ran a story called "phony soldiers." ABC, three
days before Rush's comments, ran a story called "phony soldiers." He was talking
about a guy who was lying. He wasn't a corporal in the Army. He didn't get a
Purple Heart. That's the guy Rush was talking about.

No, he wasn't Bill. Limbaugh was talking about ANY soldier who is anti-war. Slots goes on to say:

BENNETT: He took on Jack Murtha. He did not call Jack Murtha a "phony soldier."

Yes he did Bill and here's the REAL transcript:

LIMBAUGH: I was talking about a genuine phony soldier. And by the way, Jesse MacBeth's not the only one. How about this guy Scott Thomas [Beauchamp] who was writing fraudulent, phony things in The New Republic about atrocities he saw that never happened? How about Jack Murtha blanketly accepting the notion that Marines at Haditha engaged in wanton murder of innocent children and civilians?

Mark "Foamer" Levin took pretty much the same tack and had a US Attorney on who has been prosecuting some people who have falsely claimed they were soldiers. Bryan at Hot Air took the trouble to make an audio clip.

ANOTHER VET CHALLENGES FATS LIMBAUGH

Via phillip anderson at The Albany Project:

I ♥ STEPHANIE MILLER

Stephanie appeared on Hannity & Colmes to discuss the Fats Limbaugh smear of our soldiers. As a bonus package of wingnuttiness, Melanie Morgan was also in the same segment. Stephanie more than holds her own and we need more like her! Here's part of the transcript from Lexis-Nexis:

MELANIE MORGAN, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: What's clear to me is that this is a manufactured controversy by media Matters for America, an organization that's been determined to take down conservative talk show hosts for many, many years now. Rush Limbaugh is a Man who is truth teller and one of the most effective communicators of our generation. And that's why they're continuing. They're continuing.

COLMES: That doesn't answer my question, though.

MORGAN: They're continuing to attack him.

COLMES: I'm trying to understand the explanation.

MORGAN: The story about Pfc. Jesse MacBeth was a reference to a reference -- I believe it was an Associated Press article. It wasn't that it was ABC's Brian Ross. And it was an actual soldier who had been engaged in phony service.

COLMES: I understand that. But it wasn't clear earlier in the conversation to me that that, Stephanie Miller, who he was talking about because MacBeth's name didn't come up until about two minutes after the "phony soldier's" comment.

STEPHANIE MILLER, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: Yeah, I'm still wiping my eyes a little bit over Rush Limbaugh, truth teller. OK.

Yeah.

COLMES: Ha, ha, ha.

MILLER: The out of context excuse, Alan. His name was nowhere near when he made these comments. And he's done it before when he said it about Paul Hackett, who ran in Ohio as a democrat. Oh, he was just padding his resume in Iraq. I think Americans are tired of people that have never worn the uniform, particularly ones that got out of combat because of a giant anal cyst, criticizing people who have served their country.

COLMES: And the other thing is, Melanie, is that after he said it was about just one soldier, the next or a couple of days later, he went on to then renounce Jack Murtha again and put him in the "phony soldier" category.

So it really wasn't about one soldier and he did use the plural soldiers initially, so again, I'm just trying to understand this.

MORGAN: Alan, this is just a ridiculous conversation.

COLMES: Oh?

MORGAN: You know exactly what he meant. Everybody knows what he meant.

COLMES: I really don't.

MORGAN: And what he meant was accurate. There is an effort by the left in this country to denigrate conservatives who, as your narrative described.

UNKNOWN MALE: Melanie, it's more than that

(CROSSTALK)

MILLER: No, Melanie, I'm sorry, soldier is.

HANNITY: Melanie, it's more than that. What they're trying to do here is.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE[MILLER?]: Soldiers like 70 percent of the American people that are against the Iraq war. They're all "phony soldiers." Their views don't count.

HANNITY: Melanie, what they're trying to do here, they know this is a phony issue. They know the context in which Rush was talking about here. They know his history of supporting the military. But they're trying to distract from their positions on the war. And Harry Reid literally said on the Senate floor today, he called Rush unpatriotic. Does that mean we can call him unpatriotic for sending kids to war and telling them they lost? Or John Murtha who accused Marines of murder and now many of them have been vindicated and he hasn't apologized? Is he unpatriotic? Was Obama unpatriotic when he said our troops are air raiding when they don't do any such thing? Now they're going to open that door?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE[MORGAN?]: This is what Michelle Malkin has been writing about at her blog for a long time now. A number of soldiers who are fake or who are embellishers, or who are posers, who go out there, or soldiers like John (UNINTELLIGIBLE) of (UNINTELLIGIBLE).org who go out there and use their far-left, anti-American agenda and political agenda to undermine the real mission of our troops, our heroes who are out there, who are fighting in a hot war, who are fighting for our lives and for our security and our safety.

HANNITY: Stephanie, the bottom line is these same democrats that couldn't condemn the general "Betray Us" ad, these same guys that want to cut off funding bullets, armor, Humvees, and supplies, the same guys who accused them of murder and as John Kerry said, being terrorists, you know what? Why don't we have a resolution for each and every one of them and their statements? Would that be fair?

MILLER: I'm sorry, was that a question?

HANNITY: It was a question, yes.

MILLER: It seemed like run-on talking point.

HANNITY: Even a liberal can figure that out.

MILLER: Yes. You know, if the Senate is going to waste time condemning a moveone.org ad, they certainly should spend time condemning this. And I'll give you, Sean, it wasn't as bad your friend mocking Michel J. Fox's Parkinson's symptoms. This is pretty bad.

HANNITY: You don't think -- George (UNINTELLIGIBLE) the reason democrats couldn't condemn moveon.org is because they want (UNINTELLIGIBLE) money. Isn't that what it is. They care more about their power than the soldiers to call a four-star general hero, putting his life on the line, a betrayer of his country? You'd condemn that, Stephanie, wouldn't you?

MILLER: I've gone on record as saying that I though the Move On ad was a little over the top and it gave people like you.

HANNITY: A little over the top?

MILLER: . ammunition. But you know, we have a right to question General Patreaus.


Stephanie has kindly put up the video at her site and it's shareable and clears up some of the name confusion in the transcript:

FROM "PHONY" TO "SUICIDE BOMBER"

Folks, we may be witnessing a collapse that will rival the Mets, who recently blew a 7 game lead with 17 games left to play. Fats Limbaugh responded to an ad sponsored by VoteVets by claiming...well, it's hard to believe so here's how The Swamp covered it:

Radio’s Rush Limbaugh, at war with Democrats over his remark about “phony soldiers,’’ today offered a bold new description for the wounded Iraq veteran whom anti-war veterans have placed in cable TV and radio ads criticizing Limbaugh for his controversial commentary.
Suicide bomber.
“This is such a blatant use of a valiant combat veteran, lying to him about what I said and then strapping those lies to his belt, sending him out via the media and a TV ad to walk into as many people as he can walk into,’’ Limbaugh said today.

The "suicide bomber" soldier is a veteran and his name is Brian McGough. You can see the ad here. MediaMatters has the audio and REAL transcript of what Limbaugh said.

A NICE TIDBIT FROM STEPHANIE MILLER

Last week, maybe Friday, she played a clip of wacko Mike Weiner (Savage) denouncing Bill O'Reilly for his racist remarks. To be fair to Weiner, I have to mention that he did call Media Matters a "gay fascist" organization but the point is that if even Weiner gets it, there's really no defense for BOR.

CLEAR CHANNEL DEFENDS FATS

The Swamp has provided a copy of Clear Channel's reply to the Democratic Senators letter that criticizes Limbaugh. Thanks to a PDF-to-Word converter, I can provide some of the highlights here.

First, Mark Mays, the CEO of Clear Channel, is clearly dishonest with this claim:

...and I have carefully read the transcript from the episode in question. I hope you will appreciate that I cannot speak with authority as to whom exactly Mr. Limbaugh's comments were directed, or what was his intent.

Who the comment was directed to is VERY clear: any soldier who disagrees with Fats Limbaugh about Iraq. Mays continues:

However, if Mr. Limbaugh's intention was to classify any soldier opposed to the war in Iraq as a "phony soldier," which he denies, then I, along with most Americans, would be deeply offended by such a statement.

Mays should be offended because Limbaugh later went out of his way to attack Rep. John Murtha simply because Murtha opposes the Iraq War. Mays then goes on to LIE about the diversity at Clear Channel:

Each and every day, Clear Channel airs a broad diversity of viewpoints from Rush Limbaugh on the right to Air America on the left of the political spectrum.

And then tries to hide behind the 4th Amendment:

The First Amendment gives every American the right to voice his or her opinion, no matter how unpopular.

The 4th Amendment does not require Clear Channel to use the PUBLIC AIRWAYS to spread hatred and division and it does not prohibit Clear Channel from expressing its disapproval of Fats Limbaugh.

ODIE BALONEY ON IRAQ

Reuters gives us a report of a news conference with Gen. Odierno and for those of you who actually believed all the claims of progress ("more schoolz!!!"), he presented a sobering reality:

"We now need to start to improve the basic services. If we can do that, I think we will see a tipping point." Odierno told a news conference in Washington.

"We must bring the economic and political processes in now or we could squander this opportunity that we've developed," he said.

"Ultimately the government of Iraq must overcome the Sunni-Shia divide. Only the government of Iraq can truly reconcile."

Somebody should ask Ollie North about Odierno's remarks. Odierno also let us know that we're back to the old "as they stand up, we'll stand down" strategy:

Odierno said the drawdown would take place as Iraqi security forces became more capable. "It is imperative that we continue to transition security responsibilities to the Iraqis but it's equally important that we do so in a cautious and thoughtful manner," he said.

SEN. KYL (R - CNP & AZ) IS DELUSIONAL

This morning, rat bastard Kyl made an appearance on Slots Bennett's radio show and claimed that the American people KNOW that the GOP is better on national security than the Democrats. That was true at one time but hasn't been so for a while. The WaPo reports that

Democrats hold a big edge over Republicans on health-care issues. Overall, 56 percent said they trust Democrats to handle health care, and 26 percent side
with the GOP.
Democrats also have a greater share of the public trust on other key issues, including Iraq (a 15-point advantage), the economy (18 points) and handling the federal budget deficit (23 points). On the campaign against terrorism, 41 percent put more faith in Democrats, 40 percent in Republicans.

Kyl also came to the defense of Fats Limbaugh by falsely claiming Limbaugh's remarks were taken out of context.

NOTE: For those who don't know, Kyl was and may still be a member of the Council on National Policy, a rabid religious & wingnut group.

GEN. BATISTE RESPONDS TO LIMBAUGH

This is from the Friday, Sept. 28, 2007 edition of Countdown with Keith Olbermann. Gen. Batiste has spoken out on Iraq several times before (here, here and here) so he may fall under Fats Limbaugh's definition of "phony soldier."


GENERAL JOHN BATISTE, ADVISOR, VETVOTE.ORG & U.S. ARMY, RETIRED: Good evening.

OLBERMANN: How do you respond to the Limbaugh comment, and we‘re going with the original one from yesterday that service members who advocate are, quote, “phony soldiers”?

BATISTE: If a two-time combat veteran, first Gulf War, Operation Iraqi Freedom, one of the two U.S. brigade commanders in Bosnia, 12 months that began in December of 1995, 33-month commander of the 1st Infantry Division with duty in Kosovo, Turkey, and 13 months combat operations in Iraq, West Point graduate, son of a career infantry soldier and son-in-law of a career special forces soldier, if that‘s the definition of a phony, I don‘t get it.

You know, the fact is that more than 70 percent of this nation does not agree with the current strategy in Iraq and I‘m here to tell you that our Army and Marine Corps are a reflection of the society from which they came and the same percentages exist there.

OLBERMANN: General, if Mr. Limbaugh was trying to be genuine when he claimed he had been referring to the one actual phony soldier guy, pretending to be a soldier, did he not sort of dismiss any validity to the argument when he added more actual soldiers including Congressman Murtha, the decorated Vietnam vet, to his list?

BATISTE: Absolutely. That‘s exactly what he did and Congressman John Murtha joins a whole range of great elected officials like Senator Chuck Hagel from Nebraska. And Congressman Walter Jones from North Carolina who understand that this nation right now does not have a focused regional or global strategy to defeat worldwide Islamic extremism and they understand that this nation is not mobilized in any dimension to accomplish what we have to do.

A CONSERVATIVE ON PR PETRAEUS

(h/t to ThinkProgress, which also has the video of Olbermann interviewing Gen. Batiste)

Keith Olbermann pointed out on his Friday show (9/28/07) that a conservative magazine had published a scathing critique of Gen. PR Petraeus. Now, will the wingnuts also attack the magazine and the author?

Here are some excerpts:

Sycophant Savior
General Petraeus wins a battle in Washington—if not in Baghdad.
by Andrew J. Bacevich
October 8, 2007 Issue
Copyright © 2007
The American Conservative

...at the highest levels, successful command requires a sophisticated grasp of politics. ... George Washington, U.S. Grant, and Dwight D. Eisenhower were all “political generals” in the very best sense of the term.

David Petraeus is a political general. Yet in presenting his recent assessment of the Iraq War and in describing the “way forward,” Petraeus demonstrated that he is a political general of the worst kind—one who indulges in the politics of accommodation that is Washington’s bread and butter but has thereby deferred a far more urgent political imperative, namely, bringing our military policies into harmony with our political purposes.

Yet the essence of his message was this: after four years of futile blundering, the United States has identified the makings of a successful strategy in Iraq.

What then should he have recommended to the Congress and the president?

A single word suffices to answer that question: more. More time. More money. And above all, more troops.

It is one of the oldest principles of generalship: when you find an opportunity, exploit it. Where you gain success, reinforce it. When you have your opponent at a disadvantage, pile on.

Given the current situation as Petraeus describes it, an incremental reduction in U.S. troop strength makes sense only in one regard: it serves to placate each of the various Washington constituencies that Petraeus has a political interest in pleasing.

After the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, to sustained bipartisan applause, President Bush committed the United States to an open-ended global war on terror. ... The result, six years later, is a massive and growing gap between the resources required to sustain that global war, in Iraq and elsewhere, and the resources actually available to do so.

Petraeus has now given this charade a further lease on life.

This defines Petraeus’s failure. Instead of obliging the president and the Congress to confront this fundamental contradiction—are we or are we not at war?—he chose instead to let them off the hook.

Politically, it qualifies as a brilliant maneuver. The general’s relationships with official Washington remain intact. Yet he has broken faith with the soldiers he commands and the Army to which he has devoted his life. He has failed his country. History will not judge him kindly.

ANOTHER EDITION OF ....

REWARDING FAILURE

Blackwater has hurt our efforts in Iraq but what does the criminal Bush regime do? Why, increase the amount of work Blackwater does in Iraq.



From The Gavel:

A RETIRED WINGNUT PHRASE

I recalled that whenever a Democrat/liberal said or did something the wingnuts didn't like, they'd say you shouldn't do that in a "time of war." I haven't heard that phrase for a while so I thought I'd use Lexis and check to see when one of my favorite wingnuts used that expression. The Limbaugh quote was too good to ignore.


HANNITY: ... aid and comfort to the enemy in a time of war? Are you proud of that?
(H&C, 1/29/07)

[DAVID]LIMBAUGH: Well, the one thing. And this is part of the motivation for writing this book. I have to say, I resent what the Democrats, the Democratic leadership has done for the last five years, which is to call our commander in chief during a time of war a liar and announce to the world that he's a liar when he wasn't lying. Both as to WMD and as to the connection between al Qaeda and Saddam, not 9/11.
(H&C, 9/5/06)

HANNITY: Here's the point. They've undermined this war from the beginning. They stand by the most despicable statements that have been made about our president and our troops at a time of war. This is disgraceful, the way the American...
(H&C, 7/6/06)

ANOTHER INSTALLMENT OF "GOD, THESE PEOPLE ARE STUPID"

Sometimes I'm surprised folks like scotlaz can even use a keyboard.

#7 - 10/02/07 01:22 AM (Msg Id: 523441:4008191)
scotlaz
It takes a sick mind to come up with this , and media matters, a
CNN owned company is just the people to try.

A DISTURBING TOS CLAUSE

Ken Fisher at Ars Technica found this clause in AT&T's Terms of Service agreement for its braodband customers:

(c) tends to damage the name or reputation of AT&T, or its parents,affiliates and subsidiaries.

This is VERY broad and could include, let's say, a political post that the wingnuts are opposed to. After all, it's happened before.

WOW! FAUX NEWS TURNS ON FATS LIMBAUGH

I began reading FAUX's story about Fats and when I came to "or supposedly saying that troops who oppose the Iraq war are "phony soldiers." " I figured that FAUX was going into defense-mode for Fats and I thought this sealed the deal:

A literal reading of the Sept. 26 show transcript shows that the controversial host did not in fact say that soldiers opposing the war are "phony," but his remarks have left confusion as to whom he is referring when he used the phrase.

But I was wrong! FAUX correctly noted that Fats edited the transcript, just as Media Matters claimed:

On Thursday, he referenced the segment, but he edited out a portion of it,...

As an added bonus, FAUX reports what Republican Walter Jones had to say:

North Carolina Republican Rep. Walter Jones told FOX News late Monday that Limbaugh "went too far," and that he will sign on to Udall's resolution on Tuesday morning. Jones is one of two Republican House members who have consistently supported antiwar legislation.

"The men and women who have been to war in Iraq — those speaking out, they've been there, they should be respected and whether you agree or not with what they are saying, at least respect and not make such statements as (Limbaugh) had made," Jones said.

SHIELDS UP!

DEFLECT DEFLECT DEFLECT!!!!

In response to Sen. Harkin's great line, Internment defender Malkin decides to bring up the old story about Harkin making false claims about his service record. She got the story from Instapundit (Glenn Reynolds).

I SEE WHY ATRIOS CALLS IT "DRUDGICO"

The Politico really is just another part of the GOP Noise Machine. Here's the headline for their story about Sen. Reid calling on his colleagues to denounce Fats Limbaugh:

RUSH TO JUDGMENT

In comparison, The Hill correctly reports the issue:

Democrats on Monday called on the chief executive of Clear Channel communications to denounce remarks by radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh, whom they say made a “hateful” and “unpatriotic” attack on U.S. troops opposed to the war in Iraq.

At issue is a remark from Limbaugh that characterized such troops as “phony soldiers.”

GREAT LINE!

Amanda at ThinkProgress finds Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA) getting in a deserved smack at Fats Limbaugh:

Well, I don’t know. Maybe he was just high on his drugs again.

YUP, THEY ARE IGNORANT

One commenter at BlackFive is under the impresstion that Rep. Peter King (R-NY) is a Democrat:

What a complete waste of time. It is a waste of taxpayer resources when Democrats like Kingston resort to this type of pandering.
Posted by: R October 01, 2007 at 02:44 PM

Anybody want to try to convince him that we didn't find WMD in Iraq?

MORE ON THE MSM'S SHYNESS ABOUT "FILIBUSTER"

As others have noted, when the Senate Democrats threaten to filibuster, the MSM uses the word "filibuster" but when the Senate Republicans do the same, the word isn't used. Here's the latest example:

Senate Approves $150B in War Funding
Oct 1, 6:51 PM (ET)
By ANNE FLAHERTY

Similar attempts have been made but fell short of the 60 votes needed to overcome procedural hurdles in the Senate.

THE MIRACLE OF PRIVATIZATION

In Blackwater, we have another great example of the free market ideology failing miserably. The AP reports that the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee has released a report on Blackwater and provides some "highlights":

Blackwater Portrayed As Out of Control
Oct 1, 6:33 PM (ET)
By RICHARD LARDNER

WASHINGTON (AP) - Blackwater USA is an out-of-control outfit indifferent to Iraqi civilian casualties, according to a critical report released Monday by a key congressional committee.
Among the most serious charges against the prominent security firm is that Blackwater contractors sought to cover up a June 2005 shooting of an Iraqi man and the company paid, with State Department approval, the families of others inadvertently killed by its guards.

Blackwater has had to fire dozens of guards over the past three years for problems ranging from misuse of weapons, alcohol and drug violations, inappropriate conduct and violent behavior, ...

The 122 personnel terminated by Blackwater is roughly one-seventh of the work force that Blackwater has in Iraq, a ratio that raises questions about the quality of the people working for the company.

The only punishment for those dismissed was the termination of their contracts with Blackwater, says the report, which uses information from Blackwater's own files and State Department records.

On Dec. 24, 2006, a drunken Blackwater employee shot and killed a bodyguard for Iraq's Shiite vice president, Adel Abdul-Mahdi.

The AP previously reported the contractor had gotten lost on the way back to his barracks in Baghdad's Green Zone and fired at least seven times when he was confronted by 30-year-old Raheem Khalaf Saadoun.

The guard was terminated by Blackwater. Within 36 hours of the shooting, the department allowed the 26-year-old contractor to be transported out of Iraq, according to the staff report.

The negative fallout from the event affected the relationship between the U.S. military and Iraqis, many of whom see little distinction between the private guards and American troops, the report states. Initial news coverage by Middle Eastern media of the killing said a "U.S. soldier" was responsible.

And what does this cost the American tax payer? David Kurtz of Talking Points Memo found this in the committee's report:

A single Blackwater security contractor costs the government $1,222 every day to guard U.S. civilian personnel, or $445,000 per year. That's six times the cost of getting a U.S. Army soldier to perform the same function.

MORE ON FATS LIMBAUGH

(Via Amanda at ThinkProgress) I noted before (here & here) that Rush Limbaugh is a very important part of the conservative movement and here's some more evidence to back that up:

Rep. Jack Kingston (R-GA) — who voted to criticize MoveOn.org — has decided to commend Limbaugh. Today at 3:16 PM, Kingston introduced a resolution “[c]ommending Rush Hudson Limbaugh III for his ongoing public support of American troops serving both here and abroad.”

Amanda also notes that Sen. Reid has called for all Senators to sign a letter to the CEO of Clear Channel disapproving of Limbaugh's "phony soldiers" remark. So far, Rep. Mark Udall (D-CO) hasn't filed his resolution in the House condemning Limbaugh.

MORNING MUSIC TO MY EARS

The remarks from these extremists are like a Christmas present.

Christian right is split over GOP field
By Michael Finnegan, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
October 1, 2007

"It's low tide right now for our movement," said Tim Wildmon, president of the American Family Assn.

"There's just no enthusiasm for this crop of first-tier candidates," said Richard Viguerie, a veteran conservative activist and author. "Not one of them is a principled conservative, so why support them?"