Given the way NPR writes the story, you’d think the word of a Democratic Senator — who we’re told is a “meticulous note taker” — is dispositive. See? That settles that!
The question then becomes, just how much juice do the current Dems have, with respect to keeping the CIA in check? Note that Graham criticizes the Bush CIA, which — much like the Bush military tribunals — he paints as lawless, obsequious, and incompetent.
Slap a new Obama Hope and Change veneer on something and we’re to believe it a whole new entity, I guess — even when it remains fundamentally unchanged.
Will this give the CIA the requisite cover Graham hopes it will, preventing it from taking further steps to embarrass the Speaker? Or will the spooks (who evidently could not be reached for comment) pick up the gauntlet and slap back.
Clearly the Obamatrons, with some media help, believe they can “control” the CIA.
I see a pattern forming. You?
(h/t Slart)
Comment by The Talking Heads on 5/17 @ 11:48 am #
Same as it ever was.
Comment by Great Mencken's Ghost! on 5/17 @ 11:49 am #
When your government turns from making bigger pies to trying to cut bigger slices out of the pie you’ve already got, your country is over.
Comment by Two Dogs on 5/17 @ 11:50 am #
I think that we can all agree that the article is interesting until the very last paragraph. When someone says the words “Speak Truth to Power” they can legitimately be labeled as a MORON. What in the Hell does that even mean?
It also begs the question, “Are there any intelligent Democrats left?” The fact that they think the new president is SMART is kinda telling.
Comment by Merovign on 5/17 @ 11:51 am #
It’s NPR. Of course the coverage favors the left. And has no regard for fact, truth, reality, or history.
Comment by happyfeet on 5/17 @ 11:51 am #
lying CIA bastards
Comment by mongo78 on 5/17 @ 11:51 am #
Indeed. There is no quote, or even an acknowledgment, from the other side of the dispute. Nothing from the CIA saying this is true, or this is false, or this is technically true but misleading – not even a weaselly ‘no comment’. This is a straight-up propaganda piece representing a single point of view, and a highly biased one at that.
I should be used to this by now, but it’s still a little jarring to see it being done with so artlessly.
Comment by happyfeet on 5/17 @ 11:58 am #
The CIA lies and lies because they love to torture people is why. They are very very sick people.
Comment by happyfeet on 5/17 @ 12:06 pm #
Thank you Mrs. Pelosi and Mr. Graham for showing us the truth about the sick lying sadists at the CIA and all the torturings and also how they have shamed America with their lies and their torture. This sick institution should be dismantled and criminal charges should be brought against all of the ones that knew about the sick sick torture.
Comment by happyfeet on 5/17 @ 12:06 pm #
Except for Nancy.
Comment by McGehee on 5/17 @ 12:07 pm #
Maybe if Florida voters had actually failed to elect him he might have figured out he’s not as smart as he thinks he is. Then again, he was undoubtedly elected by the same Florida voters whose votes for Al Gore went to Pat Buchanan instead.
Comment by Chef Mojo on 5/17 @ 12:19 pm #
DCI Panetta is in quite a pickle. O! sent him there to tame the beast, and like other DCIs, he’s finding that the beast has a mind of its own.
CIA is the intelligence arm of the State. It’s job is to have the goods on people, which means dredging up anything bad about them to use as leverage. The State created CIA thinking that it would be subservient to the State, but bureaucracies take on a life of their own. Their primary objective becomes survival and justifying existence. Knowing where the bodies are buried sure helps in that regard.
CIA would have been perfectly happy to let bygones be bygones, but the fools just had to mess with them. Not good.
I think CIA is going to retract its claws slightly, now that it’s made its point. In return, Pelosi will be their bitch. Nice to have the speaker on their side. The White House will also take this as a valuable teaching moment. CIA will be kept at arms length and given its steady diet of above-board and black appropriations. That’s what you do with mean dogs, especially if shooting them is not an option.
Andrew Sullivan will continue to be heartbroken and gobsmacked.
Comment by Joe on 5/17 @ 12:32 pm #
Obama is trying to make Graham the next Huntsman?
Comment by Joe on 5/17 @ 12:34 pm #
My bad. I first assumed this was Lindsay Graham, not Bob. Thank heaven for little favors.
Comment by Joe on 5/17 @ 12:38 pm #
The problem with athiests…whining.
I really have no problem with athiests. I have a problem with whiners, regardless of their faith.
Comment by Joe on 5/17 @ 12:46 pm #
Rumsfeld
Allah H/T
I do not agree with the left, but Rumsfeld was a disaster. And I recognize the man’s accomplishments in trying to reform the DoD and in the early days of the Iraq war. But if anyone almost lost the Iraq occupation, it was Rummy. This author is not some net nutroot.
Comment by happyfeet on 5/17 @ 12:58 pm #
Rumsfeld is a good man and people are free what would not have been because of this man and if I saw him I would thank him. I can’t believe the unbelievable shit he took to do good things and if those faggot French faggots hadn’t talked Turkey into denying us a northern route into Iraq the whole story would have been a lot different. I wouldn’t tell Rumsfeld the faggot French faggots part cause he probably already knows.
Comment by ushie on 5/17 @ 1:00 pm #
So…this clod and Nancy are implying the CIA is run by the characters in EA Poe’s stories? Where’re the pit and the pendulum at Club Fed?
Comment by Slartibartfast on 5/17 @ 1:00 pm #
Interesting that he’s consulting his notes for whether a meeting was held, but is consulting his memory regarding whether or not waterboarding was discussed.
Of course, it could be the whole classification thing, and the prohibition on taking unclassified notes of any kind. I think it’s time the CIA started filming its briefings, so that it can show video evidence.
Graham does have a point about the WMD briefing, though. There were some serious errors in the intel. Something having to do with mobile bioweapons labs, IIRC.
Comment by Joe on 5/17 @ 1:05 pm #
The bible quote stuff is small potatoes and just basically Rummy acting like a brown nosing administration infighter he is. You can pretend Rummy did a good job during the occupation, but he almost lost the war. Bush’s biggest mistake was not replacing him sooner.
I do not consider Rummy a crusader or war criminal, just a man who screwed up in his last big assisgnment (mostly due to his own personality flaws).
It would have helped if Turkey gave us that northern access route, but that does not explain way the mishandling of the occupation.
Comment by happyfeet on 5/17 @ 1:10 pm #
Alls well that ends well I and who also almost lost the the war was our piece of shit president, Barack Obama, and also his skeezey woman and Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid and our faggy CIA buddies as well as the aforementioned French and also the United Nations and our dirty socialist media, particularly the skanks at NPR, and they all tried way more harder to lose and on purpose too and in context Mr. Rumsfeld is a lot Churchillian I think.
Comment by Jeff G. on 5/17 @ 1:40 pm #
Me too. It’s de rigeur to pretend we are all disappointed with Rummy’s work. But the truth is, he took one for the team.
And he’s big enough to do it.
Comment by pdbuttons on 5/17 @ 1:49 pm #
why’d rummy cross the road?
a-he didn’t/ the road crossed him..or
b-to kick ur ass
Comment by eaglewingz08 on 5/17 @ 2:08 pm #
Well if he’s a meticulous note taker where are those notes from 2002 and 2003, I’m sure the public has a right to know what he put down on paper then concerning these briefings. Especially when Porter Goss has contradicted him and Peelousy on the details.
Comment by happyfeet on 5/17 @ 2:09 pm #
oh. I think I was going for Alls well that ends well I *think* or maybe I had gone there and backtracked. I can’t remember. This was easier before the quitting smoking.
Comment by mojo on 5/17 @ 2:16 pm #
I see a pattern forming. You?
Delusional psychosis, leading into paranoid schizophrenia?
If he starts rolling ball-bearings in his hand, look out.
Comment by Pablo on 5/17 @ 2:18 pm #
The war in Iraq was not going to turn around until the Iraqis figured out which side their bread was buttered on and that it wasn’t the al-Qaeda side. Iraq almost lost the war and then they wised up.
Comment by Joe on 5/17 @ 2:23 pm #
Take one for the team? Churchilian? If you consider the Iraq occupation like Galipolli perhaps. Does anyone think the occupation could have gone far better from the start? Seriously there was no other way but to slog through the way we did for three years?
I am not backing the Powell doctrine, but we needed more troops for the initial occupation. Going light meant liberating an area, leaving and allowing al Qaeda to come in and kill anyone who collaberated. For a couple of years, it was not worth working with the Americans. It was only when al Qaeda in Mesopotamia became unbearable and the Americans changed strategy in supporting and dealing local tribes against al Qaeda that things changed. That and Petraeus’s surge strategy for dealing with Baghdad. What was a quagmire was turned around in about a year. Truth is Rumsfeld was a obstacle to that change.
Now I understand mistakes happen. But it took an aweful long time for Bush to change course from the Cheney-Rummy occuapation plan and when Bush did so things improved immediately. Was that just coincidence?
What matters in the end is success and Rumsfeld was a highly qualified person who did a lot of good in other areas before this, but it sucks to go out poorly and unfortunately for Rumsfeld that is exactly what happened.
Comment by Joe on 5/17 @ 2:30 pm #
Meanwhile, Greenwald laments Obama going wobbly.
Comment by guinsPen on 5/17 @ 2:43 pm #
Fuck you, Joe.
Comment by guinsPen on 5/17 @ 2:44 pm #
Let me repeat that.
Fuck you, Joe.
Comment by guinsPen on 5/17 @ 2:45 pm #
For fifteen, Joe.
Comment by pdbuttons on 5/17 @ 2:47 pm #
#4
Comment by guinsPen on 5/17 @ 2:47 pm #
You too.
Comment by The Truth on 5/17 @ 2:54 pm #
The saddest thing about the war in Iraq? Political posturing was more important than victory, and every single mistake was overblown in an attempt to create political advantage for the commenter. From the left that was expected. From the right it was tragic. I voted for McCain. I didn’t appreciate him. I’m not going to pretend he did his country any favors on this issue now that we can look back. He didn’t. Most of the Republican party didn’t. When they should have been defending a policy that was vital to the success of the west and America they wilted and allowed Iran to gather much more strength than it should have. What Israel has to do next can, in some part, be blamed on them…and will be in the long run, I think.
Comment by BumperStickerist on 5/17 @ 3:15 pm #
My recollection of Bush’s War is that Bush did every.damn.thing. he said he was going to do. Which caused no end of Befuddlement {capitalization intended} by the lefties who were accustomed to Clinton’s shade-and-nuance approach to politics.
It sort-of reminds me of something posted on Ace’s site a while back, and a theme that echoes Jeff’s intentionalism-ism – what if men edited women’s magazines – my favorite was this: “The Words That Come Out Of His Mouth: The Secret Source Of What A Man Is Really Trying To Tell You!”
full thread: http://minx.cc/?post=213808
-
But, seriously, should you go back and read Bush’s speeches, there’s not a goddamn bit of mystery as to how things unfolded in Iraq during his “regime”.
.
Comment by BumperStickerist on 5/17 @ 3:21 pm #
Also, keep in mind this – it’s probable that the CIA types involved in these briefings were hired in during the Clinton years, not the evil Booooosh years.
You don’t take new hires and put them in Congressional Briefings. At a minimum, the guys who spent 8+ years in the CIA, who joined when former CIA Director George H.W. Bush was president or during the Reagan presidency, were part of the full CIA during the full eight years of Clinton’s presidency.
.
Comment by RC on 5/17 @ 3:42 pm #
More troops in Iraq would have been a serious mistake at first. Much of how the bad guys were able to get and keep support of the masses was by portraying it all as an occupation. Going in and “locking down” the country with a platoon on every corner would have proven the bad guys correct about it being an occupation and yielded more support for the bad guys.
The tide did not and could not turn until the bad guys showed their true sadistic stripe and demonstrated that they were nobodies friend. Then it started to be clear that we and the new Iraqi government were doing good things and al-q were the enemy of all. All of this required lots of time and Rummy did not do one thing that would have slowed this process down. He took one for the team because there was no way Iraqi attitudes were going to change in the time frame the idiots in our country were allowing to give the process. Petraeus was not only the right guy with the right plan, but just as importantly at the right time. Gates is a good DOD in that he’s staying the he’ll out of the way. There is not one shred of evidence it would have gone one iota different under Rummy. In fact it was some of the institutional attitude change that Rummy was forcing down the DOD throughts that enabled a Petrarous to get exposure and his ideas to come out. The old cold warriors were blockages that Rummy removed.
Comment by Joe on 5/17 @ 4:00 pm #
guinsPen why are you so…so like those fuckers on the left. You are like a Kos Diarist. Anyone disagrees with you and it is fuck you.
I think Rumsfeld fucked up the occupation. You are free to disagree and have a rational conversation. But don’t mendacious douchebag about it.
Comment by Joe on 5/17 @ 4:06 pm #
RC, I am not talking about locking down Iraq. That would have taken much more than 400,000 troops and I agree would have been counter productive. But going in heavier in the beginning would have probably been better. Having sufficient forces to support towns in say…Anbar and preventing al Qaeda in Mesopotamia from moving in and killing collaberators in the night would have helped. So those who initially cooperatived with Americans were targeted first for execution by al Qaeda.
What I disagree with is we had to go through exactly what we went through to get to this spot. I understand there is a learning curve, but I think it could have been done better. And I suspect had we had a Petraeus in charge of the occupation from the start it would have been done and gone a lot better.
Comment by geoffb on 5/17 @ 4:07 pm #
RC,
Right on!
Comment by geoffb on 5/17 @ 4:17 pm #
Isn’t Graham the one who has a daily personal diary and has kept it since, well forever? Maybe that’s his notes.
Comment by Pablo on 5/17 @ 4:27 pm #
Except that instead of looking to us for support, they were shooting at us along with al-Qaeda. Does Fallujah ring a bell?
Comment by Rick Ballard on 5/17 @ 4:28 pm #
“but I think it could have been done better.”
No kidding. You mean that your experience in planning and executing invasions and occupations leads you to believe that there were areas which could have been improved had you been given the opportunity to provide knowledgeable input? You should have volunteered in about 1982 so that you would have risen to a position where your opinion would have carried some weight.
Identifying and training trustworthy leadership cadre has not, to my knowledge, ever been accomplished among the headchoppers prior to our doing so in Iraq. The fatalism inherent within the followers of the ME death/slavery cult has always militated against the development of particularly capable military leadership. It remains to be seen whether the Petraeus lease a sheik program will actually hold up over time but there is no way that it could possibly work with the Sunni dominated command structure extant at the time of our invasion.
Comment by Sdferr on 5/17 @ 4:28 pm #
You know what’s better than a Monday morning general, Joe?
Listening to a good performance of Brahm’s String Sextet no. 2 in G major. And better than that?
Being in the room as it is performed.
Comment by Pablo on 5/17 @ 4:28 pm #
More troops would have meant more American casualties. Grim milestones, y’all.
Comment by router on 5/17 @ 4:42 pm #
yes there was no other way. just like there was no other way for D-day where we lost more troops in a single day then in 3 years in iraq.
Comment by Joe on 5/17 @ 4:44 pm #
You all really love Rummy.
Of course we had problems early on in Faljuah. We also had Iraqi towns that we would visit, leave and anyone who cooperatived with us were killed.
More troops = more casualties? I heard Andrew Sullivan and others argue that in connection with the Surge. Rumsfeld was against the Surge too.
Comment by Sdferr on 5/17 @ 4:45 pm #
Brahms Joe, really.
Comment by Pablo on 5/17 @ 4:48 pm #
Read.
There’s a bug difference between adding troops to places that want them to be there and adding them to places where they want to kill them. And I’m talking about the same places. Time and experience changed them from one to the other.
Comment by Joe on 5/17 @ 4:49 pm #
router-I do not accept the occupation had to go exactly as it did.
And if that was the case, Bush and Cheney completely fucked up politically by not warning the American public that was going to be the case before getting into the war. I do not buy it, so the Surge and the change to a counterinsurgency mode under Petraeus was merely coincidence?
That is delusional left thought, like saying Bush spending destroyed the economy so the only cure is 10x more spending under Obama.
The early years of the occpation were poorly handled. That is the objective reality. Fortunately we changed course in time before we lost Iraq completely. Rumsfeld is a complex guy, who did some good things, but to pretend that his stewardship of the Iraq occupation was a success is just nuts.
Comment by Pablo on 5/17 @ 4:49 pm #
That is a huge part of how places that were of one mind came to be of the other. Experience is a fabulous teacher.
Comment by Pablo on 5/17 @ 4:51 pm #
Joe, you sound as if there were some blueprint for all of this that was somehow concealed, or that there was a failure to follow it. Nothing like Iraq has ever been done before, by anyone. No, it wasn’t perfect, but war never is. You learn as you go, and nobody had a perfect plan, just as no one has one now.
Comment by Joe on 5/17 @ 4:54 pm #
Pablo, I remember reading that op-ed when he made it. And I do not disagree with the basical theme that a “surge” for Iraq is not necessarily what is needed for Afghanistan.
Actually Rumsfeld was correct on Afghanistan and tried to do the same thing in Iraq and that is what got him into trouble on the later occupation. The reason Afghanistan is going south (and mostly in the Pashtun south) now is because of the safe havens al Qaeda and the Taliban have in Pakistan and can constantly infiltrate back and forth causing mayhem.
Comment by Joe on 5/17 @ 4:56 pm #
Pablo, I absolutely agree there is no perfect plan, but I would have expected a fundamental change in how the Iraq occupation was being run sooner than what took place. And that blame is not on Rumsfeld, but on George Bush.
Comment by Joe on 5/17 @ 5:00 pm #
Oh and on that Rumsfeld op-ed, read.
Comment by router on 5/17 @ 5:01 pm #
the earlier years of ww ii were also poorly handled. what’s your point other than being an arm chair general.
Comment by dicentra on 5/17 @ 5:03 pm #
And if that was the case, Bush and Cheney completely fucked up politically by not warning the American public that was going to be the case before getting into the war.
George Bush was clairvoyant and he held back?
IIRC, in all his speeches, he droned on about how this was going to be a long, tedious war. Long and tedious. Tedious and long. And tedious. But the MSM latched onto the “slam-dunk” thing and beat it to death. They wanted another Gulf War with the video-game graphics and quick end.
Nothing about how the war proceeded surprised me, not because I’m some kinda war specialist (I totally am not) but because I understand that the enemy has a vote in how a war goes and that it would be messy more than it wasn’t.
Comment by router on 5/17 @ 5:05 pm #
all i said is experience is a good teacher if you want to learn.
Comment by Joe on 5/17 @ 5:05 pm #
Peter Wehner
Comment by Joe on 5/17 @ 5:06 pm #
router–you are right about WWII. And they fired those generals and replaced them with competent men.
Comment by router on 5/17 @ 5:07 pm #
quote by g. tenant bill clinton’s cia director to g. bush imagine that?
Comment by dicentra on 5/17 @ 5:07 pm #
Joe, you also have to take into account that there were factions inside State who had every intention of mucking up the war to embarrass Bush. Which they did, especially in the early stages.
I read only the first part of this book, but it was enough show how feckless these life-time bureaucrats are, and how they will very cavalierly play fast and loose with soldiers’ lives to win points against their political enemies.
All of that has to go into your calculus. All of it.
Comment by dicentra on 5/17 @ 5:08 pm #
And the Union nearly lost until Lincoln changed generals.
Seems to be a trend emerging, huh?
Comment by RC on 5/17 @ 5:28 pm #
Joe,
Fundamentally we disagree on the entire strategy and tactical doctrine that was used in Iraq. Fact is there is no way to tell what was right and what was wrong and when. I sense you think that change was necessary was obvious for a long time and Bush and Rumsfeld were too stubborn to make changes. I suspect the reality is in war as with many things perserverance is rewarded. In WWII the Germans were willing to spend their nations life blood even down to their second youngest generation to keep from losing. Resistance was substantial and stiff for the entire duration of the war until at the very end it totally collapsed. If the generals of that time had listened to the people advising that; “Gee they’re really not folding up as quickly as we thought they should so lets try something really new”, we’d have just prolonged the war because we were not willing to persevere. As someone above mentioned, the enemy gets a vote too.
Ultimately you and I disagree and since there is no way to go back and study what would have happened under different tactics or strategy (at least no honest and accurate way, Monday morning quarterbacking has no relation to scientific analysis) we’ll just have to agree to disagree. Nothing in any of my study of military history, NCO training, officer training, staff training or military experience indicated or indicates that Bush or Rumsfeld were wrong. You really don’t have the option of knowing everything in war or combat so you go with the best you know at the time you have to make a decision, and live with the results. That’s what it is to be a military leader and that’s why there are a lot of people not suited to it.
Comment by Joe on 5/17 @ 5:44 pm #
dicentra–absolutely right. There were factions, especially in the State Department who were not on board with victory.
RC–fair enough. I do not disagree about Germany (and you could make the same argument about Japan) but Iraq was a different beast. We completely routed Saddam’s army in a matter of weeks. I am not so naive to think the occupation was ever going to be easy, but you are correct in assessing my belief to Rumsfeld refused to change tack soon eough.
Comment by RC on 5/17 @ 5:56 pm #
Geez, I’m not used to dialoging with a non-moonbat non-progressive type. I’d almost forgotten that people with good faith opinions really can discuss them and civilly disagree, freaky. :)
Comment by Grammatiknazi on 5/17 @ 6:01 pm #
“It also begs the question….”
No, it raises the question. The phrase “begs the question” has a specific meaning: something “begs the question” when it assumes the answer to that question. For example, when someone condemns “waterboarding and other forms of torture”, they are begging the question of whether waterboarding is in fact torture.
Comment by router on 5/17 @ 6:10 pm #
yes after getting rummy’s scalp the witch hunt organizers @ moveon.org moved on to gwb. and now sanfrannan. and teleprompter jesus. cannibalism is good in the late oughts.
Comment by Joe on 5/17 @ 6:19 pm #
I think you will like this article router. While I am a bit more critical than you about Rumsfeld, I do disagree with it.
Comment by Joe on 5/17 @ 6:24 pm #
In defense of Dick Cheney,
Comment by geoffb on 5/17 @ 6:25 pm #
Great thread re-fighting the early Iraq war and the Rumsfeld Sec. Def. period. History is so interesting. Wargaming out the old battles. Sigh.
It would be nice to discuss current events sometime too. Maybe those CIA briefings and did Pelosi or the CIA lie. Or maybe not. I’m sure it will come up sometime in 2015 or so.
Comment by RTO Trainer on 5/17 @ 6:30 pm #
They could have fired Teddy Roosevelt, Jr and Patton for neglect of duty in North Africa; might have done Patton good–he never did learn that lesson. They could have fired Mark Clark for a number of actions not least of which was the near total destruction of the 36th Division at the Rapido River. There’s a lot more that goes into these decisions then any one person’s idea of what constitutes incompetence.
Not soon enough? There was absolutely never any moment in time when any change in strategy could have taken place except when it did. The “surge” could not have happened before it did. Rumsfeld was a political sacrifice that appeased the opposite camp enough to allow the strategy change that could only have happened at that time. Up to that point, no one was prepared and, much more importantly, the Iraqis were not on board, and positively never would have been had it been sprung on them. Every discussion of this subject completely neglects the fact that Iraq had had it’s sovereignty restored in 2004 and was a participant in all decisions after that time.
And as for the constant “needed more troops” drumbeat, at the height of the surge there were still fewer US troops in Iraq than during the 2003 invasion and immediate aftermath. And, by the way, all discussions of that subject turn entirely on US troop numbers which is a gross disservice to our allies.
Comment by RTO Trainer on 5/17 @ 6:37 pm #
Comment by guinsPen on 5/17 @ 6:38 pm #
Anyone disagrees with you…
No.
It’s a Body of Work thing, Joe.
Comment by guinsPen on 5/17 @ 6:47 pm #
I just got to #19.
brb…
Comment by router on 5/17 @ 7:14 pm #
pelosi lied people died.
Comment by Jeff G. on 5/17 @ 7:16 pm #
Like I said, took one for the team.
And big enough to do it.
Comment by The Sanity Inspector on 5/17 @ 7:21 pm #
I just finished Thomas Ricks’ The Gamble, and recommend it, allowing for the fact that the author thinks the war was blunder from the get-go. The book is a good, insightful sheaf of reportage on how Generals Petraeus and Odierno & co managed to wrest the strategic direction of the war away from the Pentagon and buy breathing space with the surge.
Comment by cynn on 5/17 @ 7:26 pm #
Donald Rumsfeld was a sneering asshole who didn’t give a shit about this country. Nancy Pelosi is a human pekinese who is irrelevant and yappy stupid. Harry Reid looks like Ichabod Crane.
Comment by Flan on 5/17 @ 7:26 pm #
Wars end when one side gets tired of fighting. One of the unintended consequences of the relatively easy military victory is that the Iraqis were not tired of fighting. With regard to Rumsfeld (and Bremer), most criticism of their records comes from a hostile media working to undermine the Bush administration.
Comment by router on 5/17 @ 7:28 pm #
O! my. let’s kill a baby.
Comment by SBP on 5/17 @ 7:33 pm #
Nancy Pelosi is a human pekinese who is irrelevant and yappy stupid.
Ah, yes. You can always count on cynn to regurgitate the latest idiotic leftoid talking point, no matter how ridiculous it may be on its face.
Tell us, cynn, why is the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the person who is third in line for the Presidency, “irrelevant”?
Take your time.
Comment by Swen Swenson on 5/17 @ 7:33 pm #
With perfect 20/20 hindsight it’s easy to criticize Rumsfeld. More troops — “getting there firstest with the mostest” as Nathan Bedford Forrest recommended — is always dandy. However, striking a balance between the competing principles of “mass” (the mostest) and “economy of force” (the smallest force capable of doing the job) is always difficult. Considering that we’ve now got troops on their third and fourth rotations into Iraq/Afghanistan, one wonders where all those extra troops would have come from. Bush warned early on — undoubtedly with the council of his generals — that this would be a long, hard conflict. Accepting that admonition — which has certainly proven true — I think I would have leaned toward economy of force as Rumsfeld did and I still believe he was right.
Perhaps there’s something to be learned here: As Rumsfeld also observed, you go to war with the army you’ve got, not the army you wished you had. Never again should we allow our military to be pared back as it was in the ’90s.
Comment by Joe on 5/17 @ 7:38 pm #
Actually the comment was not so out of line with the RS McCain piece, since it was Wonkette freaking out how Redstate could question Palin’s almost son-in-law (given how Wonkette and Wonkettish Andrew Sullivan bashed Palin for months, who are they to talk). Didn’t McCain raise the issue of Palin in his post?
But addressing Jeff’s point, do I think Rumsfeld is a stand up guy–yeah, for the most part (although he is a legendary infighter). The man is a patriot for sure. Stuborness is a good quality sometimes and a weakness at other times. Bush would have been better off getting rid of Rumsfeld a year earlier.
I agree with the Wehner article that Rumsfeld followed a strategy that was not working. I agree that the Iraqis were a fundamental part of policy making early on. And I agree the surge would not have been the surge if done earlier (it would have been something else).
I disagree that we would have had to do the occupation the way we did it regardless. An emphasis on counter insurgency from the start would have likely resulted in a better outcome.
Comment by cynn on 5/17 @ 7:38 pm #
What is your point, SBP? I have never cared for Pelosi; forgive me for not forwarding my comprehensive dossier to you, O standard bearer. Pelosi has always been a grating, zombified goof to me and many.
Comment by router on 5/17 @ 7:41 pm #
yes the army you got: reid, pelosi, obama. onward to Armageddon
Comment by SDN on 5/17 @ 7:43 pm #
#80, thank you. My take from the beginning is that the difference between what happened in both the WWII occupations and what happened in Iraq can be easily explained by the fact that the “dead-enders” in Germany and Japan had to walk through their burned-out cities to collect whatever bread and water rations their conquerors deigned to give them. And so did anyone in the populace who thought about helping them. And both of those groups had to deal with the idea that no one would give a fuck if they got body parts removed when they pulled shit. As opposed to giving up on dreams of conquest and working at putting their country back together. Concentrates the mind wonderfully on the question of whether or not continuing the struggle is a good idea.
Comment by router on 5/17 @ 7:44 pm #
shooting leftsts?
Comment by cynn on 5/17 @ 7:48 pm #
Who’da thought the Iraqis would keep fighting and not dance happy barefoot amongst the fig trees? Bremer and Rumsfeld were blindsided by history, not their own idiocy.
Comment by Swen Swenson on 5/17 @ 7:55 pm #
My, aren’t you just a little ray of sunshine! Unfortunately, you may also be right..
Comment by SBP on 5/17 @ 7:56 pm #
What is your point, SBP? I have never cared for Pelosi
Let me repeat myself. Try reading it slowly this time.
You claimed that Pelosi was “irrelevant”.
She’s the Speaker of the House, which means that she’s far from “irrelevant”, whether you “care for her” or not.
What leftoid blog did you get that from, cynn? Not even you are stupid enough to come up with that on your own.
Comment by SBP on 5/17 @ 7:59 pm #
By the way, cynn, how are your smokes tasting? Still like Barky’s ass?
Do you drink soda by any chance? That’s up for a tax increase next, in case you hadn’t heard.
Comment by cynn on 5/17 @ 8:03 pm #
Great way to change the subject, SPB. Pelosi has always been irrelevant, Speaker notwithstanding. Smokes are fine, but more expensive. So I cut out my ProWiz contribution.
Comment by SBP on 5/17 @ 8:06 pm #
Great way to change the subject, SPB.
The subject of this thread is Nancy Pelosi, idiot.
Pelosi has always been irrelevant, Speaker notwithstanding.
You are an idiot.
Comment by cynn on 5/17 @ 8:09 pm #
You sound like the idiot; unless there’s some secret code I don’t know about. In that case, pound smooth Iraqi sand.
Comment by SBP on 5/17 @ 8:10 pm #
You sound like the idiot
I’m not the one who’s claiming that the Speaker of the House is “irrelevant”, idiot.
unless there’s some secret code I don’t know about
Yeah, it’s called “rational thought”.
Comment by guinsPen on 5/17 @ 8:15 pm #
Graham, Pelosi, Democrat Party, CIA, Bush, Obama.
You do the math.
Comment by cynn on 5/17 @ 8:16 pm #
What the fuck is wrong with you? Why does Speaker of the fucking House of fucking Representatives mean some grand diktat that I have to blindly adhere to? Sorry, I’m not a bot like you; I tend to think and act for myself.
Comment by Abe Froman on 5/17 @ 8:17 pm #
You suppose Cynn dislikes Pelosi on account of how much alike they are? That is, besides one being Speaker of the House and the other being a frequently drunk interweb troll.
Comment by cynn on 5/17 @ 8:21 pm #
Excellent argument.
Comment by SBP on 5/17 @ 8:26 pm #
some grand diktat that I have to blindly adhere to
Everything isn’t about you, idiot.
Sorry.
Comment by cynn on 5/17 @ 8:28 pm #
Back atcha.
Comment by SBP on 5/17 @ 8:29 pm #
What are you babbling about now, cynn?
How many boxes of Ernest and Julio’s finest have you gotten through this weekend, anyway?
Comment by cynn on 5/17 @ 8:30 pm #
Well, it’s technically not the weekend anymore. Set your alarm, if you have a job.
Comment by SBP on 5/17 @ 8:31 pm #
Well, it’s technically not the weekend anymore.
That’s not what I asked, idiot.
Comment by SBP on 5/17 @ 8:32 pm #
Oh, and it’s still the weekend for several more hours, anyway.
Too drunk to remember what time zone or even hemisphere you’re in, idiot?
Comment by cynn on 5/17 @ 8:36 pm #
You are truly a caricature.
Comment by SBP on 5/17 @ 8:37 pm #
You are truly a drunken idiot.
Comment by router on 5/17 @ 8:39 pm #
you like demorats?
Comment by cynn on 5/17 @ 8:39 pm #
Whatever. You win; pick up your prize in the nearest dumpster.
Comment by ThomasD on 5/17 @ 8:40 pm #
Hey Joe,
Has anyone ever explained to you that that guy playing ‘devil’s advocate’ really does believe the shit he’s spewing?
It really is that obvious.
Comment by geoffb on 5/17 @ 8:41 pm #
Cynn and Joe, tag team event.
What round is this? Seems like infinity.
Comment by ginwa on 5/17 @ 8:41 pm #
What I see, is a shitstorm of epic proportions in the very near future.
Comment by cynn on 5/17 @ 8:44 pm #
I just wanna know where Joe’s goin’ with that gun in his hand.
Comment by easyliving1 on 5/17 @ 8:47 pm #
Cynn could have had an arguement that Pelosi is irrelevant now because of her loss of political capitol after last week.
Comment by cynn on 5/17 @ 8:50 pm #
No, Pelosi has always been a botoxed beanbag as far as I’m concerned. Doesn’t diminish my party support.
Comment by guinsPen on 5/17 @ 8:52 pm #
Pelosi has always been a grating, zombified goof to me and many.
Do you see her as a slow or fast one, cynn?
Comment by guinsPen on 5/17 @ 8:53 pm #
I say slow.
Comment by router on 5/17 @ 8:54 pm #
O!bamaNATION
Comment by SBP on 5/17 @ 8:54 pm #
Doesn’t diminish my
partycult support.Fixed that for ya.
Comment by ginwa on 5/17 @ 8:56 pm #
Well, of COURSE, cynn! After all, your “party” is known for it’s scrupulous adherence to the rule of law, impeccable ethics, and an unquestioned sense of fair play. Who wouldn’t support a party like that?
Comment by RTO Trainer on 5/17 @ 8:56 pm #
A what?
What do you think we were doing?
Comment by cynn on 5/17 @ 8:59 pm #
RTO, they were referring to granite counter tops. Hence the counter-insurgency.
Comment by pdbuttons on 5/17 @ 9:11 pm #
i’m a democrat and i’m okay
i sleep all night and i sleep all day
call u a rascist if u get in my way
i hug trees
cap ya at the knees…
and trade your future as i please
and i wear womans bras and panties
Comment by Dash Rendar on 5/17 @ 9:17 pm #
Mr(s) Buttons is onto something here I think.
Comment by router on 5/17 @ 9:21 pm #
i’m a demorat that’s ok wear high heels sleep all day
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5zey8567bcg
Comment by guinsPen on 5/17 @ 9:23 pm #
Foggy Bottom Breakdown
Comment by Pablo on 5/17 @ 9:35 pm #
If only we’d listened to our new Presentdent, and abandoned them altogether.
Comment by pdbuttons on 5/17 @ 9:40 pm #
up on cripple creek
democrats do punish weak
by their lies so sleek
spam spam spam ukelele spam
spam tiny don ho bubbles spam
spam spam viking spam
guinsPen spam/
thanks
was spameliscious!
Comment by router on 5/17 @ 9:45 pm #
some of them iraqis wanted to lead back to the 7th century after Christ. yo mo go
Comment by Joe on 5/17 @ 9:55 pm #
What’s obvious Thomas?
Your love of cock?
Comment by pdbuttons on 5/17 @ 10:02 pm #
cockney accent say
i’m going to mexico
to shoot my fishwife..
i’m on fire!
Comment by router on 5/17 @ 10:04 pm #
feel the O! love
Comment by guinsPen on 5/17 @ 10:07 pm #
12 + 13 + 14 + 15 = 54
40 or fight.
Comment by happyfeet on 5/17 @ 10:14 pm #
I got sunburned today. Stupid sun. My fault for going outside. We just earthquaked too. I wonder if the Powerade I threw in the freezer is cold yet. Powerade cause I never buy stupid gay dirty socialist Pepsi products. That was rude what you said to ThomasD, who is a nice person. Something was weird with youtube earlier but it’s all fixed now. Maureen Dowd is a dirty socialist plagiarist spinster.
Comment by pdbuttons on 5/17 @ 10:28 pm #
i would go outside….
but i live in a bubble…
i heart farrah….faux
Comment by geoffb on 5/17 @ 10:46 pm #
thor never left he just morphed to an alternate reality version.
Hijack!
Comment by pdbuttons on 5/17 @ 11:00 pm #
don’t the the british “tufff” guy vids
but/ and this is not…[)wot)
a critieeke
but do the have to..
A-run across the same bridge..
B- run down that wanker alley
C- look surprised?
my tooth apoli=geez- loise
4 the spell
Comment by geoffb on 5/18 @ 12:02 am #
No they don’t, but Doc Martins weren’t the point either.
Comment by pdbuttons on 5/18 @ 12:15 am #
any smart less drunk peeps
want to join me on
the website/ lefty/
ballon juice?
cuz i already threw it down/
i can freak my own
just be fun to have/ like
an amen….
my first post was how do i get my frigid bitch girlfriend
to pose for a sarah palin ice sculpture?…
oooh/ they be hate!
off i am…
at baloon juice….
whee!
Comment by geoffb on 5/18 @ 12:26 am #
Don’t get hurt runnin’ in those badlands. Copperheads and weasels abound.
Comment by ThomasD on 5/18 @ 12:32 am #
What’s obvious Thomas?
Your love of cock?
That’s the best you got?
No feigned insouciance? No martyr complex?
And to resort to homophobia right from the word go, it’s just so moby.
But thanks for playing.
Comment by mossberg500 on 5/18 @ 4:18 am #
Someone must have convinced cynn that a lobotomy was cosmetic surgery.
Comment by Carin on 5/18 @ 5:07 am #
No, Pelosi has always been a botoxed beanbag as far as I’m concerned. Doesn’t diminish my party support.
And yet, she sets the agenda for the donks. Irrelevant? Apparently not to your party.
Comment by Carin on 5/18 @ 5:10 am #
I got sunburned today. Stupid sun. My fault for going outside.
I was outside yesterday too, except instead of a sunburn, I got something stuck in my thumb while gardening. Freakin still hurts. I can’t tell if there is something way deep, but now it’s all white and puss-y.
Luckily, my thumb is only needed for the space bar, and I kinda use the side, not the face. So, everything’s ok. For now.
Comment by Carin on 5/18 @ 5:27 am #
And, more totally OT comments, but it is 31 degrees right now.
31 degrees.
Comment by Joe on 5/18 @ 5:43 am #
And to resort to homophobia right from the word go, it’s just so moby.
That is an excellent line.
Comment by Joe on 5/18 @ 5:44 am #
Carin, I take it planting tomatoes right now is out of the question.
Comment by Joe on 5/18 @ 5:48 am #
Meanwhile, as Pelosi continues to draw attention, Obama just keeps doing what he is doing.
Comment by N. O'Brain on 5/18 @ 6:26 am #
“Comment by Sdferr on 5/17 @ 4:28 pm #
You know what’s better than a Monday morning general, Joe?”
Watching your daughter graduate with a BA from Penn State University on Saturday night.
Comment by Carin on 5/18 @ 6:28 am #
Hopefully this is the last of the cold nights. The raised beds are ALMOST ready.
Comment by alppuccino on 5/18 @ 6:31 am #
I can’t tell if there is something way deep, but now it’s all white and puss-y.
You must have seen the Republican strategist re-cross her legs on Fox News this morning. AY-OH!!
Comment by alppuccino on 5/18 @ 6:32 am #
I got nothin’
Obama is a good liar, Pelosi is a bad liar. Welcome to Democratic rule.
Comment by Slartibartfast on 5/18 @ 6:47 am #
Slightly OT, anyone here read Cobra II? I’ve only made it a couple of chapters in.
The authors make a pretty decent case for Rumsfeld deliberately ignoring folks whose opinions he didn’t like, as far as I can see. It’s hard to get through the bias, though. Their disdain is seething.
I’ve run into similar difficulties making it through Mao, but one of the authors is actually a reformed Maoist, and you know what they say about reformed addicts.
Comment by Matt on 5/18 @ 7:01 am #
According to moveon, pelosi actually means “honesty” in italian. Who knew ?
I actually really liked Rumsfeld- he had good ideas about modernizing them military, using technology instead of putting so many soldiers in harms way. Saying he hated America is ridiculous – however, he DID hate reporters, which while American, are not exactly representative of the vast majority of people in this country (unless you live in New York). In hindsight, I think he was the wrong SecDef for the job- just like Tom Hagen wasn’t a wartime consigliere, Rummy wasn’t a wartime SecDef- its hard to make sweeping changes to the military when a. you’re fighting a war and b. a large majority of generals can’t stand you.
Rumsfeld took the heat for Bush and stood aside when they needed him to- he’s a good man (though admittedly grumpy) who is a true patriot, no matter how he managed or failed to manage the war.
Comment by Carin on 5/18 @ 7:03 am #
Makejokes,alp,butIusemyrightthumbforthespacebarandit’sstartingtohurttoomuchtodo.I.could.use.periods.instead.
Comment by LTC John on 5/18 @ 7:06 am #
“Donald Rumsfeld was a sneering asshole who didn’t give a shit about this country.”
Really? If you really believe the two time Sec Def didn’t give a shit about this country, or me an mine while we were fighting – you need to stop drinking wood alcohol and go back to the Ernest and Julio.
Joe – If I ask politely, will you stop being the armchair field marshal and derailing threads every so often to flail at Sec Rumsfeld? You speak so surely of that which you did not work on or live through. Try to stick to the topic at hand – in this case, NPR, Pelosi and Graham.
Jeff, I vote for the “pretend it never happened” outcome. Too hard to reconcile.
Comment by Joe on 5/18 @ 7:19 am #
No doubt N O’Brain. Congratulations to you and your family.
Comment by Timstigator on 5/18 @ 7:20 am #
Thank God for pdbuttons. PW’s own poet laureate. Forever may pd reign.
Comment by SBP on 5/18 @ 7:21 am #
Congratulations, N. O’B.
Comment by alppuccino on 5/18 @ 7:25 am #
Sore thumbs are bad. I was insensitive.
I would, however, suggest puss-filled, oozy, gooey, or seeping as an alternative.
Have you tried Epsom salts?
Comment by Carin on 5/18 @ 7:30 am #
I think there must be something still stuck in my thumb. I tried to dig it out, but it’s too deep.
I will take your suggestions, though, under advisement. Puss-filled works. It’s neither oozy, gooey or seeping.
Yet.
Comment by Joe on 5/18 @ 7:30 am #
Webb breaks away on closing Gitmo. Expect more Dems to join him.
Before you know it Obama is going to be spinning like a figure skater.
Comment by serr8d on 5/18 @ 7:32 am #
What’s happened is one side’s ‘loyal opposition’ continued an orchestrated hating of the CinC, promoted (amplified by a friendly media, of course) public criticizing and protesting that quickly became (AFAIC) aiding and abetting of the enemy. Because the enemy had a ally, why should they tire?
Near-treasonous I call it.
Comment by serr8d on 5/18 @ 7:33 am #
a = an except for when ally = bedfellow
Comment by Joe on 5/18 @ 7:34 am #
LTC John: “Joe – If I ask politely, will you stop being the armchair field marshal and derailing threads every so often to flail at Sec Rumsfeld? You speak so surely of that which you did not work on or live through. Try to stick to the topic at hand – in this case, NPR, Pelosi and Graham.”
Sure LTC John. Just do not put me with those maligning Rumsfeld personally. I did not do that. I just disagreed with his handling of the Iraq occupation.
And thank you for your service.
Comment by Gulermo on 5/18 @ 7:38 am #
#162. Black salve will usually “pull” small objects from beneath the skin. You should be able to buy over the counter at any drugstore or pharmacy.
Comment by Sdferr on 5/18 @ 7:38 am #
N. O’Brain, a tilted coffeemug raised to your Nittany Lionette, Cheers!
Carin, have you got a field lens, anywhere from 10x to 15x magnification? If not, getcha one with which to peer in close at the offending sliver. A super sharp sewing machine needle might come in handy as a probe, or you can use a new exacto blade as a scalpel to dig around with. Find the bugger and get it out, off the nerve-end it’s pressing on and you should be good to go.
Comment by Sdferr on 5/18 @ 7:41 am #
Uh, Joe…….
Comment by Slartibartfast on 5/18 @ 7:42 am #
I have to say that I object to the notion that if one criticises the actions of another, that must mean one should be able to outperform. No. Lincoln, after all, relieved McClellan, and for good cause. I don’t know that I could out-SecDef Rumsfeld, but that doesn’t mean there’s nothing about him to critique.
Comment by alppuccino on 5/18 @ 7:43 am #
I think the thing that’s stuck in Carin’s thumb is an allegory for Nancy Pelosi. It’s in too deep to dig out, but it causes soreness and stinky oozy goo to collect around it and it needs to be popped and then it needs a black salve to eradicate it.
Creepy.
Comment by alppuccino on 5/18 @ 7:44 am #
Upon further reading, Sdferr’s suggestion is better than my “meat cleaver” strategy.
Comment by Carin on 5/18 @ 7:45 am #
Sdrerr, I don’t think the sliver is small (at all) I think it is deep. I poked around with a needle yesterday, and as far as I could dig, I couldn’t find anything.
But it hurts to much to just be a poke. Something’s in there. I’ll wait. to see if I’m wrong. Then I may have to go to my small local doc for him to numb it up and go looking. The PA should be able to handle it.
Comment by Carin on 5/18 @ 7:47 am #
Perhaps if I think of the sliver as Nancy Pelosi, I’ll be able to just dig the bitch out myself.
Mind over matter.
Comment by Sdferr on 5/18 @ 7:52 am #
Carin, something is no doubt in there, and given the usual thumb pad’s meatiness, it could be deep as you say. Poking without seeing though, in my experience (and as a lifelong carpenter and wookworker, I know from slivers) can be worse than not poking at all, as you can drive the offending particle further down on the nerve-end. It will, come out eventually on it’s own, helped by the surrounding infection and tissue death, of course, but I can’t recommend that course of action if you want relief. No. Get the thing out and your relief will come measure in minutes, rather than days.
Comment by Sdferr on 5/18 @ 7:52 am #
d
Comment by Sdferr on 5/18 @ 7:53 am #
twice
Comment by Joe on 5/18 @ 7:54 am #
Comment by Sdferr on 5/18 @ 7:41 am #
Uh, Joe…….
…..do not put me with those maligning Rumsfeld personally. I did not do that.
From your 2nd post on the subject
just a man who screwed up in his last big assignment (mostly due to his own personality flaws).
LTC John asked me to stop, so this is for Sdferr only.
Rumsfeld is legendary for being stubborn, for issuing “snowflakes” memos to his subbornates, for not being a team player, and for being prickly. And those traits, which can be positive attributes in some circumstances, acted as personality flaws (in my opinion) when it came to his handling of Iraq. I also said Rumsfeld was a patriot and is a stand up guy. I do not think Rumsfeld is a bad man, I think he was always trying to do what he thought was best. But Rumsfeld is a public figure and it is okay to critize his performance in government. Just like it is okay to do it to Obama, Pelosi, etc. And Rumsfeld is in my mind far more honorable than Obama and Pelosi.
Comment by takeshi kovacs on 5/18 @ 7:55 am #
Right, what’s the standard, the Brits lost 20,000 on the slong slow slog to Baghdad, during WW1, fighting a small German contingent with Mesopotamiab irregulars, they lost nearly as many in the 1920 insurgency, over almost as long a period of time. One of the authors of Cobra 2, wrote of a proposed invasion of Iraq, using only two divisions. In the end it didn’t several hundreds of thousands of troops, but a slightly larger contingent with a better counterinsurgency plan.
Comment by Sdferr on 5/18 @ 8:02 am #
Oh, you are quite free to criticize all you want Joe. I’m not inclined to listen too intently to your ramblings about Rumsfeld’s personal characteristics though, as I doubt you’ve ever met the man and have likely gathered near about everything you claim about him [snowflakes] from the press and whatever books you’ve read, which too, is fine for you, while I’m not buying what you’ve got to sell.
Still, in like manner with your claim to freedom to criticize Rumsfeld, I’ll now and then point out where you’re pissing down our leg and claiming it’s raining.
Comment by PR on 5/18 @ 8:04 am #
Dear CIA,
When briefing Democrats,
to help them remember,
give them hats.
Comment by Joe on 5/18 @ 8:08 am #
splinter removal
Comment by Joe on 5/18 @ 8:08 am #
more splinter removal
Comment by Rob Crawford on 5/18 @ 8:09 am #
Joe — regardless of the age the calendar assigns to him — is a child. Once you realize that, his “opinions” make sense.
Comment by steveaz on 5/18 @ 8:11 am #
Rummy is one of my heroes!
The thing the Democrats don’t like about Rummy is, he had a habit of getting his way in committee. Which means, his direct speaking style, his grasp of facts and his body language all conspire to convince voting majorities to vote his way when the chips are down.
So, if you are like one John Kerry/GE acolyte, and anti-Rumsfield military affairs ‘expert’, Thomas P. Barnett, who repeatedly loses important votes in key military restructuring committees, arms-procurement discussions or CIA/NSA interrogation deliberations (BTW: this describes the entire “anti-War” subsidiary of the Democrat’s global corporation), then guess what?
You didn’t “like” Rummy (as though “liking” the Sec of Def is a professional qualification) and you did your darn’dest every day to make sure everyone disliked him, too. All the cartoonish media caricatures of him spring from that fact.
It’s particularly interesting, too, to ponder the ways in which Nancy Pelosi’s bald-faced lying is serving to de-oderize Bush’s eight years, as well as his first cabinet. Like old spinsters trying on their mothers’ wedding gowns, the old, tired voices are recycling all the old
liescaricatures from the Bush years, only to find they don’t fit, and never did.Comment by Joe on 5/18 @ 8:20 am #
To you Rummyphiles–do not equate me with the lunatic left. My criticism of Rumsfeld is more aligned to this.
And Sdferr, I did not think it was raining, but you pissing on my leg.
Comment by Joe on 5/18 @ 8:23 am #
Rob-while the personal attack? Because you disagree with me? Perhaps you should go back to fighting orcs on your computer.
Comment by Joe on 5/18 @ 8:29 am #
Rob-excuse me, why the personal attack. Here is some childish reading for you.
And I also recognize the dilema. How do you deal with de Bathification (which is what the Shiites were demanding) and not alienate those former Saddam followers.
Comment by alppuccino on 5/18 @ 8:51 am #
“Don’t speak ill of your predecessors or successors. You didn’t walk in their shoes.”
–Donald Rumsfeld
Success is not only measured against failure, it is the product of failure. The “unknown unknowns” come to light and they are moved to a different category. And the man who was in charge while they were still unknowns is a failure.
Comment by slackjawedyokel on 5/18 @ 8:52 am #
PEDANTRY ALERT!!!!
“Pus” (as in (“laudable pus”)is spelled with one “S”. “Puss” is something altogether different…
You may now resume your discussion.
(Say what you will about Rumsfeld, he was outside the Pentagon on 9/11 helping with casualties and making sure the troops were OK. I liked the guy.)
Comment by N. O'Brain on 5/18 @ 9:03 am #
I’d like to see this commentariat talking about Union Generals during the Civil War.
It took Lincoln what, six tries, before he got the man capable of doing the job?
Comment by Slartibartfast on 5/18 @ 9:04 am #
further pedantry: it’s de-Baathification.
Comment by JD on 5/18 @ 9:06 am #
Pelosi is a lying sack of cow dung, and her enablers in the MSM are no better. This will get shoved down the memory-hole. Never happened.
Comment by Joe on 5/18 @ 9:10 am #
Good point. For defending Abe Lincoln. History not particularly kind, however, in regards to General McClellan.
Comment by Joe on 5/18 @ 9:12 am #
Did Rahm authorize the Pelosi smackdown?
Comment by Joe on 5/18 @ 9:14 am #
(Say what you will about Rumsfeld, he was outside the Pentagon on 9/11 helping with casualties and making sure the troops were OK. I liked the guy.)
Jesus, I like the guy too for those qualities too. Rumsfeld is a patriot.
Comment by Joe on 5/18 @ 9:16 am #
Pedantry correction: I put one too many toos above.
Comment by Rob Crawford on 5/18 @ 9:34 am #
That was, largely, the search for someone with the right mindset. I think it was Meade, after Gettysburg, who told Lincoln that he’d chased the Army of Virginia “out of our country” — an attitude that caused Lincoln to despair because Virginia was part of the country, too.
Grant’s attitude mirrored Lincoln’s in many ways — that the fight wasn’t to capture territory, but to destroy the rebels’ ability to fight; that the Union could afford much higher casualties, for a longer time, than the Confederates; that the period after the war would be more critical than that during the war.
(On the last — think of the terms Grant gave Lee’s army at Appomattox CH. Those were definitely the act of a man thinking of how to put the nation back together.)
I think it’s extremely rare to start a conflict with commanders who understand the strategic goals. We shouldn’t be shocked when commanders are swapped out in search of one who does.
Comment by gus on 5/18 @ 9:35 am #
McClellan presided over Antietam. Che Obama is even worse.
Comment by Rosa on 5/18 @ 9:39 am #
I found Graham’s case pretty compelling. The C.I.A. has essentially said, we don’t lie and Pelosi was briefed about interrogation techniques. But the language they are using is vague and smacks of legalese. I think that Graham’s argument that this was a lie of omission on the part of the C.I.A. sounds very plausible, more plausible than claims that Pelosi lied. Here is a good link about this: http://www.newsy.com/videos/pelosi_vs_the_cia/
Comment by McGehee on 5/18 @ 9:51 am #
Um, this is Pelosi we’re talking about.
Calling her a woman of negotiable virtue would be an insult to whores.
Comment by Sdferr on 5/18 @ 9:54 am #
To be blunt, bullshit, Rosa. Panetta’s language is quite clear. Here is his memo in full. [Note: emphases added.]
Comment by Rob Crawford on 5/18 @ 9:55 am #
How much do you make for spreading Democrat lies, Rosa?
Comment by alppuccino on 5/18 @ 9:56 am #
more plausible than claims that Pelosi lied.
Yes. I believe that Pelosi’s smooth and measured delivery of her explanation took all plausibility of her lying away. When she began expounding, there was nary a trace of change in tone or expression. (if you disregard her stammering, her pausing, her fumbling through her notes because she couldn’t find her memory in her brain, so she needed it in writing)
Comment by Joe on 5/18 @ 10:08 am #
Rosa will probably discount the source, but the smackdown of Pelosi by Panetta was blunk and stark.
Legalese and nuiance? I do not think so, nor was it waranted for Pelosi’s lies.
Comment by steveaz on 5/18 @ 10:14 am #
RE “pedantry alerts!”: I like them, especially when they do nifty things, like redirect readers up-page to one of my prior comments. They’re handy at keeping the limelight where my ego wants it. Heh!
But also, sometimes I make egregious grammatical or spelling errors, and, fearing the cheek-burn that attends my PW peers’ correctives, I’ll open my dictionary to check myself and wind up learning something in the end. And, later one, in making the correction down-page, I sear, sear, s-e-a-r the lesson into my brain.
Pedantry-alerts are my friend, too.
Comment by mossberg500 on 5/18 @ 10:14 am #
204.Comment by alppuccino on 5/18 @ 9:56 am #
more plausible than claims that Pelosi lied.
Yes. I believe that Pelosi’s smooth and measured delivery of her explanation took all plausibility of her lying away. When she began expounding, there was nary a trace of change in tone or expression. (if you disregard her stammering, her pausing, her fumbling through her notes because she couldn’t find her memory in her brain, so she needed it in writing)
Rosa, what iteration of Pelosi’s explanation seems most likely to be true? It’s a multiple choice question.
Comment by mcgruder on 5/18 @ 10:16 am #
72, you are correct. I wrote a paper on mark Clark in grad school. How that man was not fired after the Italian campaign is a very good question. I suspect it was because he was percieved as a “man of action,” that sort of thing.
An honest assesment of Rumsfeld, not a BJ or a scalping, but an analysis of a man at once both truly visionary and progressive, yet simultaneously retrograde and in over his head, would be fascinating. a great read.
I disagree that we should have ever launched the Iraq war, but once we did, I am forced to respect Bush’s tenacity and willingness to change course viz. the surge. I wish he had done that sooner.
Im not sure the Patriot meme has a lot to do here. Rumsfeld was truly impressive on 9-11; I think Gates, who appears to be the opposite of Rumsfeld is also impressive and also a patriot. I’ve met more than a few incompetents, inside and outside of government, who truly love America and its people, yet were overmatched in their jobs (or in life for that matter).
to this end, im thinking of Sen. Webb of Va., about as rude a man as was possible to Pres. Bush, and having just spent time with him, about as dismissive of other people’s opinions on Iraq and GWOT as you can imagine, yet has spent his whole life in the military (served in Vietnam, Reagan Sec. Navy, his son served two tours in Iraq) and is obsessively patriotic.
I didnt like the guy, not a bit, and he hates the Iraq war 10x more than I have (once the die was cast, I was a big Bus supporter) but I cant really question the guys love of the U.S.
Comment by mossberg500 on 5/18 @ 10:16 am #
Rosa,
whatwhich iteration of Pelosi’s explanation seems most likely to be true? It’s a multiple choice question.Damn!
Comment by steveaz on 5/18 @ 10:17 am #
Pedantry Alert: “And, later on,[...]”
Hmmm….
Comment by mcgruder on 5/18 @ 10:18 am #
Pelosi.
Just 20 years ago this might have driven her from office.
sigh.
Comment by geoffb on 5/18 @ 10:19 am #
I still believe Pelosi lied but, in relation to my #41, this from the Bob Graham Wiki entry should make things interesting for all.
Comment by happyfeet on 5/18 @ 10:19 am #
I hope you get fixed soon, Carin. Sdferr sounds very wise on the matter. Nature. If it’s not being actively treacherous you can be sure it’s plotting something.
Comment by mcgruder on 5/18 @ 10:25 am #
Pelosi would have done better telling the truth.
it would have been a one day story and would have shortly thereafter been relegated to follow-ups and left wing agita…until the next election cycle, when she would have raked in cash for the dems and been their pointwoman again.
they really, really never learn.
PS–Im not sure old Rahm had anything to do with this story. It makes the Dems look very complicit, which they were of course, and takes away a 2×4 of their campaign platform.
Comment by geoffb on 5/18 @ 10:33 am #
Carin, I don’t know your situation re: medical costs. I’ve dug a lot of things out of my hands over my many years of working with them. If you can’t get it without a lot of damage and pain a doctor is the way to go. If fast is needed use one of the things like Med Serv. Handily located in my city across from my work.
From a guy who keeps a hatpin, single edge razorblade, alcohol wipes, and a first aid kit on his work desk. Though half of mine are steel and half wood.
Comment by SBP on 5/18 @ 10:33 am #
I found Graham’s case pretty compelling.
So, you’re either incredibly stupid or incredibly dishonest.
Which is it?
Comment by Slartibartfast on 5/18 @ 10:37 am #
“He has a quirky habit of keeping a detailed log of his daily activities on color-coded notebooks, which some say may have cost him a spot on past vice-presidential tickets. He keeps all of these notes in a file cabinet arranged by month and year.”
Yes. Legend has it that if you wants to know what it has in its pocketses, you just need a peek at the proper notebook.
Comment by geoffb on 5/18 @ 10:37 am #
She told “her” truth. Each time. This happens when it is Party policy that “truth” is relative and everyone gets to have their own one, or ones. Words, meaning, all is mush.
Comment by Pablo on 5/18 @ 10:42 am #
Pelosi also could have STFU. That would have worked quite nicely. But there were political points to be scored, and Granny McRictusface wanted to score them. Apparently by hitting into a triple play.
Comment by geoffb on 5/18 @ 10:45 am #
I’m sure he is quite organized but the whole idea bring to mind “The Library of Babel”.
Comment by geoffb on 5/18 @ 10:46 am #
“s”
Comment by Sdferr on 5/18 @ 10:50 am #
In any event, taking strategic lessons from errors in the conduct of war-planning and war-fighting won’t generally amount to propositions of the form “Don’t go to war with Don Rumsfeld at the controls, he’ll just come close to losing your war for you on account of his character flaws.”
Comment by Joe on 5/18 @ 10:54 am #
mcgruder–you said it well. I supported the Iraq War from the get, but I agree with your assessment of changing course. Many people may be wrong on an issue, and still be acting in good faith and be patriots. Rumsfeld is an example of a patriot. Jim Webb is an example of a patriot. I can criticize Rumsfeld on things he did without questioning his patriotism, just like I can question Jim Webb for stupid policies he has supported. Unfortunately some people here misconstrue such criticism as an attack on Rumsfeld’s patriotism (which it definitely was not). But the difference between conservatives/classical liberals and the left not engage in true retrospection or analysis.
Pelosi is not a patriot, in my opinion. She may subjectively think she is one, but she is not. She, Harry Reid and some other democrats do things that actively hurt the United States. The absolute positions they took on Iraq with Bush, which changed 180 degrees when Obama took over and followed the exact same policies shows that. It may be due to mental instability (actually I think it is more probable they are corrupt) but that is just the way things are. Then there are people like Soros and Michael Moore who are just flat out dishonest and rotten to their cores.
Comment by steveaz on 5/18 @ 10:59 am #
McGruder @#228,
I’d like to read that account, too. And I’m be willing to go with your “over his head” critique, but only for this reason: he undertook two impossible tasks at the same time – he conducted a multi-front war while attempting a drastic reform of the Pentagon’s procurement priorities. Taken singly, each was an Herculean feat and would defeat greater men. Taken together, at the same time, the combination is too much for any one man.
If any “branch” of the military was overstretched by OIF (as was reported about the Marines by antagonistic media and politicians), you could say it was Rumsfield’s bureau.
But, even here I have to admit my bias. For the duration of my reading of any purportedly “down-the-middle” account of Rumsfield’s tenure, I’ll suspect that the tit-for-tattish nature of the content is forced by the authors’ desire to project that their story is “balanced.” Call me cynical, but I’ll be start out at page one convinced the balance will be illusory and contrived.
Maybe it’s just me, but the deliberate incorporation of anti-American media caricatures, foreign slanders like “Rumsfield=Hitler” which are recycled from foreign press organs, and the Democrat’s concerted dis-information campaigns (Pelosi Lied?!) into the engineered image of the American citizen, Donald Rumsfield, has so terribly disfigured both his reputation and our nation’s discussion of the “Iraq War” that his champions like me want his resurrection. A therapeutic “balance” simply will not do.
Call it a BJ. I won’t disagree. But, after the “thrill” is over, one hard fact will remain. Rumsfield faced a concerted “phantom Borking” from a bevy of unaccountable, shifty assailants, both domestic and foreign, while fighting a major war. If anyone deserves a BJ, it’s Rumsfield.
:-)
Comment by Matt on 5/18 @ 11:00 am #
Poll over at hotair says 43% of people believe the CIA lied to Pelosi. The mind, she boggles.
And hey, no making fun of people for fighting orcs on their computer- I’ve done quite alot of orc fighting in the past. Nerds are people too ! =)
Comment by steveaz on 5/18 @ 11:01 am #
Sorry,
T’was McGruder @ 208
Cheers!
Comment by SBP on 5/18 @ 11:07 am #
Poll over at hotair says 43% of people believe the CIA lied to Pelosi.
Well, 52% (+/- the margin for election fraud) voted for the Communist, so there’s that.
Comment by Matt on 5/18 @ 11:09 am #
*Pelosi would have done better telling the truth.*
I think I’d disagree with this statement. She tells the truth, she enrages the people who elect her. She lies, the press, democrats, left wing bloggers cover for her and the heat stays on for a bit but no long term damage is done.
What she should have done was given up the idea of prosecuting freaking lawyers for interepreting the law. She caused this mess and it irritates me to no end she’s likely to walk away from it without any long term damage. I mean, this was Hoyer’s chance to get rid of her and he hasn’t pulled the trigger (and it seems likely won’t). Personally, I’ve never understood how she ended up as speaker anyway.
Comment by B Moe on 5/18 @ 11:11 am #
Nerds are
peopleAlliance too !FTFY
Comment by Sdferr on 5/18 @ 11:11 am #
Besides SBP, everyone knows that of course the CIA lied to Pelosi because G.W.Bush is an all-seeing, all-controlling tyrannical monster who forced them to lie!!!eleventy!! And an idiotic nincompoop too, that G.W.Bush stupidmonster hate him hate hate hate!
Comment by B Moe on 5/18 @ 11:13 am #
Pelosi is Speaker because she has been running unopposed in a very rich district for years and thus has a huge war chest.
In other words she bought it.
Comment by geoffb on 5/18 @ 11:21 am #
Democrats wanted a Speaker who had both some identity (female) type cover and a base that would never, ever vote a Republican in. Memories of Tom Foley and Tom Daschle. That she is rather stupid is a feature. That she is willful and headstrong too, is a bug now, with Obama in the Whitehouse, wasn’t with Bush in.
Comment by JD on 5/18 @ 11:23 am #
Every time I see Webb’s name, I picture him picking up a small boy, turning him upside down, and placing his crank in his mouth.
Comment by Carin on 5/18 @ 11:27 am #
That was artistic expression, JD. I can’t believe you won’t let it go.
Comment by happyfeet on 5/18 @ 11:28 am #
It’s an enduring image.
Comment by JD on 5/18 @ 11:31 am #
Artistic image? Shannon Elizabeth’s glass-cutting nipples are artistic. Jim Webb’s crank-bobbling, not so much.
Macaca.
Comment by Carin on 5/18 @ 11:37 am #
Artistic EXPRESSION, JD. Webb had a story to tell.
Comment by Sammy on 5/18 @ 11:52 am #
As a liberal Democrat, I would consider it delicious irony to have Pelosi out as Speaker of the House over this particular issue. I agree with Gingrich on this. She is either incompetent or a coward. She’s absolutely ineffective and worthless, and incapable of taking a political risk for what’s right.
Now if I were a Republican, I wouldn’t be making noise over this. If this does sink her, you can count on the fact that the next Speaker will be much more effective at advancing the Obama agenda and driving wedges into the Republicans.
Comment by happyfeet on 5/18 @ 11:55 am #
I would like to share with you the opinion of fascist attorney Kevin Zeese, who is a fascist.
This logic has to make Nancy squirmy. Complicit torturey fascist bitch.
Comment by Sdferr on 5/18 @ 11:58 am #
Polite golf clap for attorney Zeese, go get ‘em counselor, we’ll watch.
oh, and sweep you up from the curb when your fellow fascists have done with you.
Comment by mcgruder on 5/18 @ 12:08 pm #
thanks Steveaz and Joe.
I think Pablo is the winner here however.
If she had STFU and started talking about anti-farting legislation or whatever foolish favor she could throw the Nation mag. and its readers, and just not even engaged this issue, and I do mean stayed like 5000 miles from it, she’d be ok.
a real politician, Tip O’Neill for instance (a total New Dealer), would have done that.
Pelosi’s absurd levels of ambition wouldnt let her though. She doesnt care about her job, the POTUS, or even America.
no one ever questioned whether Jim Wright or Tip O’Neill loved America; that is completely on the table with her though.
Comment by JD on 5/18 @ 12:10 pm #
Carin – Apparently you do not recall our host’s artistic expression about Shannon Elizabeth ;-)
Atty Zeese – you, not sir, are a disgusting fascist, prolly related to meya.
Comment by Joe on 5/18 @ 12:13 pm #
This is a welcomed pallet cleanser. The disturbing mental image of Jim Webb “crank bobbing” does not cut it (although I am sure it is welcomed in other venues). But it would help if Webb didn’t write about it in the first place.
Comment by JD on 5/18 @ 12:13 pm #
Amen, mcgruder. Amen. I think the botox may have been injected into her temporal lobe.
Comment by Joe on 5/18 @ 12:17 pm #
Excuse me, palate cleanser. Better visually with a picture than in words.
http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=13146
http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=14909#comment-718161
http://tbogg.firedoglake.com/2008/04/28/it-must-be-sweeps-week-again/
Comment by Ric Locke on 5/18 @ 12:43 pm #
Ah, but you see, we don’t think this will sink her.
You appear to be a member of the vanishing minority who are Democrats out of conviction. The majority of your fellow (D)s are simply cheering GO TEAM! with absolutely no knowledge, or intent to learn, what the “team” stands for — it is irrelevant; only “win” or “lose” makes any difference.
Nancy Pelosi could pull some unfortunate’s fingernails out with pliers on national TV, and still be re-elected. She is therefore a winner, and will remain the choice of Team Democrat.
Regards,
Ric
Comment by cranky-d on 5/18 @ 12:44 pm #
That made me laugh out loud. Thanks. I needed that.
Pingback by Cranky-D » An observation on 5/18 @ 12:48 pm #
[...] here. Nature. If it’s not being actively treacherous you can be sure it’s plotting [...]
Comment by Joe on 5/18 @ 12:58 pm #
Is this Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid?
Comment by Joe on 5/18 @ 12:58 pm #
Is this Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid?
Comment by geoffb on 5/18 @ 1:15 pm #
A shot across the bow. The State ABA disciplinary boards get to see closeup “The Chicago Way”. Still Capone’s town after all these years. Horse’s head indeed.
Comment by Matt on 5/18 @ 1:28 pm #
*Shannon Elizabeth’s glass-cutting nipples are artistic.*
I’m unable to continue without pictures.
Ric’s got it- my point too – nothing will happen to Pelosi. Hell, when does anything happen to liberal democrats. Teddy can leave a woman to die, Bill can get blowjobs in the oval office then lie under oath about it, Frank can practically cause the mortgage crisis while he runs gay hookers out of his congressional office, Dodd can be caught red handed getting sweetheart mortgage deals and Murtha biggest contributor is raided by FB@#!#ingI and he’ll hold onto his seat too.
Ric’s point about winners is true- the left doesn’t view a winner as someone who does the right thing, they view a winner as someone who gets what they want and gets away with it.
Also, shannon elizabeth is a sexy beast.
Comment by Matt on 5/18 @ 1:29 pm #
As an addendum, Nancy could actively waterboard somebody on live TV and then claim she a. never did and b. has no idea what waterboarding is and c. it was all Bush’s fault anyway.
The left will simply applaud while giving fellating Obama (not easy feat but they multitask).
Comment by Sammy on 5/18 @ 1:58 pm #
The difference (i hope) is that Obama would be happy to see Pelosi go, followed by Reid. Those two are completely expendable. They served their purpose, which was to basically duck and cover during the Bush years. We no longer need that position filled.
This liberal has his fingers crossed that we can get a real pit bull running the House, and then the Senate.
Comment by Sdferr on 5/18 @ 2:04 pm #
So they can ram the Totalitarianism home good and hard, eh?
Comment by Matt on 5/18 @ 2:09 pm #
I’m not sure why you need a pitbull running your party when 3/4 of the republicans in congress (especially the senate) are fracking poodles.
Comment by Makewi on 5/18 @ 2:50 pm #
Now if I were a Republican, I wouldn’t be making noise over this. If this does sink her, you can count on the fact that the next Speaker will be much more effective at advancing the Obama agenda and driving wedges into the Republicans.
I read this in a different way than Ric. I read it as a lay off Nancy or your team will really get hurt by the next Democrat Speaker.
Comment by McGehee on 5/18 @ 3:06 pm #
Sammy, no offense, but I’m not so sure a Dem pit bull is really going to do O! or his party any more good than the status quo. O! won’t trust anyone he can’t keep on a short leash, and frankly I think what this whole thing will accomplish is to shorten Pelosi’s leash to exactly O!’s liking.
Comment by Ric Locke on 5/18 @ 3:32 pm #
Makewi, you and I read Sammy’s intent the same.
I just don’t think Pelosi is dislodgeable.
Regards,
Ric
Comment by steveaz on 5/18 @ 7:00 pm #
You’re welcome McGruder…I like your posts, and I get riled up sometimes.
I wuz just thinking…maybe we can scrub Nancy off the next California congressional ballot. What if Nancy’s husband (who cleared a six-figure commission by brokering the Treasure Island sale recently) decided to splurge, and took Nan to a South Bay Hooters? That alone is grounds for removal from a ballot, if Obama’s Chicago rules still hold next election.
Maybe we could get Sac’s Dems to throw their next party at the local stripper joint. All we need is to get Nan there.
Let’s pull out the Alinsky playbook and throw it at ‘em, I say.
Comment by Sammy on 5/18 @ 7:54 pm #
Exaggeration and hysteria were a losing tactic that my party employed for 8 years, but feel free to try it.
I meant it as, “Please, please, do me, as a Democrat, a personal favor and help sink Pelosi!!! I want someone who can really advance a progressive/liberal agenda, and she’s not it!” You guys focus on (a) a coward, or (b) incompetent. From my side, I’ll lament, “She turned a blind eye to torture. TORTURE!!! HOW COULD SHE!!!” and shed some crocodile tears.
Don’t underestimate Obama’s ability to turn on someone who becomes a liability.
If this issue shortens her leash, that’s better than nothing, but I’d rather just have her out.
Comment by B Moe on 5/18 @ 7:56 pm #
What happened to the 52% shit?
Comment by cynn on 5/18 @ 8:30 pm #
The 52% shit got flushed. Exaggeration and fulmination and non-sexist hysteria are the new puce.
Comment by SBP on 5/18 @ 8:33 pm #
You can skip the “progressive” euphemistic bullshit around here, Sammy. We all know fascism when we see it.
Comment by cynn on 5/18 @ 8:36 pm #
Yeah, “progressive” starts with P that rhymes with T that stands for tool.
Comment by SBP on 5/18 @ 8:37 pm #
Down your second box and go to bed, cynn.
Barky’s taxes won’t pay themselves, you know.
Comment by cynn on 5/18 @ 8:39 pm #
Why are you up so late, SBPP? Locked out of the house again?
Comment by ginsewa on 5/18 @ 8:54 pm #
Hey, Sammy! Suppose you provide a list of all the benefits that your “liberal/progressive” agenda is going to bring.
‘Cause I’ve been looking at it for a number of years now, and I’ve got nothin’. Unless you count “ever expanding power for faceless bureaucrats,” of course.
Comment by guinsPen on 5/18 @ 9:41 pm #
P that rhymes with T…
Sweet.
Also, “How can there be any cynn in sincere?”
Comment by pdbuttons on 5/18 @ 9:47 pm #
kids?
whats the matter with kids today?
ann margeret then
or in the movie tommy with all those baked beans on her?
once i learn to link…
Comment by McGehee on 5/19 @ 8:57 am #
Pd, best thing about that movie, to me, is the idea of Paul Lynde playing the overprotective father of a teenage girl. Talk about acting!
Comment by Sammy on 5/19 @ 10:20 am #
Apparently not. You should look up the definition of big words like “fascism” before you use them in sentences.
Comment by Sdferr on 5/19 @ 10:22 am #
“You should look up the definition of big words…”
See, Sammy, that’s what’s often known as a Q.E.D.