Chickenhawks: Doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result

Speaking to an audience at the Veterans of Foreign Wars convention in Pittsburgh, President Obama said:

“Some of the same politicians and pundits that are so quick to reject the possibility of a diplomatic solution to Iran's nuclear program are the same folks who were so quick to go to war in Iraq and said it would take a few months.  We know the consequences of that choice, and what it cost us in blood and treasure. So I believe there's a smarter, more responsible way to protect our national security.”

And:

“Instead of rushing into another conflict, I believe that sending our sons and daughters into harm’s way must always be a last resort, and that before we put their lives on the line we should exhaust every alternative.”

But, I heard on Fox News that most members of ISIS are from Iran.  And Rush Limbaugh said the Benghazi terrorist attack was carried out by Iranians.  Now, if we stage a pre-emptive military strike against Iran, our soldiers will be greeted as liberators; they'll be showered with candy and ice cream by throngs of grateful Iranians...

Jeb Bush: “OK, this is it — my really truly definitive answer to the Iraq Question”

GOP Candidates' Achilles' Heels: Ask About Iraq

Why bother with cow-tipping when Republican-tipping is so much more fun?  Ambushing Jeb Bush or Marco Rubio with the Iraq question is sort of like sneaking up behind a waiter who's carrying a huge tray full of dishes, and tickling him in the ribs.  

Republican-tipping is not only fun; it's a way to start weeding out the dimmest and most clueless of the wannabes.

Jeb Bush had first said that based on the intelligence we had at the time (2003), he would have invaded Iraq.  Then he sputtered that he had misunderstood the question; he would have done something different, or, uhh, er...  And then finally:

“If we're all supposed to answer hypothetical questions, knowing what we know now, what would you have done? I would not have engaged. I would not have gone into Iraq.”

It depends on what the meaning of is is.

Later, Marco Rubio was asked the same question, and immediately transformed into a mass of incoherent blubbering.  First, the Iraq invasion was a mistake based on what we know now.  Next, it wasn't a mistake because “the world is a better place because Saddam Hussein doesn’t run Iraq.”  And then, trying to get out of his self-dug hole by burrowing in even deeper, he blurted “based on what we know now, I wouldn’t have thought Manny Pacquiao was gonna beat Floyd Mayweather Jr. in that fight a couple of weeks ago.”

Clearly, every White House wannabe needs to be asked the Iraq Question.  Relentlessly.  Mercilessly.  At some point they'll come up with a boilerplate talking point for every candidate to recite verbatim.

And these teleprompted synchronized-swimming recitals will be just as entertaining as their “Uh, what I meant was” “I misunderstood the question” flailings. 

Dick and Liz Cheney: the Circle Jerk

Disgraced former Vice President Dick “Meet my new heart, same as the old heart” Cheney and his daughter Liz the Quitter are jerking each other off again.  This time they're doing it in full public view on the pages of the Wall Street Journal.

Dick Cheney had a 9% public approval rating during most of his vice presidency, but that hasn't stopped him from him from spewing shit out of his mouth every chance he gets.  The same chickenhawk who swore up and down that Saddam Hussein had Weapons of Mass Destruction, assured us that a U.S. invasion of Iraq would be a cakewalk and ended up murdering 4,500 American soldiers is once again slamming the president who successfully got us out of Iraq.

The Father-Daughter 69 Team wrote in the Wall Street Journal:

“Rarely has a U.S. president been so wrong about so much at the expense of so many...Iraq is at risk of falling to a radical Islamic terror group and Mr. Obama is talking climate change. …Terrorists take control of more territory and resources than ever before in history, and he goes golfing. He seems blithely unaware, or indifferent to the fact, that a resurgent al Qaeda presents a clear and present danger to the United States of America…Instead, he abandoned Iraq and we are watching American defeat snatched from the jaws of victory...Oh, wait a minute, Liz is finally coming.  First time for everything.” 

Liz Cheney had been campaigning against Wyoming Senator Mike Enzi (i.e. trying to primary him from the right) but she quit her campaign last January for “health” reasons.

Dick Cheney: Eight More Years

Well, not Dick Cheney exactly. But if Rudy Giuliani gets into the White House, he wants his vice president to be someone like Cheney.

Giuliani was answering questions from voters in New Hampshire, and one of them asked who would be Secretary of State in his administration. His answer was:

“Let me 9/11 answer with the 9/11 question of what you 9/11 would look for in a 9/11 vice president first — again without any 9/11 presumption that I'm 9/11 going to be the nominee. A vice president 9/11 has to be a partner in the 9/11 administration. The vice president has to know 9/11 everything that's going on, just in case 9/11 the vice president has to step in at a moment's notice.”

He said he spoke with Cheney on September 11, 2001 and felt that the vice president “had a sense that he knew what he was doing.”

Giuliani also said he might choose his current White House rivals to serve in his cabinet. There's something to look forward to: President Giuliani, and the top cabinet posts being held by Mitt Romney, John McCain, Mike Huckabee…

**************************************

With Barack Obama winning in Iowa, the attack is on. Mitt Romney said: “Did you listen to Barack Obama? He is a new face, but gosh when you listen to what comes out of his mouth. It’s like, ‘We're going to just get our troops out of Iraq.’ Have you thought about the consequences?”

Well, Asswipe, that’s pretty much how we got INTO Iraq, isn't it? Were you thinking about “the consequences” then?

Oh, that’s right, there'll be a bloodbath if we pull out of Iraq. If we pull out now, there'll be a bloodbath. If we pull out in 900 years there'll be a bloodbath. Well, as the Great Ronald Reagan once said: “If it takes a bloodbath, let’s get it over with.”

Iraqmire, South Africa and America

The United States isn't the only country having the life sucked out of it by Iraqmire. The same thing is happening in South Africa.

Thousands of white soldiers and police officers — most of them are veterans of the disgraced apartheid regime — have left their jobs and families to work as contractors in Iraq. This is causing a lot of tension and controversy in South Africa; much more so than in the United States.

South Africa is still recovering from the infamy of being one of the world’s worst police states not too long ago. They're trying to live down that image. Compare that to the U.S., which seems to get off on being the global tough guy. While the American Powers That Be are doting and swooning over Blackwater, South Africa has a different reaction.

Their current government has drafted a law that would criminalize all South African citizens who are working as contractors in Iraq. Maybe we could learn something from them.

(Yes I know Condoleezza Rice has issued an order cracking down on Blackwater. Those orders can be rescinded just as quickly as they were issued. We'll see how long this "order" lasts when the cameras have gone.)

The internal tension and embarrassment aren't South Africa's only problems. South Africa’s security is in jeopardy. Local police departments have been drained by the mass exodus of officers fleeing to Iraq for more money (up to ten times what they were making in South Africa). And most of the country’s special forces trainers are now on the U.S. payroll in Iraq.

The country is being bled dry by the War in Iraq. Sound familiar?

Blackwater Evicted From Iraq

This is an urgent request for assistance from Blackwater:

Hi. We are a large group of stupid quick-tempered poorly-trained security guards. And we need a home. Will you take us in? Pleeease??? Check out some some of the pictures from our warm and fuzzy photo album: here, here and here.

If you let us move in with you, we’ll take care of all of your security needs. If anybody gives you a bad time — protestors or any other riffraff — we’ll fuck ‘em up! We shoot first and ask questions later.

Our boss is a born-again Christian who worships fetuses. But once you're born we get to shoot you. You got a problem with that?!?!?!

We just got evicted from our home in Iraq. Iraq!?!?!?!?!! Who’da thunk some war-torn disease-infested Third World country would be worried about some riffraff’s “civil rights” or whatever? Some robe-wearing falafel-guzzling sheik thinks he's too good for us??? Goddamnit we oughtta strap that son of a bitch down and stick a cattle prod up his —

[take a deep breath…count to ten…eeeasy...]

Uh, where was I? Ah, right, we’re looking for a home; somebody who’ll take us in. Will you be our friend? Come on, there can't be too many countries that have “standards” or whatever it was that got us kicked out of Iraq.

Oh well, if nobody else will have us, we’ll always have a home in the good ol’ USA. That’s the place where we get to do anything we want, whenever and wherever we want, and we’re never held accountable to anyone. Yes!!!!

Suddenly All Of Our Enemies in Iraq Are “Al Qaeda”

With Bush plummeting further and further in the polls and Iraqmire being more disastrous than ever, our “leaders” have come up with a new spin. Since the public is still rightfully concerned about al Qaeda — Presto! Every enemy combatant that we've killed or captured in Iraq is now a high-ranking member of al Qaeda.

Isn't that great? We’re winning! Freedom is on the march! At this rate we'll be capturing Osama bin Laden any day now.

Without any changes in military strategy or any new intelligence information, yesterday’s “insurgents” have suddenly become today’s al Qaeda members. If you can't win, the next best option is to redefine all the terms.

It’s bad enough that the Pentagon is putting on this charade. Even worse — the “media” is marching right along in lockstep, dutifully re-christening all “insurgents” and “enemy combatants” as “al Qaeda.” The New York Times recently used the term “al Qaeda” nineteen times in an article describing American battles in Iraq.

These are desperate times. Bush and Cheney have constantly fallen back on generic terms like “terrorists” whenever they wanted to arouse mass paranoia. If some pesky reporter asks why we invaded Iraq — “the war on terror,” “fighting them over there so we don’t have to fight them over here,” etc.

But referring specifically to al Qaeda just to push the right emotional buttons — this was always a level that even Bush wouldn’t stoop to. Until now.

Here is another example of a “news” story “reporting” on our war against "al Qaeda" in Iraq. We've all noticed the gradual change in the “media” as they’ve deteriorated from Watchdog to Lapdog. The mutation is now complete.

And here is another article on Bush’s desperate attempts to create the illusion of victory in Iraq by renaming and redefining everything.

For a larger view of the Bush Administration's history of lying, spinning and redefining, take this quiz. Had enough?

Democrats: A Solution to Iraqmire

This article seems like a no-brainer — something from the cover of DUUUHHH!!! Magazine. It’s supposed to be a way for Democrats to take a firm stand on Iraq without looking like wimps or isolationists. The author — Jonathan Alter — thinks they need a new slogan: “Pull and Strike.”

ZING!! Doesn’t that get the adrenaline pumping. OK, so it’s a lame slogan. But the idea behind it makes perfect sense. It’s so basic a 5-year-old could’ve thought of it. “Pull” means pulling our troops out of Iraq. “Strike” means striking at Islamic terrorist groups wherever we find them.

Isn't this what we should've done right after 9/11?? Anybody??? Nobody ever thought our new president was the brightest porchlight on the block. But we never imagined that his solution to the 9/11 terrorist attacks would be to invade a country which had nothing to do with 9/11 and get us embroiled in a 4-½ year quagmire there, and end up squandering tens of thousands of lives and trillions of dollars.

According to Alter, a lot of Islamic terrorist groups are hiding in countries that don’t want them there, and these governments would welcome American airstrikes that zero in on the terrorists’ hiding places. The U.S. will have to strengthen its intelligence agencies for this method to work, and the intelligence will have to be accurate. No more cherry-picking, “fixed” intelligence or useless gossip (“the British government has learned…”).

Again, isn't this what we all thought Bush would be doing right after 9/11/01? What happened?

Bush and Cheney: “High Crimes and Misdemeanors”

And who’s the leftwing flagburner who said that? Would you believe Lawrence Wilkerson, Colin Powell’s former chief of staff when he was Secretary of State. Last Thursday he said “The language in the Constitution about impeachment is nice and precise — it’s high crimes and misdemeanors. You compare Bill Clinton’s peccadilloes for which he was impeached to George Bush’s high crimes and misdemeanors or Dick Cheney’s high crimes and misdemeanors, and I think they pale in significance.”

Wilkerson wasn’t actually pushing for impeachment; he made that statement on a radio program in response to a question. Earlier in the program he had said “This administration doesn't know how to effect accountability, in my opinion.”

Wilkerson also said he thought the Founding Fathers intended for impeachment to be used more often. He said “I do believe that they would have thought had they been asked by you or whomever at the time of the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia 'Do you think this will be exercised?' they would have said 'Of course it will, every generation they’ll have to throw some bastard out.’ That’s a form of accountability too. It’s ultimate accountability.”

When he was asked about the high crimes of the Bush Administration, Wilkerson said the American public was duped into supporting the Iraqi war: “I think we went into this war for specious reasons. I think we went into this war not too much unlike the way we went into the Spanish American War with the Hearst press essentially goading the American people and the leadership into war. That was a different time in a different culture, in a different America. We’re in a very different place today and I think we essentially got goaded into the war through some of the same means.”

Bravo.

Who Won the Iraqi-American War? Iran.

This article — by Gary Brecher — makes a lot of sense. Iran’s two worst enemies have been slugging it out for over four years now. What’s not for Iran to love?

Iran probably didn't plan any of this, but things couldn’t be working out any better for them if they had directed every detail. The ideal way to invade a country is by using a proxy instead of your own forces. Remember our own rightwing terrorists (oops, sorry, I mean “Freedom Fighters”) fighting in Nicaragua in the 1980s? We sure showed the Iranians how to do it.

Again, Iran probably didn’t plan or intend for us to invade Iraq. But like Gary Brecher says, “From the enormous advantage gained by Iran via our invasion of Iraq, you would think that Dick Cheney is a mole for the Ayatollah.”

Iran’s main rival has now been obliterated and the Shiites (the majority sect in Iran) have the upper hand in Iraq. And we've “provided Iran with a risk-free laboratory to spy on American forces in action.”

According to Brecher, Iraq is like a nuclear reactor that Iran can control by inserting and removing control rods. He says:

“They need to keep us there, because — makes me sick to say it but it's true — our troops are now the biggest, strongest control rod the Persians are using to set the temperature of this war. They want us there as long as possible, stoking the feuds and making sure nobody wins.”

Another benefit of a long bloody regional war is the money and supplies that come pouring into neighboring countries. Iran (and Syria) must have tons of money and supplies coming into their border provinces. As Brecher says, “Need any U.S.-issue supplies, weapons, toilet paper, or global positioning system units cheap? Just ask at any bazaar in Damascus or Tehran. Uncle Sam's guarantee of quality — fell off the back of a two-and-a-half ton truck.”

The Vietnam war — with all the money pouring into the region — helped transform Thailand from a feudal backwater into a bustling tourist magnet and major economic power. Looks like the Iraqi-American war will be providing the same benefit for Iran and Syria. We sure know how to sock it to our enemies.

Republicans: The Dark Story Behind Their “Unity”

Since most Americans think we need to get out of Iraq ASAP, you'd think this would be a no-brainer for Congress. Regardless of political party, it seems like political suicide to vote for staying in Iraq and digging ourselves deeper and deeper into Iraqmire.

You’ve gotta admire the Republicans’ unity. Whenever the Most Unpopular President Ever says “Jump!” his little congressional automatons keep saying “how high sir?!”

Is it unity, or is it more like a bunch of Brownshirts marching in lockstep?

A Republican Congressman from Maryland, Wayne Gilchrest, voted in favor of troop withdrawal. Gilchrest is a former Marine and a Vietnam veteran. But that didn’t stop some of the prominent chickenhawks in his district from lashing out at him at town hall meetings, calling him a coward and a traitor.

Bob Inglis (R—S. Carolina) also voted for the withdrawal timetable. Local GOP officials threatened him with a primary challenge.

Maybe these furious reactions were just spontaneous outpourings by concerned citizens. Or maybe they were the well-organized movements of a desperate Inner Party, clinging to its failed agenda. I suspect the latter.

Where does “unity” end and extortion begin? This sounds less like political activism and more like a bunch of Mafia goons springing into action when Big Vinnie orders a hit.

Dick Cheney: Crawl Back Into Your Hole and Stay There

This past Tuesday must have been Bash Dick Cheney Day. Our illustrious leader probably wishes he had never poked his head out of his cubbyhole. That’s probably what everybody wishes.

During an argument in the Senate about continued funding for Iraqmire, Cheney accused Senator Harry Reid of “defeatism.” Reid fired back with "I'm not going to get into a name-calling match with somebody that has 9 percent approval ratings." Pow! Give ‘em Hell Harry!

On the same day, George McGovern had a column responding to Cheney’s recent attacks on him. Some of the highlights include:

“In the war of my youth, World War II, I volunteered for military service at the age of 19 and flew 35 combat missions, winning the Distinguished Flying Cross as the pilot of a B-24 bomber. By contrast, in the war of his youth, the Vietnam War, Cheney got five deferments and has never seen a day of combat — a record matched by President Bush.”

“We, of course, already know that when Cheney endorses a war, he exempts himself from participation. On second thought, maybe it's wise to keep Cheney off the battlefield — he might end up shooting his comrades rather than the enemy.”

Cheney, McGovern and Reid are scheduled to go quail hunting next (to be continued)

Why is the Iraqi Quagmire like Terry Schiavo?

They're both being kept alive by a feeding tube. That’s the comparison being made in this column. At least Terry Schiavo’s feeding tube didn’t kill thousands of American soldiers and cost a trillion dollars.

The columnist says that after we toppled Saddam Hussein and threw Iraqi society into chaos, “our national security physicians inserted a feeding tube into Iraq to restore its health. This treatment was supposed to nourish Iraq while it recovered from its ills, but it has not given the result we wanted. Like Schiavo, our patient has not awakened, Iraqi civil society is in a persistent vegetative state and our own society is fighting about whether to withdraw the feeding tube.”

When it was first suggested that Terry Schiavo’s feeding tube should be removed, her parents were horrified. In addition to the tragedy, this would mean that keeping her on a feeding tube for fifteen years had been all for nothing.

Likewise, Iraqmire’s “parents” are determined to keep their feeding tube in place. They just can't — won't — admit that they’ve accomplished absolutely nothing with the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people and the alienation of America from the rest of the world.

The feeding tube will stay. Forever.

George W. Bush: “Won't Somebody Please Come Out and Play with Me??”

Wanted: We are now accepting applicants for the exciting new position of War Czar. Just think of the opportunity — YOU could be in charge of our ongoing military adventures in Iraq and Afghanistan. Come on, there's light at the end of the tunnel. The insurgency is on its last legs.

The Bush Administration created this position several weeks ago, with no publicity. They were hoping they could quietly fill the position and then Bush could hold a big ceremony where he would announce the new position and who would be filling it. The best laid plans…

So far, three retired generals have been offered this position — and they’ve turned it down. These generals include retired Marine General John J. Sheehan, a former NATO commander. He said "The very fundamental issue is, they don't know where the hell they're going." He said that pragmatists who want to find a way out of Iraq are overpowered in the White House by the Cheney philosophy of stay and stay and stay until either we win or Hell freezes over. "So rather than go over there, develop an ulcer and eventually leave, I said, 'No, thanks.' "

Who could possibly turn down an opportunity like this? What kind of job could be more challenging? Let’s see: how about being the last-minute replacement skipper on the Titanic. Or Tom DeLay might be looking for a new Public Relations manager.

Will Bush Really Veto the Iraq Accountability Act?

Bush says he’ll veto the Iraq Accountability Act because it contains a timetable for withdrawal. If this law is passed, American troops will have to be out of Iraq by August 2008.

But will Bush really veto this bill? This is where the War on Terror clashes with Bush’s true goal: the Quest For Oil. Buried deeply in this bill is another item which might be even more important to Bush/Cheney than their rhetorical “War On Terror.” This other item mandates the sharing of oil revenues among all Iraqis. Well, that sounds nice. That’s the large print.

The fine print goes into much more detail. When this law takes effect, about 80% of Iraq’s oil reserves will be controlled by British and American oil companies. These oil reserves are currently controlled by the Iraq government.

THIS is why we invaded Iraq and why we’re still quagmired there four years later. “Support Our Troops!” and “fight them over there so we don’t have to fight them over here” — it’s all window dressing. Control of Iraq’s oil is the underlying purpose of this war, and this control is written into the Iraq Accountability Act.

Bush doesn’t have the stones to veto it.

John McCain: “We’re Making Progress In Iraq”

Listen up all you doom and gloom Liberals: John McCain says we’re starting to turn things around in Iraq. You got that?? So quit your whining and hand-wringing and start supporting our troops.

OK, so this invasion was supposed to be a cakewalk and it turned out to be a 4-year quagmire that’s killed over 3,000 American soldiers and drained almost a trillion dollars from our treasury. Get over it. Let’s stay over there until we win. There's light at the end of the tunnel. The insurgency is on its last legs.

And if you don’t agree with McCain’s cheerful optimism, it means you don’t support our troops and you want the terrorists to win.

America’s Gilded Palace in Iraq

How many of you think American forces will ever, ever be pulling out of Iraq? Gotcha! We’re staying and we’re digging in. We’re gonna be that unwanted relative who moved in and never left. And the Iraqis will LIKE it!

We’re building a sprawling embassy in Baghdad. It’ll be the largest American embassy in the world, covering an area the size of Vatican City. Our new imperial palace will be on 104 acres, with 21 buildings and a staff of 5,000. Congress has already appropriated $1 billion toward building this embassy. But don’t worry, we’ll be leaving soon.

Our new fortress/embassy will be occupying the grounds of Saddam Hussein’s former palace. How’s that for symbolism? “Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.”

A construction foreman with 27 years of experience, John Owen, quit his job on this project after seven months. Describing the contractor, First Kuwaiti Trading & Contracting, he said “I’ve never seen a project more fucked up. Every U.S. labor law was broken.”

John Owen informed the U.S. State Department — who had awarded this contract to First Kuwaiti — of what he had witnessed: security breaches, safety violations and workers being beaten by their managers. And this was right in the middle of the American-controlled Green Zone. The labor camps where thousands of these migrant workers lived had practically no sanitation or medical care.

First Kuwaiti imports most of its workers from the Philippines, India, Nepal and Pakistan — not from Iraq. Because of so many safety and security concerns, some of these governments have now banned their citizens from working in Iraq. These countries’ passports are often stamped with “Not Valid For Iraq.” Because of this, First Kuwaiti has had to “sneak” these workers from Kuwait into Iraq.

Here's how it works: the workers are told by First Kuwaiti that they're going to Dubai. They're herded through airport security, with instructions to tell Customs that they're going to Dubai. Then at the last minute, the workers are instead herded into a different, unmarked plane that flies them to Baghdad instead of Dubai.

A medical technician was fired by First Kuwaiti after he reported several deaths that he thought were from medical malpractice. His observations included: “There hadn’t been any follow up on medical care. People were walking around intoxicated on pain relievers with unwrapped wounds and there were a lot of infections.” He also said “I told First Kuwaiti that you don’t give painkillers to people who are running machinery and working on heavy construction and they said ‘that's how we do it.’”

Isn't this great? No wonder those grateful liberated Iraqis showered our troops with flowers and ice cream. As the article says, this sick twisted fiasco is “the most lasting monument to the U.S. liberation and occupation of Iraq.”

Iraq vs. Vietnam

This columnist is saying “A generation ago, Vietnam blew up politics as we knew it. Why isn’t that happening now?” Then he answers his own question by saying the Democrats haven’t offered any solutions yet. He says “Democrats haven’t fashioned a compelling (even to themselves) alternative to George W. Bush’s world view. Unless they do, they could lose in 2008.”

Regardless of whether that’s true, there's another reason Iraq hasn’t blown up in our faces. We don’t have a draft any more. At least technically we don’t. (Although, with the same “volunteers” being herded back to Iraq again and again and again, even after their doctors have declared them medically unfit for battle — but I digress…)

The Vietnam War had its share of chickenhawks —Cheney, Wolfowitz and all the rest of those pathetic armchair warriors at Project For A New American Century. But they had to work for it. They had to constantly make sure their draft status didn’t change to 1A. The most reliable way to keep from getting drafted was to stay in college — even if it meant getting Ph.D.s in twelve different subjects. At one time being married would keep people from being drafted, but that changed sometime during the Vietnam war. After they changed it, you could be drafted even if you were married with children. And the number of occupations that were “draft-safe” kept on shrinking.

So it was a constant struggle if you wanted to be a chickenhawk, and it made for some awkward contradictions. “We need to keep fighting over there and do whatever it takes to keep the Communists from taking over uh oh I just got a letter from my Draft Board, I have to go straighten this out right away. Oh God…”

Today’s chickenhawks, on the other hand, only have to do one thing to stay out of the military: Don’t enlist. It doesn’t get any easier than that.

A tiny percentage of America’s population — service members and their families — is gravely affected by the Iraqi war. It’s the center of their lives; it’s turning their lives upside down. Meanwhile, the other 99% (just guessing at the number) can just go on about their routines, totally unaffected by the war. They might argue about it, but they aren’t contributing anything to it and they aren’t inconvenienced by it.

And THAT is why Iraq hasn’t “blown up American politics.”

Cheney: “We Need To Get Out of Iraq NOW!”

OK, he didn’t actually say that. But with Cheney’s near-perfect record of wrong predictions, this seems like the clearest choice. We've all heard jokes about people listening to the weather forecast and then dressing for the exact opposite. “Mostly sunny today” equals “break out the raincoat and umbrella.”

It’s the same with Dick “Wrong Way Corrigan” Cheney. The person who brought us “our soldiers will be greeted as liberators” and “the insurgency is on its last legs” has struck again.

“If our coalition withdrew before Iraqis could defend themselves…the violence would likely spread throughout the country and be very difficult to contain. Having tasted victory in Iraq, the militants would look for new missions.” Well there you have it, straight from the horse’s mouth. Hurry up and get our troops out of that hellhole and bring them home. Now.