if pat were mike

I'll probably be pretty busy for the next few weeks or so, but, recently, I've been imagining what the media scenario would be like if Michael Moore had said something as outrageous as Pat Robertson has recently.

an utter buffoon

I can think of nothing else to say about Pat "suggester of foreign assass
ination" and "prayer for Supreme Court vacancies" Robertson.

I can't believe that anyone who would call him or herself Christian would follow this man.

recommended reading

When I was doing a little on-line research this afternoon, I ran into a really great blog via blogcritics.org. Alphaliberal is an exceptionally smart political blog that I have posted a regular blog link to and I suggest that you check it out.

Anyway, this particular column is about the outrageously overused comparison and analogy between Iraq and WWII. I have only included an exerpt of the post because it is long, but, if you have the time, I highly recommend you read the whole thing.

In World War II, there was a very real struggle against an alliance of world powers who wanted to conquer the world and were in the process of doing so.One of those powers attacked us and the others declared war on us. Iraq was a nuisance and an anathema, but Saddam Hussein neither attacked us, nor was capable of attacking even his neighbors at the time the Iraq war was launched.

Before the Iraq war, Rice, Cheney, Bush, and the rest of their cabal, invoked impending mushroom clouds over the US "rhineland / heartland" caused by Saddam Hussein and secret uranium deals from Niger purporting to show how Saddam's nuclear ambitions were a clear and present danger to the United States --all provably false.

It is not in the American tradition to invade a sovereign nation pre-emptively. Anyone who studies history knows what a disaster such a doctrine has universally been for every country that has invoked it, from Hitler, to Musollini, to the Roman empire, to Napoleon. Even without studying history, just look at where we are in Iraq, and why Bush and his cronies claimed we needed to be there, and the cost that is being borne on the American citizen, and that should be enough of a history lesson for anyone with a rational mind to reject Bush's analogy and his weak defense of his indefensible doctrine.

p.s. On a totally different topic, if you've read anything about the supposed low-ratings and "scandal" at Air America, this other Alphaliberal post should make you feel a bit better.

more bad news

Another day and another broken deadline in Iraq. Here's the lede in the newest BBC article:

Iraqi negotiators have been given three more days to reach agreement on the draft of a new constitution.

MPs met for a brief session minutes before the 2000 GMT deadline to receive the draft expired, but did not vote.

Somehow though, the administration is trying to play this off as a postive step. Maybe I'm totally biased, but they seem to remain utterly incapable of acknowledging any kind of unpleasant reality.

In Washington, the White House welcomed "another step forward" in the work on the constitution.

"The progress made over the past week has been impressive," said a statement, adding that democracy was "difficult and often slow, but leads to durable agreements".

my favorite republican pt. ii

As you may or may not know, I am a tivo subscriber. This sometimes puts me a day behind in the news cycle (wonderful quality for a blogger, eh?)

So, I watched this morning's This Week w/ George Stephanopoulis this evening and, once again, Hagel was excellent.

Here's an ABC news article about the interview and here's an AP one. I really wish that ABC provided free transcripts or video so that I could link to them.

my favorite republican

Sen. Chuck Hagel is an honest man. Sometimes I disagree with him, but I always appreciate his candor and sincerity. He says what he thinks and explains why. We need more like him.

In a recent interview about Iran, Hagel encourages the administration to view and pursue diplomatic negotiations with Iran as a potential opportunity rather than a necessary conflict.

You've got a new president, a new opportunity to do something bold here. Why not take that opportunity and do something bold? Iran is going to be a major influence in the future of Iraq. It already is. Who are we kidding when we think that they're not? They are.

"I would start engaging with American face-to-face dialogue. We're not at negotiations yet, but opening that dialogue. This is a process. This needs to work. Every side has to give something here. . .

"Quite frankly, what is the military option, what are we talking about here? We lose credibility in the face of the world when we say things like, 'Well just don't forget what happened to Iraq could happen to you Iran. We could invade you, we could bomb you.'

"Oh come on now. First of all, where are we going to get the troops? Who's going to go with us? Where are our partners going to be with Iran?"