when you're right you're Bob right:
no sooner...

http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/124...5&out=00:13:35

Here's the Ali decision. http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/script...=403&invol=698 Mr. Kaus is apparently still making the argument that the Government made before the Supreme Court, which is that Mr. Ali did not object to all wars in any form but just this war. Previously the government had also questioned the sincerity of Mr. Ali's beliefs and the religious basis for his objection to the war, but the government conceded these points in argument before the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court kinda weaseled out of deciding whether Mr. Ali's opposed war in any form (although it should be noted that the hearing officer who actually heard evidence on the matter had determined he did meet this requirement). It said that since it had not been made clear on which of the three grounds Mr. Ali was turned down and the government now admitted that at least on two of the grounds he did meet the test, that the conviction would have to be thrown out because there was a strong possibility that the denial of c.o. status was erroneous. The concurring opinion of Justice Douglas is actually the most interesting

Two questions/points. 1) When Mickey asks Bob if he wants bases out of Kurdistan it is kinda like they assume Kurdistan is some independent country. As I understand it 'Iraqi Kurdistan' has political autonomy (with a 'federal' Iraq) and 'Kurdistan' is an area that encompasses bits of Iraq, Turkey and Iran. This isn't supposed to be some pedantic thing, but isn't it more common to refer to "the Kurdish area of Iraq" or "Iraqi Kurdistan" or something? 2) Is Bob really happy that Obama can say pretty categorically that the US will be out of Iraq in a year/1.5 years (which I think he did during the primary debates, right?) but then really be happy that he has to mean during his first term? I know this is all politicking etc. but why not expect a slightly higher standard of honesty/frankness ... especially from the candidate that is running on a 'washington outsider' & 'change' platform. If Obama can just throw out platitudes to get past the rest of the democratic field, how can we really know whether we should be voting for him or not? Maybe I am naive to want to hold political candidates to a higher standard than

So if as Mr Wright's timetable the facts on the ground and the generals say that the Iraqi Armed Forces are not ready to protect their country from their neighbors is he willing to allow another 6 months, 12 months 18... Should we walk them so close and then role the dice that the Middle East is to be the sacrificial lamb to the left. Whom ever is President at that time will own the consequences and no President is going to want that legacy. The only real choice is to get out as fast as possible, so that a case can be made that President Bush owns the failure, or see the thing trough to the end.

Yes, Mickey continues to ramble on, getting various aspects of the Ali case wrong and missing the point that Muhammad Ali's act of civil disobedience was tremendously important for human rights, world peace and the struggle to end conscription all over the world. Ali understood that being coerced into committing murder or being murdered in the jungles of Southeast Asia was an extension of forced labor, i.e., slavery. At the time, the teenagers who were dying in Vietnam were disproportionately black and poor; the draft was a perfect example of institutionalized racism in America. Martin Luther King and many other revered African American leaders had opposed the war, so Ali was informed by his roots in the African American Christian community as well as his conversion experience to Islam. Ali did not take on the US government from a position of safety. He was not Jane Fonda (whom I respect very much), but rather a man who sacrificed the best years of his professional career, his freedom, and his wealth for a noble cause. Ali was sentenced to a lengthy prison term for refusing to cross the induction line

Quoting piscivorous: The only real choice is to get out as fast as possible, so that a case can be made that President Bush owns the failure, or see the thing trough to the end.

You have presented a false choice. Getting out wisely is the only strategy to follow by the candidate who suggested time frames in the primary season, but now has to adapt his language to reflect the general election cycle. His position has not changed fundamentally. But he offers the contrast to McCain that your "seeing things through to the end" provides cover for. Namely: Stay and stay some more. So nice try , but wishful thinking. Anyway, GW won't receive his credit until we are all dead and gone and the historians can whitewash and spin away. Maybe.

Hey Mickey
You didn't read the rest of RCs post where you are supposed to take them out to lunch and coke and dine them.. what gives?

Quoting rcocean: Invite them to lunch. Talk to them. Most of them are too young for scotch, so give them a Coke. Show them you're not a counter-revolutionary. Don't intimidate them with actual knowledge or facts. Just show them you've changed your mind and approve of illegal aliens. Say I'm for open borders - not "Hate". Rant about McCain and the evil Republicans. Show them you follow the party line. They'll they'll love it - and so will Bob.

Now that I read it again, I don't blame you at all...

"Getting out wisely" can you offer some form of definition to this counter to my false choice. I don't really see how this contradicts what I said. P.S. Edit so tat it actually makes sense

Quoting piscivorous: So if as Mr Wright's timetable the facts on the ground and the generals say that the Iraqi Armed Forces are not ready to protect their country from their neighbors is he willing to allow another 6 months, 12 months 18... Should we walk them so close and then role the dice that the Middle East is to be the sacrificial lamb to the left. Whom ever is President at that time will own the consequences and no President is going to want that legacy. The only real choice is to get out as fast as possible, so that a case can be made that President Bush owns the failure, or see the thing trough to the end.

So the surge isn't working after all?

Sticking with the nice thread title (thanks pisc), Bob nearly took Brendan's advice. He threw a gratuitous utterance of McCains name into the let's criticize all the Flip-floppers in the race. He also renamed (again credit Brendan) under the bus as "throwing overboard."
Mickey was even willing to cut Obama some slack on Wes Clark, but Bob would have no part of it. He wasn't sure, but thought he heard Obama say reject. How about some analysis from someone whose ideas I respect?
Instead Bob offered pre-digested talking points on spinelessness. Not only do I not agree, but I guess we won't be reviewing all the nay-sayers when and if Obama is elected and attempts to implement the policies and approaches that have been at the core of his platform.

Quoting piscivorous: "Getting out wisely" can you but some form of definition to this counter to my false choice. I don't really see how this contradicts what I said.

Type faster (smiley face)

Quoting piscivorous: "Getting out wisely" can you but some form of definition to this counter to my false choice. I don't really see how this contradicts what I said.

The wise stratagem will include input from the Generals and the facts on the ground. But the goal is removal of troops, not reassessment of rationale for staying. Bush has nothing to do with it. The exact time frame and means are to be determined.

That I guess depends on the metrics you use to measure and define success. If is a drop on causalities both civilian and military at this point in time I would say yes, if you mean that it has allowed the Sunni's to announce that they are now ready to rejoin the government (reconciliation) I would say yes, if you go by the benchmarks, demanded by our our congress , they had to pass; 15 out of 18 not to bad, if you consider that the Jordan appoints ambassador to Iraq after five-year absence and they are not alone I would say yes, if you measure it by foreign investment capital flowing into Iraq I would say yes. Was the Surge designed to get the country to the point that they can completely defend themselves from internal forces and external powers not really. If you have more than rhetorical talking points to rebut the above easily confirmed facts I would be willing to entertain them.

New keyboard I have getting use to them.

Quoting piscivorous: New keyboard I have getting use to them.

gggggggotchaaaaaa ;^)

Quoting handle: Hey Mickey
You didn't read the rest of RCs post where you are supposed to take them out to lunch and coke and dine them.. what gives?

Now that I read it again, I don't blame you at all...

Quite a letdown for Bob's insignificant base (by number according to rcocean/Mickey) to not entertain our actual complaints against Mickey's sometimes racist utterances and the disingenuous posturing of political preference. Bob has his hands full I guess or maybe he doesn't want to ruffle the feathers of his big ticket draw - Mickey, his admirers and Slate links.

Quoting piscivorous: That I guess depends on the metrics you use to measure and define success. If is a drop on causalities both civilian and military at this point in time I would say yes, if you mean that it has allowed the Sunni's to announce that they are now ready to rejoin the government (reconciliation) I would say yes, if you go by the benchmarks, our congress they had to pass 15 out of 18 not to bad, if you consider that the Jordan appoints ambassador to Iraq after five-year absence and they are not alone I would say yes, if you measure it by foreign investment capital flowing into Iraq I would say yes. Was the Surge designed to get the country to the point that they can completely defend themselves from internal forces and external powers not really. If you have more than rhetorical talking points to rebut the above easily confirmed facts I would be willing to entertain them.

I was being flip, I know, but I was specifically talking about the surge as a way for Bush to bequeath what is being sold by you and others as a situation

Do I think the refugee problem is a good thing no and while I haven't seen current population flow figures for a few months, but the dynamics had began to reverse even a couple of months ago. The figures were moving in a favorable direction, both internally and externally. I also seem to have read some where that we spent a some minor sum of money rebuilding Italy, Germany and Japan even though a day before the war was over they were doing their best to kill Americans. Has some of the money gone unaccounted for you bet, has there been graft and corruption you bet. Not to excuse it but can you name me one major government run program, here in America or for that matter through out the world, where there is no fraud and corruption. What is the estimate for waist, fraud and corruption in the Medicaid program. Should we abandon Medicaid because of this waist, fraud and corruption. Large sums of money draws greed like shit draws flies and it is part of life that needs to be dealt with. I don't think there will be

Quoting graz: Quite a letdown for Bob's insignificant base (by number according to rcocean/Mickey) to not entertain our actual complaints against Mickey's sometimes racist utterances and the disingenuous posturing of political preference. Bob has his hands full I guess or maybe he doesn't want to ruffle the feathers of his big ticket draw - Mickey, his admirers and Slate links.

Almost a metaphor for Obama-Mcgeezer, Obama can afford to move away from his base because the alternative is about as unlefty as one could get.
Although even tongue-in-cheek I figure Bob appreciates your support...

Bob, I think you missed the details of the Clark fiasco. HP info. You'll find he didn't reject him at all. He did say Clark didn't owe McCain an apology.

Quoting piscivorous: Do I think the refugee problem is a good thing no and while I haven't seen current population flow figures for a few months, but the dynamics had began to reverse even a couple of months ago. the figures were moving in a favorable direction, both internally and externally. I also seem to have read some where that we spent a some minor sum of money rebuilding Italy, Germany and Japan even though a day before the war was over they were doing their best to kill Americans. Has some of the money gone unaccounted for you bet, has there been graft and corruption you bet. Not to excuse it but can you name me one major government run program, here in America or for that matter through out the world, where there is no fraud and corruption. What is the estimate for waist, fraud and corruption in the Medicaid program. Should we abandon Medicaid because of this waist, fraud and corruption. Large sums of money draws greed like shit draws flies and it is part of life that needs to be dealt with. I don't think there will be

Quoting sp3akthetruth: Bob, I think you missed the details of the Clark fiasco.

HP info.

You'll find he didn't reject him at all. He did say Clark didn't owe McCain an apology.

Bob seems to be skipping his homework. He's becoming a more palatable Mickey. The results are the same: Reflexively bash Obama - oh, did I mention that AIPAC walk back again - while pretending to support. Why, I wonder?

Quoting graz: Bob seems to be skipping his homework. He's becoming a more palatable Mickey. The results are the same: Reflexively bash Obama - oh, did I mention that AIPAC walk back again - while pretending to support. Why, I wonder?

Give him a break, people, his dog not only lost his snardleys, but has to wear a conehead to boot!! Mapes!

Quoting handle: Give him a break, people, his dog not only lost his snardleys, but has to wear a conehead to boot!! Mapes!

I'll cut some slack (ouch!)... but a trend is in motion.

It seems to me that Bob and Mickey missed the point of the critique of Joe Klein's remarks. "Dual loyalties" as a charge against Jews is not analogous to the divided loyalties of Cuban, Irish or Polish people (three of the examples Bob and Mickey used). The issue of anti-Semitism arises because Jews have historically been charged with conspiratorial disloyalty to various regimes. "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion" is a classic example of the disloyalty charge. The Dreyfus Affair also comes to mind. That being said, Klein is surely correct in noting that among the most hawkish neo-cons there are a number of Zionist Jews who would be right-wing Likudniks if they were Israelis. However, the problem is not that there's a confluence of interests between US Jews in government and the Israelis. The problem is the bond among right-wing hawks. Warlords like Cheney (a Wyoming Christian) and Netanyahu nurture each other to the detriment of those Israelis and Americans of all religions and ethnicities who seek peace and justice. Bob noted this in his attempt to elucidate the genuine interests of Israelis and

I suppose the answer to how long we can afford the financial commitment is a matter of budgeting priorities more than an an actual question of affordability. The actual dollars amount seems gigantic, but if you consider it as a percentage of the totality of the total GDP, over the period of time we have been in Iraq, (less than 1 tenth of 1% if I remember correctly) it in and of itself is not overly burdensome to the economy as a whole. Back in the late 80s my parents 15 year old dodge had to be replaced. I can remember my mother going on forever about how the new car, a Buick Century, cost more than the house the bought in the late 60's. But between their SS, my fathers Army pension and the pension he was drawing from his civilian carrier was such that the actual hit to their finances was a smaller than the one they took some fifteen years earlier when they bought the dodge. I got so tired of hearing the story I walked them through the math and I never heard the story again. I mean 700-800 billion

Quoting piscivorous: I suppose the answer to how long we can afford the financial commitment is a matter of budgeting priorities more than an an actual question of affordability. The actual dollars amount seems gigantic, but if you consider it as a percentage of the totality of the total GDP, over the period of time we have been in Iraq, (less than 1 tenth of 1% if I remember correctly) it in and of itself is not overly burdensome to the economy as a whole. I mean 700-800 billion dollars just doesn't go as far as it used to.

Not the way you guys are burning through it... where's the cheap oil and flowers we were promised? I hate to be light headed about this but I really think we have more important fish to fry... no play on your handle pisc..

Quoting graz: Bob seems to be skipping his homework. He's becoming a more palatable Mickey. The results are the same: Reflexively bash Obama - oh, did I mention that AIPAC walk back again - while pretending to support. Why, I wonder?

See, it reminds me of this article in the LA Times. Too often, Bob and Mickey spend their time bashing Obama instead of spending equal or even sometime bashing McCain. It's a shame liberals eat their own.

Quoting sp3akthetruth: See, it reminds me of this article in the LA Times. Too often, Bob and Mickey spend their time bashing Obama instead of spending equal or even sometime bashing McCain.

It's a shame liberals eat their own.

You are probably aware of this link, but I'll offer it just the same:
http://www.whatliberalmedia.com/

PS Bob I've been there and all will be well again in a very short time.
I mean my dog was there and I felt real bad for him... the other meaning is for a different forum.

Actually I prefer my fish grilled or baked or broiled there are too many calories in frying and while I can appreciate that your priorities, are different than mine, replacing the various forms of dictatorship and domination that passes for governments, in the Middle East, is at the top of mine. Osama bin Laden is merely the most visible manifestation, of the cancer, that is governance throughout most of the Middle East and destroying him will only provide temporary relief if the underlying cancer is not removed. I believe that the Iraqi people are secular enough, that with the proper patience, representative governance is possible there.

Quoting sp3akthetruth:
It's a shame liberals eat their own.

Maybe because they rely heavily on independent and abstract thought. And are of the mind that blind loyalty is counterproductive to true innovation and progress.
But there is power in extreme confidence and the unflinching adherence to ideology as we have witnessed.
But I say let's try to use all of our strengths to move forward. and quit trying to rationalize our missteps.
I get all preachy when I'm tired, WTF? Logging off...

Quoting piscivorous: Actually I prefer my fish grilled or baked or broiled there are too many calories in frying and while I can appreciate that your priorities, are different than mine, replacing the various forms of dictatorship and domination that passes for governments, in the Middle East, is at the top of mine. Osama bin Laden is merely the most visible manifestation, of the cancer, that is governance throughout most of the Middle East and destroying him will only provide temporary relief if the underlying cancer is not removed. I believe that the Iraqi people are secular enough, that with the proper patience, representative governance is possible there.

In the fall of 2001, when the towers fell in Lower Manhattan, Hunter S.Thompson was writing an online sports column for ESPN. Of course he couldn't be expected to stay on topic, and while his column published on Sept. 12 is full of inaccuracies -- he estimated that more than 20,000 people were killed in the attacks -- it has weathered better than most of the mystified, pseudo-patriotic drivel written in the immediate aftermath of the disaster. "The towers are gone now, reduced to bloody rubble, along with all hopes for

Quoting piscivorous: Actually I prefer my fish grilled or baked or broiled there are too many calories in frying and while I can appreciate that your priorities, are different than mine, replacing the various forms of dictatorship and domination that passes for governments, in the Middle East, is at the top of mine. Osama bin Laden is merely the most visible manifestation, of the cancer, that is governance throughout most of the Middle East and destroying him will only provide temporary relief if the underlying cancer is not removed. I believe that the Iraqi people are secular enough, that with the proper patience, representative governance is possible there.

I say the operation, while arguably not without merit, has been too costly and is running a huge risk of only spreading the cancer, while I must admit grilled fish sounds pretty f'n good right now.
Cheers!
Represent with a AK yo... kidding!

Great comments Wonderment.