Replies

Onyx, thanks for posting this awesome DOSE tonight!!

MUST VIEW . . .

C-Span will re-broadcast today's FAREWELL CEREMONY a few more times tonight (or should I say early morning):
http://inside.c-spanarchives.org:8080/cspan/schedule.csp

MUST READ . . .

IN BAKER'S BLUNDER, A CHANCE FOR BUSH
By Charles Krauthammer

WASHINGTON -- As a result of the Iraq Study Group, President Bush has been given one last chance to alter course on Iraq. This did not, however, come about the way James Baker intended. It came about because the long-anticipated report turned out to be such a widely agreed-upon farce. From its wildly hyped, multiple magazine-cover rollout (Annie Leibovitz in Men's Vogue, no less) to its mishmash of 79 (no less) recommendations, the report has fallen so flat that the field is now clear for the president to recommend to a war-weary country something new and bold.

. . . Now that these 10 establishment sages have labored mightily to produce a mouse, the president has one last chance to come forward with a new strategy.

He must do two things. First, as I've been agitating, establish a new governing coalition in Baghdad that excludes Moqtada al-Sadr, a cancer that undermines the Maliki government's ability to work with us. It is encouraging that the president has already begun such a maneuver by meeting with rival Shiite and Sunni parliamentary leaders. If we help produce a cross-sectarian government that would be an ally rather than a paralyzed semi-adversary of coalition forces, we should then undertake part two: "double down'' our military effort. This means a surge in American troops with a specific mission: to secure Baghdad and (together with the support of the Baghdad government -- a sine qua non) suppress Sadr's Mahdi Army.

It is our last chance for success. Bush can thank the ISG and its instant irrelevance for making it possible.

You can read the entire commentary at
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2006/12/last_chance_for_success.html

A POSTER AFTER MY OWN HEART (FROM BLOGSFORBUSH.COM):

"The same would happen under Bush with SS, and that's why popular sentiment turned against him on this issue in 2005." Blah...blah...blah...puke.

I'm with keefer! This absurdity of always blaming Bush is getting on my nerves.

The libs often decry that GH Bush won an incredible military victory during the first gulf war, but they forget that we did not go all the way to Baghdad either. So, forget about the past, forget about pulling out, screw the polls because as expected, GW will do what his advisors and his heart tell him to do and I hope to God that we send more troops in kick some more terrorist ass. As the troops and our military want, not what the American public wants.

Take that JAT and put it where the polls don't shine.
The problem with you libs is your weakness when it comes to fighting and when you win an election, you automatically think it's a mandate of some sort. Whooppppiii!

Thus far, I have not seen a poll that insists that the American voter has given that mandate, so, take a deep breath and remember this, GW HAS JUEVOS THE SIZE OF BASKETBALLS AND HE ISN'T AFRAID TO SAY "NO" TO THOSE THAT CHALLENGE HIM. EVEN JIMMY BAKER.

Posted by: navydad at December 15, 2006 07:49 PM

http://www.blogsforbush.com/mt/archives/2006/12/americans_are_s.html#comments

THE BEST OF THE WEB
BY JAMES TARANTO
Friday, December 15, 2006 1:00 p.m. EST

RESPONDING TO RANGEL--VIII

We'll be back from vacation Monday. In the meantime, here's another set of letters from servicemen responding to Charles Rangel's disparaging comments.

You can read the posts from members of our military at
http://opinionjournal.com/best/?id=110009384