Russ is a genius!

Progreesive Patriots Fund has a fabulous commercial on the NSA scandal. Watch it! You’ll be glad you did!


The mind boggles. In an article about the latest White House changes, I learned a couple things I didn’t know about Karl Rove:

The administration's highest priority over the next seven months is to ward off what now looks like a Democratic victory in the November elections," said Thomas Mann, a political analyst at Washington's Brookings Institution, adding he did not see the change as a rebuff to Mr Rove. "It's hard to believe his stock has fallen that low with the president. Karl got him re-elected, and Karl was not a champion of war in Iraq."…Mr Rove's departure is not expected to lead to immediate changes in administration policy, but could influence a significant ongoing debate inside the administration. Mr Rove is reported to be an opponent of military action in Iran.

So Karl is a voice of sanity when it comes to these idiotic dreams of world domination? I just keep shaking my head, can’t get my mind around the idea that he could be a positive influence on anything. here’s the full story


Several bloggers are also speculating that the Rove change was actually due to some new developments in the Plame case.

It is reported that the Grand Jury began reviewing the latest Fitzgerald information today. Pursuing the speculation, one might wonder if today's removal of Rove as a policy advisor could possibly be in anticipation of his increasing legal vulnerabilities. Is this the first visible step in a necessary distancing? It may not be long before the reasons become abundantly apparent.

Here

AND

Just as the news broke Wednesday about Scott McClellan resigning as White House press secretary and Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove shedding some of his policy duties, Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald met with the grand jury hearing evidence in the CIA leak case and introduced additional evidence against Rove, attorneys and other US officials close to the investigation said.
The grand jury session in federal court in Washington, DC, sources close to the case said, was the first time this year that Fitzgerald told the jurors that he would soon present them with a list of criminal charges he intends to file against Rove in hopes of having the grand jury return a multi-count indictment against Rove.
In an interview Wednesday, Rove's attorney, Robert Luskin, confirmed that Rove remains a "subject" of Fitzgerald's two-year-old probe.

It’salmost too good to be true!


Oh my. This is just too easy to believe. Just like Chimpy McFlightsuit, some generals seem to have gotten caught up in the make-believe world….

JA Brtitish officer who worked in Baghdad in 2004 said there was a "strong streak of Hollywood" in the US military as officers tried to portray themselves as Sylvester Stallone or John Wayne.
Brigadier Alan Sharp made the comments in an academic report on Britain's influence on US foreign relations.
The 46-year-old, who worked alongside the US military, criticized "shoulder-holster" American generals for trying to emulate film stars.
He said an important part of being a success in the US Army was the ability to combine the "real and acted heroics" of World War II hero Audie Murphy, the "newsreel antics" of General Douglas MacArthur and the "movie performances" of actors.
This may make good television back home, but Brigadier Sharp said "loud voices, full body armour, wrap-around sunglasses, air strikes and daily broadcasts from shoulder-holster wearing brigadier generals proudly announcing how many Iraqis have been killed by US forces today" was no "hearts-and-minds-winning tool".

they call it John Wayne syndrome…


Really fascinating interview with Richard Clarke, here are some gems:

You have the realise that, yes, the United States can bomb things in Iran, but that's the beginning, not the end, of the escalatory cycle. Iran would respond. Iran has asymmetrical means, guerrilla forces, terrorist forces, it controls Hezbollah, the terrorist group in Lebanon and around the world, and the Bader Brigade in Iraq, it controls the El Kud's force, their special forces that have conducted terrorist attacks around the world, and they have a navy that could conduct some operations against oil tankers in the Persian Gulf, all of which would drive the price of oil up. It's now at about US$70 barrel and would probably increase to over US$100 a barrel which would have an enormous negative impact on the American economy and the world economy.

Well, it's feasible to strike hundreds of targets with Stealth bombers and cruise missiles, even though some facilities are underground they could still be struck with earth penetrator war heads. I don't think the military option is infeasible. I just think it is inadvisable because it kicks off an escalatory campaign, a tit-for-tat exchange, where we don't know where it ends. We would pay a high cost because of the Iranian terrorist strikes and military strikes against the oil facilities in the Persian Gulf. The other question is really: have we exhausted all of the alternatives? This administration says it won't even negotiate directly with Iran because to talk to them would be rewarding bad behaviour. The Secretary of State says that she sounds like she's talking about a kindergarten class. Maybe in a kindergarten class you don't reward bad behaviour, but in the real world you negotiate with your enemy. We've always done that. We've negotiated with the Soviet Union. We've negotiated with Communist China. We negotiated with Japan right up until the beginning of World War II. It's absurd to say that we would not negotiate directly with the Iranian Government and would instead jump over that step and go straight to a military option.

Here is the rest of the interview.