The Times offers a real head-scratcher:
Support for Initial Invasion Has Risen, Poll Shows
Americans’ support for the initial invasion of Iraq has risen somewhat as the White House has continued to ask the public to reserve judgment about the war until at least the fall. In a New York Times/CBS News poll conducted over the weekend, 42 percent of Americans said that looking back, taking military action in Iraq was the right thing to do, while 51 percent said the United States should have stayed out of Iraq.
But two-thirds of those polled said the United States should reduce its forces in Iraq, or remove them altogether. Support for the invasion had been at an all-time low in May, when only 35 percent of Americans said the invasion of Iraq was the right thing and 61 percent said the United States should have stayed out. The latest poll made clear that a two-thirds majority of Americans continue to say the war is going badly.
However, the number of people who say the war is going “very badly” has fallen from 45 percent earlier in July to a current reading of 35 percent, and of those who say it is going well, 29 percent now describe it as “somewhat well” compared with 23 percent just last week.
The story provides this link to the poll itself.
I am baffled - does the Bush Administration actually have enough credibility to move public opinion? I'll be back with more, but dream with me for a moment - it is the summer of 2008, support for the initial invasion has risen back above 50% and Dem nominee Hillary Clinton is boasting to a roaring convention that she never apologized for her war vote and never wavered in her belief that we could achieve a stable and democratic Iraq.
Well. Here is the bookend Times story on the latest classified plans:
U.S. Is Seen in Iraq Until at Least ’09
BAGHDAD, July 23 — While Washington is mired in political debate over the future of Iraq, the American command here has prepared a detailed plan that foresees a significant American role for the next two years.
The classified plan, which represents the coordinated strategy of the top American commander and the American ambassador, calls for restoring security in local areas, including Baghdad, by the summer of 2008. “Sustainable security” is to be established on a nationwide basis by the summer of 2009, according to American officials familiar with the document.
The detailed document, known as the Joint Campaign Plan, is an elaboration of the new strategy President Bush signaled in January when he decided to send five additional American combat brigades and other units to Iraq. That signaled a shift from the previous strategy, which emphasized transferring to Iraqis the responsibility for safeguarding their security.
That new approach put a premium on protecting the Iraqi population in Baghdad, on the theory that improved security would provide Iraqi political leaders with the breathing space they needed to try political reconciliation.
The latest plan, which covers a two-year period, does not explicitly address troop levels or withdrawal schedules. It anticipates a decline in American forces as the “surge” in troops runs its course later this year or in early 2008. But it nonetheless assumes continued American involvement to train soldiers, act as partners with Iraqi forces and fight terrorist groups in Iraq, American officials said.
Although these plans are supposed to be classified I infer from the "added emphasis" bit that this is an Administration leak; presumably it it part of their eerily effective effort to rally public support.
MORE TO FOLLOW...
MORE: AllahPundit at Hot Air opines on the political motivation behind this leak:
...Petraeus and his team can’t seriously believe they’ll have a chance to put [this plan]t into action with Republicans already itching for September to roll around so they can abandon ship. Mitch McConnell has all but promised to push Baker-Hamilton when it does, and once he heads for the lifeboats he’ll take plenty of others with him. So either they’re leaking this now for political leverage, to make it harder for Congress to withdraw as many troops as it would like after Petraeus’s progress report (”but there’s already a plan in place!”) or it’s an insurance policy to which Bush can point after they pull the plug to claim that Congress abandoned the mission before the new strategy had a chance to work (”but there was a plan in place!”).
Well, OK.
nearly always have to enter two captcha codes though.
Posted by: PeterUK | July 25, 2007 at 12:07 PM
********************
because you're a foreigner. :D
Posted by: SunnyDay | July 25, 2007 at 03:10 PM
Harrumph!
Posted by: PeterUK | July 25, 2007 at 03:15 PM
Sue, what do you suppose MW would consider the ideal courtroom for this case? Somewhere in SF I suppose, with some judge appointed by Carter.
Posted by: clarice | July 25, 2007 at 03:17 PM
Is one of the two captchas ever "ferner" ?
Posted by: cathyf | July 25, 2007 at 03:21 PM
Sue, what do you suppose MW would consider the ideal courtroom for this case?
She liked the Walton court.
Posted by: Sue | July 25, 2007 at 03:23 PM
Get your carbon credits by racking up your personal debt!
Hey, where's the SCAM card?
I am very deliberately chopping this quote, for
funthe sake of accuracy...Posted by: hit and run | July 25, 2007 at 03:25 PM
If I file bankruptcy, will my carbon offsets be taken away?
Posted by: Sue | July 25, 2007 at 03:27 PM
I think the card should automatically calculate the carbon footprint of one's purchase to determine the amount of offsets needed.
If you purchase a book, maybe a buck.
If you purcase an Al Gore book, $459
Etc
Posted by: hit and run | July 25, 2007 at 03:33 PM
Clarice - re Specter's ruse - I believe it is illegal to work with the WH.
Posted by: SunnyDay | July 25, 2007 at 03:46 PM
From the article Clarice linked:
Didn't the Supreme Court conclude that Cheney did not have to make those records public? Did they reach this decision while simultaneously rejecting Judge Bates' "'expansive interpretation' of executive privilege"?
Posted by: Elliott | July 25, 2007 at 03:47 PM
"“Al Gore’s lovely daughter Sarah got married over the weekend,” and “critics are now bashing Al Gore for serving Chilean sea bass at his daughter’s wedding because it’s an endangered species. But in his defense,” whenever “Al Gore picks up a knife and fork, any species is endangered.” Jay Leno.
Posted by: PeterUK | July 25, 2007 at 03:52 PM
Yes. In the last few weeks those records were made public and guess what? Well....there's a reason almost nobody knows the information is now out. Seems as though it's true that Cheney wasn't hiding anything, he just thought it was none of Congress's damn business.
It's funny, though, how they pretended they wanted to know for the oversight, not for any potential "gotcha". Congress has an "expansive interpretation" of oversight.
Posted by: MayBee | July 25, 2007 at 03:53 PM
Obama did say in the debate that Cheney had met with representatives of oil and gas companies 40 times while formulating energy policy. Did Obama get that from what was released recently or was that information publicly available previously?
Posted by: Elliott | July 25, 2007 at 04:03 PM
I'm guessing he got it from the recently released information, though that is truly a guess.
Posted by: MayBee | July 25, 2007 at 04:10 PM
Democratic Presidential Candidates Stand Up Moderate Leadership Conference
....Not a single one of the eight presidential candidates plans to attend the Democratic Leadership Council's summer meeting,
**********************************
The Dems ignore moderates?
Boy how many times have I said something to that effect.. My last post at 10:58am reflected the delusion of the dems nominating Hillary Clinton...
My Party has gone to the moonbats, freaks, idiots, cowards and haters of america and what it stands for...the moderate democrat is extinct.. the party of JFK no longer exists.( ask not what your country can do for you.. now is 'ask what the gov't can do for you..' )
we got defined by the moonbats..and it's our fault..we stood by quietly living the good life and let activists invade and take over.
maybe we became independents, or Neocons ( whatever the hell that is ) or maybe just ran out of good ideas and morales..but the moderate democrat is dead.. Instead of reinventing our party, looking to the past also for what made us great..
our looney base cry bush lied, we hate bush, you took away all our rights, the WOT is a bumpersticker, 9-11 was planned by america.
blah, blah, blah,,, I mean it's a joke..
I'm an adult and my party is run by children..No way i am voting for Hillary..
I'm with you guys..maybe one more crushing defeat will shake the freaks out the trees and show the dems...The middle of the road, moderate, adult voters..well..'we in charge'
to quote from hussle&flow movie..
yup..you talk that trash..but we in charge...
have a nice day JOMers.
Posted by: HoosierHoops | July 25, 2007 at 04:14 PM
Quick note to thank Clarice for the insight regarding Specter's motives.
Regarding TNR/Foer, I think the guy writing at Amazon (with the semiotic theory) has it quite right, that Foer has climbed up a tree and is about to fall out of it! Equally revealing, is this guy is also a self-proclaimed lefty. Doesn't look like anyone - even on the left - wants to join Foer out on the limb he's dangling from.
Posted by: centralcal | July 25, 2007 at 04:16 PM
Garth [10:51pm]
So the thousands of volunteers from Pakistan, KSA, Egypt, et al don't make up an army, more like a "loose affilation of groups" that rally to jihad.
1. If they love it so much why are so many dieing.
2. Isn't training conducted with concern for saftey and instructional elements: hard to re-train some 1st run bomb makers when an AC-130 rains fire on them.
al Qeada was able to operational plot the 9/11 attacks in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Malaysia, Dubai, Spain, Germany [among other places] begining a few days after Operation Desert Fox ended [if the 9/11 Commission Report is to be believed]. They were able to insert 19 operatives, some as long as 19 months [the pilot cadre], and along the way, they drew enough attention to themselves that they were not unknown elements. They were highly discliplined and controlled and have not been able to put anything comparable into affect since.
It is a ridiculous assertion that al-Qeada has anywhere near the operational capability they had prior to (or even just after) 9/11 [HAMAS is better off, Hezbollah is probably unchanged but more willing to strike within the US].
And they were able to solicit funds and recruit well prior to this. The Northern Virginia Hamas/al-Qeada fund raising ring is just one data point. This problem goes back to the early 1980's when Abdullah Azzam was making recuiting and fund-raising trips for the Afghan jihad to Tuscon AZ, Oklahoma City OK, and Kansas City KA. Your revolting nazist critique notwithstanding, if it weren't US soliders taking the brunt in Iraq it would be US foreign service officers in US Embassies and consulates in the greater ME and Europe that would be taking the brunt. Under what logic was the Islamic jihad not using the US as a recruiting and fundraising ground before March 19th 2003, but then, when the bombs were loosed, the "Arab Street" raised up to send their sons to jihad and humiliate the Great Satan.
Americans are going to die overseas in attaks large and small. This time, instead of them being foreign service officers, humanitarians and civilians on vacation, al-Qeada [and various offshoots, it is so hard to keep up], are finding that the US military isn't such a paper tiger that al-Qeada dreamt it was and the left had presented it as.
Posted by: RichatUF | July 25, 2007 at 04:17 PM
If you had to pick September or October, 2004, for the Dan Rather telecast that cost him his career; did you see polls indicating that C-BS came up with a BUST?
Because that telecast could have been the impedus that gave Bush 4,000,000 MORE votes in 2004, over John Kerry. (No polls indicated that this would happen!)
As a matter of fact, John Kerry was sure that the Bush election was something he could steal. So, intead of conceding, Kerry went to sleep that night. And, let the President "wait."
Wait for what?
It seems the press is not moving news, anymore. They're moving propaganda. Are they successful?
It seems that the stuff that was used against Nixon, and worked against Nixon! Did not reappear, here.
All I know is that Armitage was FOWLED mouthed with Bob Woodward. And, Bob Woodward was NIXONIAN, in the way his office is triggered for taping. Again, not things you'd guess at.
A long and costly war.
Right now, I'm listening to "LAND OF LINCOLN" by Andrew Ferguson. On tape. He starts out with a mention that Lincoln went to Richmond, prior to Lee's surrender. And, the south fights on! To this day! Lincoln's no hero in some minds.
Which is the way it should be in a free country. Lots of freedoms to choose what you want to believe.
Wouldn't be the first time in our history, either, that journalists make things up.
But at some point it's reached diminishing returns.
In other words? The very first time you hear a penny stock salesman, you could end up spending your money unwisely.
People learn from experience.
And, so far, when it comes to what's going on in Irak, the Bonkeys and the media are all off fighting us, here; because they want to regain their powers. (At least Truman and LBJ had the common sense to go home, when they saw they'd be on the losing ends of fighting with Americans over the choices they preferred to make.)
If you haven't been to IRAQ THE MODEL, you should go there! Omar had one of those experiences with Jordan that's truly eye-opening. And, it's straight from the hourse's mouth, reporting.
Posted by: Carol Herman | July 25, 2007 at 04:57 PM
The U.S. embassy in Baghdad, they said, would have to close — "as in Saigon. With helicopters on the roof" said Samarai — until Washington recognized a new, resistance-led Iraqi governing council, and offered compensation to all individuals and organizations affected by the war. Under the new leadership, all Iraqi citizens who worked for or cooperated with the current, coalition-backed government would be arrested. A "reconciliation council", drawn in large part from the ranks of the armed insurgency, would then draw up plans for a permanent "technocratic" government which would immediately seek criminal charges and file civil suits against the U.S. government and major American war supporters in international court.
lefty wetdream...surrender, war crimes, reparations...yummy!
I remember the luxury tax on yachts. At the time, it seemed like a precisely targeted excise tax. I also recall that the value of existing yachts rose, thus increasing the wealth of yacht owners, while sales of new yachts fell, thus leading to a loss of jobs by the workers who built or repaired yachts.
not only that, but US tax revenue on luxury yachts sales plummetted as luxury yacht and sportfisher sales transactions were simply moved 25 miles offshore and boat registered and taxed under friendlier laws.
Looks like we're boogeying down in Waziristan. The Indian press reports we've pinpointed the AQ training camps to 9 locations there and there have been helicopter attacks on all 9 spots today.
excellent
Posted by: windansea | July 25, 2007 at 05:00 PM
richard:"if it weren't US soliders taking the brunt in Iraq it would be US foreign service officers in US Embassies and consulates in the greater ME and Europe that would be taking the brunt. "
Don't tempt me into reconsidering my pro-war position with arguments like that.
centrcal, I think the noose is tightening around Foer's neck.
I think the military has put out a damned good response. Better, I think it obvious that TNR would never publish something they got from official sources w/o vetting it much better than they did this piece. Wussies with pcs and an editor's cap who haven't a clue should be more careful.
Posted by: clarice | July 25, 2007 at 05:03 PM
oh oh..looks like Fred! is imploding
Posted by: windansea | July 25, 2007 at 06:29 PM
Scott Thomas is, in my humble opinion, another Jamil/Jamal of the Reuters doctored fauxtography scam. The ignorance of the left about military regs and social policy is mindboggling. Aside from the out and out errors contained in his 3 reports, the idea that anyone could get away with such insensitive and rude remarks within earshot of others and not get called out is just crazy talk by someone who has never spent a day in service.
Posted by: Sara | July 25, 2007 at 06:42 PM
of course that's NBC reporting maybe 5% true
I think Rudy has the best chance of course I'm a RINO chimpconian, he'll probably get beat unless Petraeus outsmarts the Senate goon squad.
as an optimist, I'm betting on Petraeus but my money is on teh dumb, we need another wakeup call before this tribal nonsense is trumped by reality.
Posted by: windansea | July 25, 2007 at 06:45 PM
Gosh! In just one week Jeri Thompson has gone from trophy wife to dragon lady!
Posted by: clarice | July 25, 2007 at 06:55 PM
More on Franklin F***er.
Posted by: PeterUK | July 25, 2007 at 06:58 PM
clarice-
Don't tempt me into reconsidering my pro-war position with arguments like that.
I'm sure Garth was pleased with the Fitzocution of some of East African Embassy bombing cell. Yea they got some people with perjury and obstruction of justice, but they had the cell in 1997, and when "they got their man", they packed up and left so the other plotters could continue their work. The law enforcement paradigm indeed.
Posted by: RichatUF | July 25, 2007 at 07:00 PM
Gosh! In just one week Jeri Thompson has gone from trophy wife to dragon lady!
libs are all about the principle of the thing
Posted by: windansea | July 25, 2007 at 07:20 PM
For those who thought the NYT poll was an outlier: The Times re-did the poll, and got the same results. And it is consistent with a Newsweek poll done about the same time. (Tarnato's Best of the Web has links.)
Posted by: Jim Miller | July 25, 2007 at 08:43 PM
You really have to give the Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia paper credit for fact checking.LOL
Posted by: clarice | July 25, 2007 at 08:47 PM
You've gotta love what is happening in NY to Elliott Spitzer. Well actually nothing is happening to him yet, and the NY Times is coddling him, of course. But sheesh he put people in jail repeatedly for lesser crimes.
Posted by: Jane | July 25, 2007 at 08:50 PM
Which is more dangerous to Americans, serving in Iraq or Afghanistan or driving on American highways with drunk drivers at the wheel?
2006 - 17,941 people were killed in alcohol-related crashes.
2005 - There were 16,885 alcohol-related fatalities.
2004 - There were 16,694 alcohol-related fatalities
2003 - 17,013 fatalities
This is not all deaths in vehicle crashes, just the ones alcohol-related.
Posted by: Sara | July 25, 2007 at 08:55 PM
The Iraq Soccer team beat South Korea in the Semi-Finals and will play Saudi Arabia on Sunday in the finals for the Asian Cup. Sports is one of the best ways there is to bring a country together, in my opinion. It is unfortunate that the terrorists decided to set off a car bomb in the middle of a huge celebration after the big win and 50 celebrants were killed. But even with that, it is a big day for Iraq and their team.
Posted by: Sara | July 25, 2007 at 08:59 PM
Jane, the NYT is going easy on him, but the State legislature (both parties) isn't. Live by the sword, die by the sword. And it couldn't have happened to a more deserving guy.
Posted by: clarice | July 25, 2007 at 09:04 PM
For the Thompson lovers, what say you?
Via The Astute Bloggers:
Posted by: Sara | July 25, 2007 at 09:06 PM
Any indication Fred's thinking of naming Spence SecState?
Posted by: clarice | July 25, 2007 at 09:54 PM
Well, Sara - this news about Abraham, coming as it does from Debbie, is a real downer. I was already feeling kinda iffy about the announcement of Abraham replacing Collamore. I just don't know what to say.
I really do like Mitt Romney, but, I think Giuliani has the best chance against Hillary (and, yes, it probably will be Hillary). Dang it! Dang it! Dang it!
Posted by: centralcal | July 25, 2007 at 09:54 PM
He's making him campaign manager not his foreign policy advisor for God's sake..Get a grip.
Posted by: clarice | July 25, 2007 at 10:04 PM
I see Mitt as the only true conservative in the race right now. When Thompson enters he'll take quite a chunk of Mitts votes away from him I think
OT...Do you think Wilson and Kansteiner ever talk about Sudan's oil?
Posted by: Rocco | July 25, 2007 at 10:19 PM
I like Fred T., but I don't like the games I think he is playing right now. And I never liked Spencer A. If Fred does finally get in, it won't make much difference to me, since I am 100% behind Romney. Hillary will probably get her party's nomination, but I do not believe she can win in the General with her negatives so high. Last time I looked, 51% said they would never vote for her under any circumstances. As long as it isn't Ron Paul, I know I'd vote for any Republican candidate over Hillary or Obama.
Posted by: Sara | July 25, 2007 at 10:28 PM
Thanks, Clarice, I needed that "thwack!"
Posted by: centralcal | July 25, 2007 at 10:33 PM
US Secretary of Energy (2001-05)
U.S. Senator, Michigan (1995-2001)
Miller, Canfield, Paddock, and Stone Counsel (1992-94)
Republican National Committee Co-Chairman (1990-92)
US Official Deputy Chief of Staff to Vice President Dan Quayle (1990)
Member of the Board of Occidental Petroleum
American Legislative Exchange Council
Federalist Society
Libby Legal Defense Trust Advisory Committee
William S. Lee Award 2003
Lebanese Ancestry
Posted by: clarice | July 25, 2007 at 10:35 PM
"Republican National Committee Co-Chairman (1990-92)"
That's the only one that counts wrt campaign management - but he got beat. There will be more changes later - Abrams will do for the moment.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | July 25, 2007 at 10:50 PM
BTW, I have absolutely nothing against Fred, Rudy, Duncan Hunter or any of the other Rep. candidates, except for crazy Ron Paul. I have chosen to support Mitt Romney because I think he is the most qualified with his successful business background and his years as a Governor. Plus after years of living in the heart of Calif. Mormon country, I have developed a very high regard for them. I especially admire the way they teach their members/children how to be good citizens, good parents, and the heavy emphasis on getting a well-rounded education along with learning outdoor skills, scouting, and sports. I will be forever grateful to our neighbor who was an LDS Stake President and stepped in to act as a surrogate Dad for my son during all the years his own Dad was on military deployment. He was an excellent male role model and made it possible for my son to have someone to share in father/son campouts and even the awards dinner for his h.s. football team.
Posted by: Sara | July 25, 2007 at 10:51 PM
Tony Snow layed it out forcefully today at a Press Briefing regarding the contempt citations issued today by the House Judiciary Comm. :
Posted by: Sara | July 25, 2007 at 11:05 PM
Ap's latest on Gonzales is nonsense.
Back again to diva Comey and his fevered tale of the hospital visit.
http://powerlineblog.com/archives/018342.php
Posted by: clarice | July 26, 2007 at 12:01 AM
I don't have anything against Fred, but I think people are trying to make him something he is not. In fact I think he is trying to make himself something he is not.
However, it sure did not take Debbie S long to stab him in the back. I guess this means Malkin and the rest of the pundit brigade will have to get out the long knives.
At least now we know it is not just Bush and McCain and they like to eviscerate.
Too bad they don't put as much time and energy into going after Democrats as they do wayward Republicans who fail to do their bidding.
I wonder if Rudy will survive them? My guess we will be hearing how he betrayed the real conservatives, the true blue conservatives by not railing against illegal immigration with sufficient rage or by not calling for the death penalty for abortion providers.
Meanwhile the Democrats will inch closer and closer to 08.
Posted by: TerryeL | July 26, 2007 at 12:25 AM
As anyone talked to Aschcroft himself about the meeting? And what difference does it really make anyway?
Posted by: TerryeL | July 26, 2007 at 12:28 AM
With respect to Thompson (Fred Dalton), who he hired or fired in July will be of little concern in three months. He will sink or swim based on whether he, with the help of his campaign team, can convince enough voters that he is the best choice.
After all, Barack Obama's superb start likely caused Hillary Clinton to enter the Presidential race earlier than she would have otherwise. Right now, that fact is cold comfort for the Senator from Illinois and his advisers.
Also, if we are looking for a close historical precedent, John Kerry fired his campaign manager yet achieved total victory in the Democratic primaries.
Posted by: Elliott | July 26, 2007 at 01:14 AM
If I were a raving conspiracy nutzoid, I would want to know what under the table services the fired U.S. attorneys were performing for the dems since they are betting the farm to scandalize the dismissals, even to the point of a Consitutional crisis. U.S. Attorneys are political appointees who serve at the pleasure of the President, so how do these lefties of the House Judiciary Cmte. think they can win this argument of the contempt citations? Even if they didn't serve at the pleasure of the Prez meaning he can fire any whenever he darn well feels like it, how does one think they can compel testimony from the Prez's own lawyer? Executive privlege? What about attorney-client privlege? I thought that was sacrosanct.
Posted by: Sara | July 26, 2007 at 01:38 AM
OT--for this thread but and interesting read from Hugh Hewitt.
Posted by: glasater | July 26, 2007 at 04:58 AM
Something tells me that if a group of TNR reporters and editors went to lunch in DC and someone with AIDS sat at the table behind them and one of the TNR folks started making fun and jokes about the person with AIDS, the staff wouldn't feel the need to keep that persons identity secret. Why is the disfigured women treated differently by TNR? Would TNR still keep his identitty secret if he had admitting to following her back to her barracks and raping her? Just how far does TNR let their writers go with abusing people to make good war stories? Sexual harrassment, public embarrasment, disgusting jokes addreessed to the women is OK by TNR, but rape wouldn't be OK? Or would it?
Posted by: Poppy | July 26, 2007 at 06:16 AM
Sara:
Who knows? I stopped reading a lot of sites on the right because a number of posters {both bloggers and commenters} seemed to believe that people like Bush and McCain and Kyl were part of a conspiracy to give the American southwest back to Mexico, the paranoia was just bizarre.
Meanwhile we hear the Truthers raving about the government attacking the WTC.
And the Ron Paul people have to be removed from some Thompson event....so why do the Democrats need a rational reason?
This is politics, maybe they are just making life difficult for Bush in spite of the fact that we are in a war {or because of it}. After all who really cares about that war, on the left or the right?
It seems to me that most people have their own agendas and the war and the president's ability to wage it run a slow second to whatever side show they are pursuing at the time.
Posted by: TerryeL | July 26, 2007 at 06:44 AM
Mr. Right was telling me this morning that the NY Times has an article saying that Congress can change the numbers of Judges on the SJC, and that if a democrat administration comes in an attempt will be made to "unstack" the Court. It says it can be done by a simple majority.
It sounds like this is the NY Times idea, but I didn't read the article.
Is there any way these people won't cheat?
Posted by: Jane | July 26, 2007 at 07:31 AM
I personally like the "games" Fred is playing.
Starting campaigns nearly two years before an election?
The only people that benefit are the paid campaign staffers and consultants.
We the people suffer for it.
To quote a famous prosecutor, "Madness!"
Hold out Fred!
Posted by: hit and run | July 26, 2007 at 08:45 AM
So, Geraghty says this:
Really?
Why would expectations keep rising as he's taking lumps?
The lumps, in my thinking, which is admittedly bit fuzzy after a neighbors birthday party last night, would by their nature serve to deflate expectations, no?
I have nowhere near the experience of Mr. Campaign Spot when it comes to campaign spotting, so perhaps I am naive to think that voters are not so naive as to think that Thompson is flawless and infallible in the face of evidence that he is flawed and fallible.
Posted by: hit and run | July 26, 2007 at 09:07 AM
Jane,
The threat of "stacking" the court is how we get FDR's social programs. The original SC found, 5 to 4, that FDR's programs were unconstitutional. FDR threatened, and with a democratic majority the threat wasn't an empty threat, to raise the number of justices. Suddenly, the decision was rethought and it was 4 to 5. FDR won.
Posted by: Sue | July 26, 2007 at 09:18 AM
"Scott Thomas" has revealed himself
Posted by: hit and run | July 26, 2007 at 09:26 AM
Ho, ho, Social Security unconstitutional. But why does Chemerinsky think Val was covert, and why do they all think Armitage leaked her name first when he was quoted as saying her husband was leaking her name all over town?
===========================
Posted by: kim | July 26, 2007 at 09:27 AM
Do you suppose he meant discrete instead of discreet?
==================================
Posted by: kim | July 26, 2007 at 09:30 AM
My, my, my. Looks to me like Private Scott is facing some serious court martial action for dereliction of duty if he didn't report these things up the chain of command.
Posted by: cathyf | July 26, 2007 at 09:39 AM
my character, my experiences, and those of my comrades in arms have been called into question
So, vile sexist piggish and nasty ... yes ...
... but ... make sh!t up ... HOW DARE YOU IMPUGN MY CHARACTER !!!
Posted by: boris | July 26, 2007 at 09:43 AM
Another Fred related note, though I would file this under "jumping the gun" and on thin evidence. But it's the dog days and campaign spotters are looking for anything they can use to file a story...
Would be big, of course. And would provide an interesting contrast to the worries over Spencer Abraham joining Team Fred.
But there's not much there there here.
Posted by: hit and run | July 26, 2007 at 09:49 AM
If you wish to follow Pvt BS Beauchamp's fifteen minutes, here's a good compendium of links.
The fellow at Amazon pegged him to a T. I hope that his "comrades in arms" give him everything which he has earned.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | July 26, 2007 at 10:07 AM
Can't pass this up...
Posted by: hit and run | July 26, 2007 at 10:15 AM
"The biggest problem is my butt hurts. Is that normal?"
Not. Going. To. Do. It. I. Must. Practice. Self. Constraint.
Posted by: Sue | July 26, 2007 at 10:20 AM
Beyond parody ...
Another creepy little John Kerry.
Posted by: boris | July 26, 2007 at 10:21 AM
Read thru the comments at Hot Air by folks poring thru his blogsite and comparing posts there with his TNR works. So far, it seems he was producing on the spot war reports BEFORE he was ever deployed to Iraq.
Posted by: clarice | July 26, 2007 at 10:23 AM
FDR threatened, and with a democratic majority the threat wasn't an empty threat, to raise the number of justices. Suddenly, the decision was rethought and it was 4 to 5. FDR won.
Sue,
That's really interesting. I didn't know that.
Posted by: Jane | July 26, 2007 at 10:40 AM
It's been maddening, to say the least, to see the plausibility of events that I witnessed questioned by people who have never served in Iraq
From Mr Beauchamp, typical lefty playbook.
The fact is Mr Beauchamp it is the soldiers who have served or are currently in Iraq which have cast the most doubt on your fictions.
Posted by: royf | July 26, 2007 at 10:40 AM
It would be a good question to ask Dem candidates--do you approve of the NYT's latest court packing plan?
Posted by: clarice | July 26, 2007 at 10:41 AM
Allow me Sue...
"The biggest problem is my butt hurts. Is that normal?"
-John Edwards
Not half as bad as it's going to hurt on Super Tuesday....
Posted by: HoosierHoops | July 26, 2007 at 10:45 AM
In other news...
Posted by: hit and run | July 26, 2007 at 10:51 AM
Man I hate that "we all need to heal" crap--
Posted by: clarice | July 26, 2007 at 10:58 AM
"we all need to heal"
I think Nifong will have to do some jail time before I get any real sense of closure.
Posted by: MikeS | July 26, 2007 at 11:09 AM
Deconstructing Scott Thomas:
[quote]And a reader e-mails this info:
I’m active Army & an Iraq vet.
I just pulled up “Scott Thomas Beauchamp” on the secure “Army Knowledge Online” website. It lists his current rank as “PV2″. (That data is kept accurate via pay records on that website.)
In his Sep 06 blog post he listed his rank as “Private First Class”. That indicates that without a doubt he was busted at least one rank as part of Article 15 proceedings under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, and he likely has a strong ax to grind with his chain of command.[/quote]
More--http://michellemalkin.com/2007/07/26/scott-thomas-steps-out-of-the-shadows/>Story crumbling
Posted by: clarice | July 26, 2007 at 11:09 AM
I want "heal" and "closure" drummed out of the English language except with respect to surgical procedures.
Using this kind of psychobabble only obscures and minimizes the pain people cause others.
It's nonsensical. A kid is brutally murdered, the body is found and Greta's already blabbing about how now the family has "closure" and can "heal". For their own mental health one prays that those who were victimized by evil can find a way to still find some joy and meaning in their lives. But "closure"?"healing"? C'mon. Some wounds are so grievous they never heal or close--we just find ways to live in spite of them and the rush to declare Healing and Closure is just a way to get the perps off the hook.
Posted by: clarice | July 26, 2007 at 11:14 AM
Hah - Scott Thomas. I was following the story over at CY. I found this story about German soldiers desecrating a "skull"...and lo and behold, it looks like the dumbass was stationed in Germany at the same time the "skull" incident was making the rounds in the German news.
It is so obvious he took that story and changed it into a hit piece against American soldiers. My guess is his "war stories" can all be traced back to newsworthy events - and he just used a little literary "flair" or "Blair" if-you-will....and voila' - the new darling of the left.
I am waiting for his "comrades" to start coming forward and just trashing this shithead.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/0,1518,445133,00.html
Posted by: Enlightened | July 26, 2007 at 12:07 PM
Ugh - that kind of self-absorbed mental masturbation is what people write in adolescence, when they can't quite figure out who they are.
I actually can't stand to read it.
Posted by: SunnyDay | July 26, 2007 at 12:19 PM
Posted by: cathyf | July 26, 2007 at 12:23 PM
I for one will be celebrating when the Senate goes on vacation in August!
There will be no time for "healing" however, because according to Newsbusters.org "Hollywood to Launch Raft of Anti-Military Movies".
Also, Sony Pictures is developing a film based on the story of Richard A. Clarke, former national security official.
SPARE ME !!!!!!!!
I NEED CLOSURE, CLOSURE, CLOSURE.
Posted by: Ann | July 26, 2007 at 01:29 PM
Sue: Was that you over at HotAir on the Scott Thomas/Germany skull link?
I'm too lazy to sign up for HA, but can you add this:
Some of the posters seem to think that since STB last entry on his blog was September 2006, he might have missed the skull story in the German news.
The actual "skull" incident occurred in 2003 - I'm wondering if he learned about it through military channels while in Germany?
It just seems too coincidental for me that he writes an almost identical story to that German incident.
Unless of course, US soldiers mimicked the Germans when they stumbled across the "mass grave" that STB refers to in Iraq.
Posted by: Enlightened | July 26, 2007 at 01:37 PM
I want to know how Scott Thomas Beauchamp made connections with TNR.
The more that is revealed about Scotty-boy the worse it looks for the "editors" of TNR.
Posted by: centralcal | July 26, 2007 at 01:39 PM
Enlightened,
Yes. I've tried to give you the credit where I've left it, or at least not taken credit myself. Hope you don't mind.
I'll post your comment there for you.
Posted by: Sue | July 26, 2007 at 02:05 PM
"Every morning I get up and I’m a little more liberal than the day before
Every morning I get up and try to recite a fact from something I read last night.
Every morning I get up and wish I was as
free as the people that I’m “fighting for”
Every morning I get up and think I’m a tool.
Every morning I get up and miss my mother
Every morning I get up and shave my legs.
Every morning I get up and realize how much I love my comrades.
Posted by: PeterUK | July 26, 2007 at 02:21 PM
Sue - No prob.
Interesting - Ace is onto something about this Thomas guy and his relationship with TNR. Plame-like link he thinks.
TNR is apparently furiously sanitizing their site? Hmmmm.
Now, I wonder why Foer was so damn sure Thomas was a real soldier. Maybe because TNR arranged the enlistment? Curiouser and Curiouser.
Posted by: Enlightened | July 26, 2007 at 02:21 PM
PUK!!! Stop it you ferner!!
Posted by: SunnyDay | July 26, 2007 at 02:28 PM
Now Mr Uk - are you really intimating that BS Beauchamp is shooting for the glistening hairless chic achieved by Foer in order to curry favor? Haven't they done enough for each other already?
Artless connivers fit to share space only with Galloway. Toads of a feather...
Posted by: Rick Ballard | July 26, 2007 at 02:31 PM
Rove to be called to testify about firings of justices via subpoena...
Posted by: maryerose | July 26, 2007 at 02:32 PM
Hilarious unraveling of the "Shock Troops" story. Neglecting TNR's obvious attempt to shift the burden of proof (to a negative, of course), Uncle Jimbo has an excellent point of how much credit Beauchamp can claim for coming clean:
And, as Small Wars Journal points out, the unit was already hot on his trail. Per the PAO, they'd talked to Johannes, and: The long and short of it is that they'd already tracked "Scott Thomas" down to his unit, and his "pseudonym" was his first two names. Might as well 'fess up at that point. The veracity of this tale ought to be established in very short order, and it ain't lookin' too good for TNR.Posted by: Cecil Turner | July 26, 2007 at 02:37 PM
From Ace's...
Elspeth Reeve and Scott Beauchamp wedding registry
Elspeth Reeve a TNR staffer.
Posted by: hit and run | July 26, 2007 at 02:40 PM
Ain't that sweet?
P.S. Betcha I can guess what Pvt Beauchamp is seeing right about now . . . most likely it's the one on the right.
Posted by: Cecil Turner | July 26, 2007 at 02:49 PM
Elspeth Reeve and Beauchamp both attended the same college. She's 2nd thumbnail on the left.
Foer has ALOT of 'splainin to do.
http://journalism.missouri.edu/news/2004/11-11-summer-contest.html
Posted by: Enlightened | July 26, 2007 at 02:49 PM
Ooooh H&R,
If you thought that up all by yourself, you are indeed evil - of the finest order!
Posted by: Jane | July 26, 2007 at 02:49 PM
Mr Ballard,
Have you noticed the same personality traits in all these traitors,enormous egos and narcissistic self absorption.I think you caught this one before he became Senator for life.
Posted by: PeterUK | July 26, 2007 at 02:51 PM
Ace of Spades is where all the hot action is...
Posted by: hit and run | July 26, 2007 at 02:53 PM
Clarice,
Re Nifong,remember,"Time wounds all heels".
Posted by: PeterUK | July 26, 2007 at 02:53 PM
WOW--H & R does anyone else have that?
Posted by: clarice | July 26, 2007 at 02:54 PM
See Ace...I swiped it from there.
"Gracie" from TNR was feeding Ace information last night, TNR found out and fired him/her this morning for it.
Posted by: hit and run | July 26, 2007 at 02:57 PM
Clarice - Ace's place found the connection through the Wedding Channel? Bwaaahhha.
This is just hilarious. TNR is most likely sucking on the oxygen tube right about now.
When are these dipwads going to learn? It's going to blow soon - Hot Air is flaming right now too.
Sue - Your the best. Wink.
Posted by: Enlightened | July 26, 2007 at 03:01 PM
Cecil,
The link won't load for me - does the 'one on the right' wear an insignia with three stripes, three rockers and a little diamond in the middle? He'd be the one I wwould be trying to hide from were I in Beauchamps very damp boots.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | July 26, 2007 at 03:05 PM