Oh, and we just cut the deficit in half. In 2 years. At the current rate of growth, we’ll be back in surplus by the time Bush leaves … just like Clinton!

I do love the notion that liberals are now interested in power being “invested in the people”. Of course, that’s at odds with their platforms on Campaign Finance, Social Security, Health Care and Education, but progress is progress!

….I agree. Let’s dump Social Security once and for all.
SaveFarris

In case you didn’t know it, Social Security is producing a surplus of $150.000,000,000 each year, a surplus that is being lost and wasted by the Bush regime in the huge deficits it is running.

You really have no idea what you’re talking about do you Marty? No clue at all.
frameone

Why don’t you measure the level of violence in Iraq? That is what counts, not whether the insurgents just move out of one province.
It is worth remembering that point 79 of the Iraq Study Group urged the Bush administration to be honest with the American people about the level of violence it is under-reporting.

we should hand over Commander-in-Chief powers to pollsters.
SaveFarris

In case you didn’t know it, the power of the government is vested in the people, and the head of the government is to serve the people of the United States, not his own ego, not his own desire for be a ‘war president,” and certainly not his desire to be above the law.

You kiss your mother with that mouth? Yes, my response was overly pithy. But what else do you expect when OW is using this post to infer that we should hand over Commander-in-Chief powers to pollsters.

But I have to point out that you drove off the rails here:

We’ve barely had the additional troops on the ground six weeks.

The “surge” troops have been at full strength for about six weeks. But they didn’t hit the ground all at once. The number has been ramping up over a period of months. One would reasonably expect to see the benefits of the extra manpower throughout those months, not just at the end of the buildup.

So what’s your argument going to be when Petraeus says we need another surge or a longer one, or some other “down the road” prediction of success?

Are you suggesting that the turn around in anbar province has something to do with the surge? You yourself just noted that the surge isn’t even fully up to speed yet and we all know that what’s happening in anbar began before the surge and has everything to do with a change in attitude among tribal Sunni leaders who have been empowered in the area by the US above and beyond the actual regional government, you know, the Iraqi government were really supposed to be supporting. So Anbar has been success precisely because we’ve allowed sectarian, tribal interests to take precedence over the national government. Sounds like a great plan for long term stability.

You really have no idea what you’re talking about do you Marty? No clue at all.

His father choked to death on his Social Security card. Not the sharpest knife in the drawer.

Asshole: “Like we left Germany? And Japan? And Cuba?”

Are they shooting at us Germany? Japan? Cuba? If now, shut the fuck up, you sub-human.

Me: “Continuing a plan that isn’t working and is costing hundreds of lives and billions of dollars is suicide.”

Fucking Asshole: “I agree. Let’s dump Social Security once and for all.”

Two points:

1.) Nice dodge. I’ll assume that’s your way of admitting defeat on the Iraq debate.

2.) Social Security does work and saves lives.

I’s also like to point out that this is why you are conservative, because you are stupid.

I wasn’t aware that social security was getting people killed.

Like we left Germany? And Japan? And Cuba?

Continuing a plan that isn’t working and is costing hundreds of lives and billions of dollars is suicide.

I agree. Let’s dump Social Security once and for all.

But it’s clearly the fault of Democrats if Iraqis die when we leave. Such is the logic of the right, and the stupidity of conservatives.

I don’t know if they faxed or emailed you all the “we’re winning in Anbar” talking points, but we’re losing in Iraq. The Iraqis we trained are now killing the American soldiers serving by them, and your solution is to KEEP WAITING FOR SOMETHING MAGICAL TO HAPPEN after four years plus of doing the same shit with the same results.

Do you wonder why we’re a midge skeptical of your bullshit and your stupid spinning of this issue?

All this hell that is happening in Iraq is the fault of the Republicans. You could pull out tomorrow or stay for 20 years and it still wouldn’t change that fact.

“Doesn’t matter how we got there.”

Yes it does matter. The idiots who got us there, and their moron cheerleaders, think they know what will happen. Anyone who said we would be greeted as liberators should have resigned in disgrace by now, politicians and pundits alike.

The United States is going to get out of Iraq, sooner or later. And it is going to suck when they do. However, it sucks nows and continuing a plan that isn’t working cause trying something new might be worse is stupid. Continuing a plan that isn’t working and is costing hundreds of lives and billions of dollars is suicide.

We’ve barely had the additional troops on the ground six weeks. Didn’t they just confirm Petraeus and give him until September to make his first report. Did you think that the troops they sent were a bunch of Elizabeth Montgomery clones who would wiggle their noses and everything would be better? Is there a specific reason that Democrats that who overwhemingly approved Petraeus should continue to try to undermine the plan that he has implemented?

And why have the Democrats all of a sudden stopped talking about Anbar Province- you know the “lost cause” in Fallujah, Baqubah, Ramadi, etc. Oh- wouldn’t want to talk about the success of turning around former “insurgents” against Al Qaeda in Iraq. That would be actual successes. (Hell- even the New York Times reported on it.) You’re so damn invested in your political bullshit that you any successes would not be good for Democrats. And that’s what’s really important to you. Just refuse to acknowledge what is happening as a result of the surge. It’s not about whether there can be any form of success in Iraq or even what would happen to the Iraqi people if we were to up and start leaving right now. It’s about what’s good for Democrats and poll numbers.

Is it any wonder Harry Reid didn’t want to answer the question, “Will the Iraqi people be safer if we left right now?” You don’t give two shits about what happens to the Iraqi people if we leave or even what happens to them now. Dead Iraqis (and Americans for that matter) on the front page is good for Democrats. Turning around Anbar province and Americans and Iraqis cooperating to kill and capture Al Qaeda and other foreign fighters is bad for the Democrat narative.

O.K. Fine. Let’s pull out of Iraq. Let’s change course, like the Democrats want. I’m not even sure where I read it, but let’s do this. Let’s have the President hold a press conference with the Democratic leadership and let them have their way on one condition. Everything that happens in Iraq and around the world as a result of the Democrats strategy of “change of course” will be owned by the Democratic Party. Doesn’t matter how we got there. We’re there. Do it the Democrat way and let’s see what happens.

One question though. What will happen in Iraq when we leave? What will that mean in the big picture of things in the middle east and around the world? What will it mean for the United States?

This should be interesting.