Bring our troop home

Among President Bush's many head scratching-moments during his Thursday night address to the nation was when he thanked the 36 nations that support the American mission in Iraq. That numbers falls to 35 after October 1 when Iceland pulls its man out of Baghdad. That's right - one guy:

Foreign Minister Ingibjörg Sólrún Gísladóttir has decided to remove an Icelandic Crisis Response Unit (ICRU) member from a NATO training program for the Iraqi army in Baghdad next month, causing disappointment among NATO leaders.

The ICRU member has been working in Baghdad for the last two years, primarily as a media representative, and will cease working there October 1, Morgunbladid reports.

John Craddock, the Supreme Allied Commander Europe for NATO and the US European Command, said at a press conference in Iceland yesterday that Iceland is an important and active NATO member and that he was disappointed with Gísladóttir’s decision.

But Craddock added that he understands that NATO member nations have to make decisions according to their best interests and “estimate what they can do and what they cannot do, what they want to do and what they don’t.”

Can you imagine a country with a leader that makes decisions based on "what they can do and what they cannot do, what they want to do and what they don’t?"

We are all Icelanders now.

GOP to America: "We own 9/11, dammit!"

I was going to write about Ann Coulter and Rudy Giuliani appearing together at a 9/11 commemoration tonight, and what a God-awful idea that was. But then I had second thoughts. It seemed hypocritical for me to attack these two 9/11 fetishists for not remembering the day properly, while I'm venting just as much rage right back at them. President Bush and his Republican attack poodles have been milking that tragedy for six years now, and it's brought us to a point where the GOP has the country convinced it owns 9/11.

I was going to write about Ann Coulter and Rudy Giuliani, but then I read this from Milwaukee blogger Illusory Tenant:

Every once in awhile we need to be reminded that there are thoughtful and even scholarly conservative Republicans, as opposed to the contingent of moronic dipshits that populates the blogosphere and wake up every morning to go and see what Michelle Malkin commands them to be outraged about today.

Despite George Bush's best efforts to make us forget, Americans of every political stripe walk among us who can put 9/11 in its proper perspective. They know that liberals don't want to offer counseling to al Qaeda terrorists; that dissent is patriotic; and that democracies prevail because of, not despite, the rule of law. They know outrage, a natural consequence of the 9/11 attacks, becomes toxic when used to rally the base instead of the country.

Of course you won't hear these words on "conservative" talk radio, or read them on Powerline, except as a punchline to a joke. Only conservatives can make up jokes about 9/11, and Coulter and Giuliani will be knocking 'em dead tonight.

Conspiracy theories

People who think 9/11 was an inside job seriously need to have their heads examined. They cherry pick evidence that supports their asinine suspicions and ignore the mountain of data that goes against them. Debating these loons is like playing Wack-a-Mole - as soon as you knock one dubious claim on the head with the hammer of evidence, another claim pops up.

That said, if it weren't for 9/11 conspiracy nuts we wouldn't have 11 Settembre, a fascinating blog by an Italian skeptic with impressive technological skills. Enjoy.

Iraqi doctors surge to border

Maybe Brit Hume will ask White House Surge Spokesman David "On Board" Petraeus about this during their one hour Fox News love fest:

According to the Iraqi Medical Association (IMA), the shortage of doctors and nurses in Iraq is now critical and having a devastating effect, especially on small towns and villages.

“Our latest research shows that up to 75 percent of doctors, pharmacists and nurses have left their jobs at universities, clinics and hospitals,” Walid Rafi, a senior member of the IMA, told IRIN. Of these, at least 55 percent have fled abroad, he added.

According to Rafi, low salaries and the shortage of equipment and medicines, are other push factors. “Medical staff earn US$50-300 per month. They might persevere for a while but if the opportunity arises, they don’t think twice and leave the country,” Rafi said.

Here's another question that won't be asked: Why are Iraqis fleeing their country for the safety of neighboring military dictatorship Syria, if Iraq is so much better off without Saddam? What about all those purple thumbs - are they pointing up, or pointing down, when it comes to the surge?

GOP meltdown

Ordinarily, you have to read the comments at Redstate.com or Powerline to see how truly inane the Republican base has become these days. But last night the GOP Presidential debates did just as well.

Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Thumb Screws) actually said "I would do waterboarding - I don't believe that that is 'quote' torture." Admittedly, Tancredo's bloodlust is toned down from what one finds at Redstate, where sunshine patriots not only endorse waterboarding terror suspects, but for the cashier at the all night convenience store down the street as well who may or may not be Muslim. But I still find Tancredo's comment astonishing given that the entire civilized world recognizes waterboarding as torture.

The GOP debate is also a rich source of found humor. Gov. Mike Huckabee (R-Who?), got into an interesting back and forth with Rep. Ron Paul (R-Can't Win) over Iraq. Paul, the only anti-war candidate in the GOP field, said the war was destroying the Party of Lincoln. Huckabee countered that the US was committed to Iraq, and said "Even if we lose elections we should not lose the honor of the Republican Party." One indication of the GOP's deep state of denial over the last seven years is that no one on the stage, or the entire audience, laughed.

Gov. Mitt Romney, with an inadvertent nod to empiricism, said the surge is "apparently" working. Big mistake. Sen. John McCain (R-Bankrupt) pounced:

"The surge is working. Not apparently working. It is working. It's working because we have a great general, we have a good strategy, in Anbar Province things have improved. The Malaki government is not doing the things we want it to do. The police are not functioning the way we want them to do. But we are succeeding. And the great debate is not whether it's apparently working or not. The great debate will take place on the floor of the United State Senate in the middle of this month, and it's going to be whether we set a date for withdrawal which will be a date for surrender, or whether we will let this surge continue and succeed and I can assure you it's more than apparent. It is working."

I feel better already.

UPDATE

Sean Hannity lied to Fox viewers about Dr. Ron Paul's showing in the network's post debate poll. Fox invited viewers to text message their vote for favorite candidate, and Paul outpolled the competition with 33%. The next favorite candidate was Gov.Mike Huckabee with less than 17%.

But Hannity cautioned Fox viewers, with no evidence, that Paul's numbers were due to overzealous supporters text messaging multiple votes for their candidate. That was a lie - Fox only allowed one vote per text messaging cell phone.

Evildoer-fighting progress report

A Congressional Research Office report has concluded that Iraq's government is on the verge of collapse, and the report's author concludes there are no real prospects for political reconciliation.

The report, which was commissioned by the House and Senate, questions the troop surge and further casts doubt on President Bush's claim of military progress.

Meanwhile the President, with support from Senate and House Republicans, continue to bamboozle the American people and their media with made up statistics and rosy scenarios.

In other news, the real criminal, Sen. Larry Craig (R-Wide Stance), is fighting a misdemeanor charge arising from soliciting sex in the one place where soliciting sex is illegal.

Freedom marching news

Via Newsweek:

The militia's sectarian-cleansing campaign is far too lucrative to be given up easily. When Sunni homeowners flee, say U.S. soldiers, their furniture is often locked up and their houses listed at local Sadr offices. Shiite families—many of them displaced earlier from Sunni neighborhoods—can peruse the listings, sometimes even photos of the property. For around 110,000 Iraqi dinars (about $88) per month, they can rent a furnished home and receive deliveries of cooking oil from the Mahdi Army. The militiamen earn even more money by controlling the gas stations in various neighborhoods, and by carjacking the nicest vehicles—usually, but not always, driven by Sunnis—at the checkpoints they set up.

Stall tactics

Sen. Larry Craig's stated intent to fight his guilty plea to disorderly conduct stemming from an airport restroom sex sting could cause Democrats more problems than l'affaire Craig has already caused the GOP.

Much has been written about Republican hypocrisy in this case - that Craig, an apparently gay man, had been making life miserable for gays for most of his legislative career. But few are talking about the facts of Craig's arrest and asking the simple question "What did Craig do wrong?" Esquivalience asks the right questions:

Ok, he placed his bag against the stall door, which is, apparently, something "those intending to commit lewd acts" do. Also those who don't want to leave their bag by the sink, and have it stolen or detonated. It's a cubicle. He's supposed to maybe balance the bag on his head?

By the cop's own admission, he (the cop) "pumped his foot slowly up and down in response." In other words, Craig asked for sex using an arcane code extremely unlikely to "alarm, anger, or disturb" -- according to the the equally arcane code defining disorderly conduct in Minnesota -- an uninitiated fellow-lavator, and the cop knew what it meant and said yes.

Where's the victim?

Of course the Republican law and order crowd doesn't want to ask these questions. Craig plead guilty to disorderly conduct, which is the legal system's equivalent of Put Them in Jail Free card. The DC charge has been used for decades to harass and arrest gay people, the criminal code equivalent of fire hoses and police dogs. And for decades society has looked the other way when it's applied to men cruising for icky restroom sex.

Until now. Craig's high profile arrest, and his publicly-stated intent to fight his guilty plea, promises to keep icky restroom sex in the headlines for months to come, possibly through the 2008 elections. That's where things could get interesting.

Though I don't expect to see Craig marching in San Francisco anytime soon, the former Idaho senator and homophobe is positioned to become a champion for gay rights by virtue of hiring a legal team to take on an allegedly discriminatory application of the law. I can't pretend to know how serious Craig is about clearing his name. It would be easier if he just came out - it's not like anyone believes he isn't gay.

But should he fight the charge (and not being a laywer, I'm not sure what he can do to change a guilty plea), he will unwittingly become the poster boy for the civil rights of men who choose to have icky restroom sex. That could become a huge problem for the Democrats next year.

It's easy for Republicans distance themselves from Senator Wide Stance. There's no political cost since most Republicans are comfortable with their gay bashing party. And so far Democrats have had the luxury of sitting back and enjoying the spectable of the GOP throwing one of its own under the proverbial bus.

But that dynamic will change on Sept. 30, the day Craig officially vacates his Senate seat, and slouches back to Boise, an outed, gay, 62-year-old man in denial. At that point the GOP spin machine will make sure he becomes the Democratic Party's problem. And the spin might get enough traction to help Republicans next year.

The secret is to position icky restroom sex one foot tap away from gay marriage, no big deal for the GOP spin machine and its media echo chamber. With Craig's pathetic legal challenge slowly winding its way through the courts, Fox News, Rush and the rest will have plenty of ammo.

That will leave the Democrats with little choice but to distance themselves from Craig's own fight for justice, which will leave them open to charges of hypocricy and cause problems with their own base.

Of course none of this will happen if Craig admitted what everyone already knows, that's he's a gay man trapped in misery by icky red state politics as well as by his own denial. And by his curious loyalty to a party that pitched him overboard for no good reason.

Larry Craig joke

What is the difference between a barnstorming pilot and Larry Craig?

A barnstorming pilot pulls out of a stall, and Craig pulls out in a stall.


Heraldblog: contributing to public understanding of important social issues since 2003.

Male bathroom etiquette

Too late for Sen. Craig, but the rest of us can be saved.

Gonzo gone

It's official - the Bush White House is in total meltdown. Let's summarize just some of the crises that have paralyzed the worst President since Warren G. Harding.

The new AG will have to be vetted by a Democratic congress, and one of the many questions put to him/her will be "Will you cooperate with our investigation of the USA firing scandal, and if not, why not?" It's a loaded question that comes down to the nominees views of executive privilege, separation of powers, and above all else, personal integrity. Bush will have little choice but to either let an underling function as interim AG for the next 16 months (if there's anyone left), or appoint a rat.

The September 11 troop surge report is sure to bring additional GOP defections, and shave a few more points off Bush's Nixonesque approval ratings. The President who swears we will stay the course will be forced by his own party to relent to troop drawdowns by Christmas.

And then there's this.

Grab the popcorn. It couldn't happen to a nicer guy.

Update: Josh said Gonzales quit so he can spend more time with his defense lawyer. Let the snark begin!

A very small man in a very big country

Josh says President Bush's interests in Iraq are not the same as the people he purports to lead. Rather than act in the best interest of the United States, Bush is acting to shore up his legacy as President. It's a chilling thought when put in the context of lives lost, and damage to national prestige:

And here I think we get back to the root of the matter: We are bigger than Iraq.

By that I do not mean we, as America, are bigger or better than Iraq as a country. I mean that that sum of our national existence is not bound up in what happens there. The country will go on. Whatever happens, we'll recover from it. And whatever might happen, there are things that matter much more to this country's future -- like whether we have a functioning military any more, whether our economy is wrecked, whether this country tears itself apart over this catastrophe. But we'll go on and look back at this and judge what happened.

Not so for the president. For him, this is it. He's not bigger than this. His entire legacy as president is bound up in Iraq. Which is another way of saying that his legacy is pretty clearly an irrecoverable shambles. That is why, as the folly of the enterprise becomes more clear, he must continually puff it up into more and more melodramatic and world-historical dimensions. A century long ideological struggle and the like. For the president a one in a thousand shot at some better outcome is well worth it, no matter what the cost. Because at least that's a one in a thousand shot at not ending his presidency with the crushing verdict history now has in store. It's also worth just letting things keep on going as they are forever because, like Micawber, something better might turn up. Going double or nothing by expanding the war into Iran might be worth it too for the same reason. For him, how can it get worse?

And when you boil all this down what it comes down to is that the president now has very different interests than the country he purports to lead.

His speech other day in front of the VFW was hard to watch. Every time the President steps up to a mic, it reminds me of a perp sitting down for a chat with Lenny Brisco on the old Law and Order series. First comes the denial (I don't know nuthin' bout no gun!), then then anger (I got nuthin' to say to you pricks.) Then the bargaining (OK. OK. Let's say I did have a gun. Maybe it's not the same gun.) Finally, the perp sinks into depression and despair, buries his ruddy face in his greasy little hands, and lawyers up.

Bush jumbled syntax gives the appearance of a perp bouncing from one stage of grief to another, like a human version of pong. He clings deperately to his denial, but easily slips into anger at those who oppose him. His less-than-lame Vietman analogy was an effort to bargain his way out of the hole he's dug for his Presidency. All the while, his depression envelopes him like the cloud of dirt that follows Pig Pen in that old comic strip, Peanuts.

Only acceptance can now save George W. Bush's soul, and ours. Let us close with a prayer:

God grant me the serenity
to accept the things I cannot change;
courage to change the things I can;
and wisdom to know the difference.

They like me! Imaginary people really like me!

President Bush likes to say that since he will be vindicated by history, it doesn't matter what his critics say today. So what looks like a failed war effort and wasted treasure this year will smell like victory in an unspecified number of years. Of course you can say that about anything. In the year 2108, historians might look favorably upon Jimmy Carter, or the Boy Band era of the 90s. We just don't know, but more importantly, it just doesn't matter.

So why is Bush so quick to condemn America's withdrawal from Vietnam? It's been 30 years since the last US troops left that battered and bloody land, and Vietman has normal diplomatic ties with the US, and an emerging capitalist economy. The Vietnamese are not invading their neighbors. No dominoes fell.


Looking for vindication by people not yet conceived, in the context of a world not conceivable, is a coward's way of ducking accountability. Shame on the former governor of Texas. Shame on us for staying silent.

Am I missing something?

Is it too cynical to suggest the White House has ulterior motives because it chose Harry Connick, Jr.'s 40th birthday to release General Petraeus' "progress" report? I mean not everybody knows the New Orleans native was born on Sept. 11, 1967, but they will now! And that's supposed to divert America's attention from what is most likely another well spun version of the truth? Ha! Or as Harry might say:

I forget what happens on the Fourth of July
Or when the rent is due
Dates and deadlines just float by
But I always remember you

h/t to Harry Connick fan Blue Gal

Give it a rest, Gibby

Fox News Comb-Over Model John Gibson is making it very clear that he doesn't like John Stewart. What he's not so clear on is why he doesn't like the popular host of The Daily Show.

Gibson's hissy fit started last week when he made fun of Stewart for expressing grief in the wake of 9/11. You see, Republicans own 9/11, and anybody who steps out of line is immediately stripped of their patriotism, sincerity, and ability to be taken seriously. Stewart and other critics of President Bush are not allowed to grieve 9/11 without being mocked by Gibson and other barking media loons.

Stewart's response was brief and to the point: "Some idiot from Fox was "playing the tape of me after September 11th and calling me a phony because, apparently, my grief didn't mean acquiescence."

Gibson thinks this is unfair because

"He's a -- he's a comedian doing the news. He should expect some shots once in a while. I want to know, where is the Jon Stewart that was so grief-stricken, and why does he think what I think are reasonable measures to fight the war on terror like wiretapping, like going after Iraq, like Guantánamo Bay -- I think those are reasonable measures."

Let me break it down for you Gibby:

Wiretapping. FISA, as currently proposed by the Bush administration, violates the fourth amendment of the constitution. A simple fix is for the federal government to seek warrants for wiretaps on American citizens. Those warrants can be sought retroactively. But that's not reasonable enough for you, Mr. Gibson. You think it's reasonable to trash the fourth amendment, and give serial perjurer Alberto Gonzales authority to spy on any American, any time, for any reason, with zero accountability. Go ahead and say it Mr. Gibson.

Iraq: 3,800 dead Americans. A half million dead Iraqis. One trillion dollars. Four years of war and no end in sight. It takes one fevered imagination to claim that Bush's management of the Iraq War is a reasonable measure to fight terrorism.

Gitmo: The FBI's own study concluded that there is no credible evidence to suspect that the majority of Guantanamo detainees are involved in terrorism. How is that reasonable, and what does it have to do with convincing a billion Muslims there is an advantage to siding with the US?

John Gibson started a feud for no good reason, then screamed foul when Stewart hit back. How pathetic. Gibson should be careful about attacking comedians, because he is one himself. But Stewart has the honesty to call himself a comic. Gibson wouldn't know honest if it squirted him in the face with a bottle of seltzer.

Foul play at the Peacock Network

I will confess to watching Datelines's To Catch a Predator from time to time. Chris Hansen's smarmy self righteousness is a perfect compliment to the lowlifes and sexual miscreants he snags. It's a guilty pleasure which I am drawn to as the Hansen's victims are drawn to the jailbait decoy. Fortunately, there is no law against trash TV. But I'll never see NBC's schtick the same after reading Luke Dittrich's piece in this month'sEsquire Magazine about a Dateline bust that went very, very wrong.

NBC is being sued by the sister of a man who committed suicide after he was caught in a Predator sting operation. The victim, a career Texas prosecutor named Bill Conradt, shot himself after he saw Hansen and the Dateline crew on his property, and just as a SWAT team was closing in. This is going to be very embarrassing for NBC, as the facts of the case come to light.

It's a long article, but exceptionally well written and worth it.

Sexual predator and Fox blowhard Bill O'Reilly, who hates NBC, is oozing schadenfreude over the case, but he's not smart enough to understand this is about legal due process and vigilatism disguised as entertainment. O'Reilly and his mad dogs at Fox think due process is for suckers, while the vigilante mindset is a fuel that keeps the Fox News engine running.

Deep in the heart of Texas

That didn't take long. Don McLeroy, the recently appointed chairman of the Texas Board of Education, went on a anti-evolution jihad the other day, telling church goers to lie about the theological underpinnings of "intelligent design":

Following a long spiel about biblical truth, McLeroy told the audience to ignore intelligent design’s religious foundation when talking to the general public. Not to worry though, the “time to address [Biblical issues] will be after we have separated materialistic prejudice from scientific fact.”

The second step, he said, is to point out that evolution wrongly depends on “naturalism;” that supernaturalism or divine influences are unfairly excluded from the conversation. Finally, forget the scientists and target people without a firm grasp on evolutionary theory.

McLeroy was recently appointed by Texas Governor Rick Perry, who is, of course, a Republican.

Bill O' the Shill O'

Heraldblog extends a hearty note of appreciation to fascist Fox News clown Bill O'Reilly for attacking the YearlyKos convention, now underway in Chicago. Bill O' has been hyperventilating all week about the "hatred" oozing from the Daily Kos website, which is frequented by a half-million readers each day.

O'Reilly's rage couldn't come at a better time. The country has turned against the Bush Republicans, and Democrats are finally showing some discipline. Kos and other liberal sites deserve much of the credit, in the same way Limbaugh galvanzied the red meat right in the early 90s. A.J. Dionne connects the dots in todays WaPo:

O'Reilly is irate that the leading Democratic presidential candidates are showing up this weekend. "The far left
wants a quasi-socialistic economy and a one-world foreign policy, where national security decisions are made only with the approval of other countries," O'Reilly fumed. "So that's the soup the Democratic presidential candidates will be dining on when they show up at the Kos convention."

I'm not in the habit of giving advice to Bill O'Reilly, but there's always a first time: Liberal rage at Rush Limbaugh not only was useless, but it actually strengthened his credibility with the right. (I speak from experience.) Bill, I bet Markos loves what you're doing.

Keep up the good work, Falafel Man!

Brave Michelle and The Case of the Mysterious Collapse

The right's Fighting Keyboarders are crossing their manicured fingers and praying to St. George of the Dubya that the Minneapolis bridge collapse is the work of terrorists. Brave little Michelle Malkin opines:

DHS issued a statement that the collapse “does not appear to be an act of terrorism.” Isn’t it too early to say anything meaningful about what it “appears” to be? Couldn’t they maybe, I dunno, say nothing until they actually know something?

I mean, c'mon guys, we're losing valuable fear factor here! Malkin and other Bush cheerleaders could milk this disaster for three or four news cycles, reminding us all that we need to get 100% behind President Bush unless we want more traffic detours.

Bush butt boy John Hinderaker, who once called the President a genius, observes

"Bridges like these don’t collapse in the US, especially when they’re only 40 years old. It’s hard to say what could have brought it down, but hopefully the DoT will have more information.”

Yes, it's hard to say what brought it down, but it's easy to suggest that it "might" be the work of the bearded anarchists who hang out in a St. Paul mosque, speaking in strange tongues and, hey, look, what was that?!??!

If Hinderacker, Malkin, et.al. want to dwell on mysterious collapses, they could write more honestly about the Bush Administration which has been in free fall for, oh, I don't know, three years. The death toll is now up to a million people, yet the investigation is stalled by a lack of cooperation and denial.

Say five Hail Marys and vote for Obama

My brother in North Carolina sent me this link:

Last week I had the fortune/misfortune* of visiting Mesa Verde National Park in Colorado. Through a series of machinations I needn't elaborate here, I ended up "filling in" for one of two park rangers guiding a tour group to the (stunning) ruins. As such, the (real) ranger briefly introduced me and noted my day job in the Political Science department at IU.

At the conclusion of the tour, a very sunburnt gentleman with an overpowering Dixie accent (I'd soon learn that he hails from Birmingham, AL) approached me quite urgently and said "I need to know who you think is going to win the presidential election." Taken slightly aback, I gave him a thoroughly noncommittal but accurate answer: it's too early to say, but the lay of the land certainly looks unfavorable for the GOP. However, the nomination of Hillary Clinton could be a wild-card because of her high negative numbers.



Following that stock response, he began to unburden himself in what I have decided to call the Republican Unburdening of the Soul ritual. He started telling me about how he is an upper-middle class (pilot for NW Airlines, apparently) white guy from the Bible Belt who has been a Republican since he could walk, he voted for George Bush (twice), he supported the War in Iraq, etc etc. But the RUotS always ends as familiarly as it begins. After describing his lifelong committment to Republican principles, he revealed that he now despises George W. Bush and loathes the failed Iraq debacle.

I have decided to name this ritual because it is happening so damn frequently lately. Its source is quite obvious: a major, major case of the guilts coupled with the embarassment of having been misled (or having deluded oneself) so thoroughly and easily. I swear to God, today's average Republican cannot avoid telling every liberal they meet how much they hate the war and the president. They're like sinners desperately seeking absolution and willing to solicit it from strangers. Failing absolution, they'll settle for conscience balm. Both ordinary people and elected officials (note the "rats fleeing a sinking ship" Senators like Lugar suddenly condemning the war they blindly supported for 4 years) are performing the RUotS lately.

Back to this gentleman, I (gently, and as non-confrontationally as possible) joked that I can't figure out why he voted for Bush a second time if he felt this way. He replied that his faith in the party and its principles was strong enough to trust Bush with more time to achieve a favorable outcome. While this is singularly piss-poor logic, I nonetheless understood his response as a reasonable emotional one. Then he said something that floored me in several respects:

"See, you (meaning 'liberals', even though I had not offered him any political affiliation; all academics are liberals) hate George Bush because he represents everything you hate. I hate George Bush because he represents everything I believe in being completely fucked up and ruined."
The profundity of that struck me. I've not yet heard a more concise, eloquent explanation of what the non-brainwashed part of the right-leaning electorate is experiencing these days. It also struck me as incredible that this is what political discourse v2007 sounds like: two people of opposing ideologies arguing about who hates George Bush more.

Unfortunately but predictably, the conversation ended with him describing his openness to Democratic candidates in 2008....but not without the caveat of his hatred of Hillary Clinton. And therein lies the disingenuousness of the RUotS ritual and conservative hand-wringing in general. They're like fat people who are always about to start dieting and exercising "tomorrow." They go on and on about how much they hate Bush, the war, and their more extreme party compatriots...but not without conjuring up a reason to vote for them again anyway. In short, this gentleman told me that he's completely disillusioned with his party while implying "I will use HRC as an excuse to vote for them again anyway."

It's a very convenient, and cowardly, coulda-woulda-shoulda defense. "I was totally ready to jump ship, but that Hillary Clinton was just too awful so I had to vote for the guy who baited me with more tax cuts." Pardon me if, under such qualified circumstances, I decline to end such conversations with "Ego te absolvo, my son."

I don't think a national party has melted down so quickly in recent history. Even the Republican misfortunes after Watergate were not as precipitous. With Bush's approval ratings hovering at one in four voters, one would think more GOP lawmakers would be abandoning ship, or at least looking for a new way forward for the Party of Lincoln. Instead, we get GOP Presidential hopefuls who are still pandering to the same inbred crackers who brought the party to such ruin in the first place.