Sadly, No!

I’m glad to know that it’s not just the Democrats anymore (emphasis mine):

The U.S. Senate opened debate today on measures that would put the chamber on record for the first time asking President George W. Bush to set limits for keeping American troops in Iraq.

The Bush administration “needs to explain to Congress and the American people its strategy for the successful completion of the mission,” say resolutions introduced separately by both Republicans and Democrats. […]

Read the rest of this entry »

Justin Darr is in particularly fine form today:

Liberals are causing a European jihad

Justin Darr
November 13, 2005

After more than two weeks of nightly violence, the rioting of Europe’s Muslim minority has finally begun to subside. While the French government and Main Stream Media may be eager to pretend that the events of the last month were an anomaly, or persist in the notion that the underlying issues that incited the violence are now being addressed, the current lull in the violence in Europe is just that; a lull. The violence is doomed to return in the future. Europe is fast becoming ground zero in clash of civilizations between two equally intolerant cultures, radical Islam and Liberalism.

Y’know, it’s funny. I remember when liberals were accused of being tolerant to a fault, coddling criminals and terrorizers because we didn’t want to hurt their feeeeeeeelings. Now we’re apparently just as intolerant as religious fundamentalists who kill their daughters for having premarital sex. We can’t win, I tells ya.
Read the rest of this entry »

“Eek-eek, ook-ook, ‘enhanced interrogation’ oog-ugg”

The comment, by US national security adviser Stephen Hadley, came amid heated national debate about whether the CIA and other US intelligence agencies should be authorized to use what is being referred to as “enhanced interrogation techniques” to extract from terror suspects information that may help prevent future assaults.

Quite a journalese couple of paragraphs there. But maybe these top officials will only come straight with us under “enhanced interrogation techniques?” After all, this is wartime — and if a citizen insists on stonewalling and prevaricating on a question vital to national security…

In fact, in getting to the bottom of the Plame affair, why all of this governmental red tape? The only sane, American course, under the circumstances, is to secretly spirit away suspected plotters for “enhanced interrogations.” None of this quaint, Carter-era mucking about with grand juries and who-said-what-to-whom. Guilty or innocent — that’s the question. Which is it? Answer now!

[smack!]

Who gave the order, Libby?

[wham!]

It was your boss, wasn’t it, Libby?

[buzz of electrodes on exposed testicles, screams for mercy]

See, it’s wartime. The future of the free world hangs in the balance. Goose, gander, etc.

Excuse us?

Some 1,100 Iraqi lawyers, meanwhile, said they withdrew from Saddam Hussein’s defense team over the slayings of two colleagues representing co-defendants of the ousted leader. Their statement said other lawyers on the team continued to work despite the lack of security.

Saddam Hussein’s defense team included more than 1,100 lawyers? That is one big ass defense team. Had Saddam been just a bit smarter and listened to the Super Fans, he would have known all he needed was Ditka.

RNC chairman Ken Mehlman is on Meet the Press right now making the argument that Americans will keep voting for Republicans because they’re “the party of change”:

The American people want change, because too often the government hasn’t served their needs.

Riiiiiight. And who’s been in charge of that government for the last five years?

Or maybe many questions come to think of it.

Are any of you know familiar with TownHall? According to its website, it:

… is a one-stop mall of ideas in which people congregate to exchange, discuss and disseminate the latest news and information from the conservative movement.

Furthermore, TownHall seeks to provide:

An interactive, open and honest debate of the issues within the conservative community will help us all in the fight against those who would sacrifice the individual and freedom for political gain and big government.

Which is why we always wonder why Doug Giles’ columns are posted there instead of on one of the countless sites for Z-list conservative no-talents, like The Rant, Renew America, and The Poor Man. Doug writes about Jacques Chirac and Muslims today, so you know it’s going to be extra delicious:

Fourteen days ago riots broke out in Paris suburbs after two Muslim young men, who were running from the cops, stopped and took refuge against the wrong electric fence and got KFC?d. … before BB-testicle French President Jacque Chi-croc … President Chi-coward … the French quail is pissed … indignation towards Chi-caca … Unlike President Chi-runt and the French[.]

If all you’re going to do is yell insults, shouldn’t you at least do it in a way that is intentionally funny? (Just like Dr. BLT writes music that is intentionally bad.)

Jesse, aren’t there bigger problems to worry about?

The Rev. Jesse Jackson called the Philadelphia Eagles’ punishment of Terrell Owens “much too severe.”

Jackson said in a statement released Friday that Owens could have been more professional when he publicly complained about his contract, his team and the Eagles’ organization.

But Jackson said Owens’ suspension without pay for four games and deactivation for the rest of the season is “much too severe for the charge” and hurts the athlete’s NFL career at its height.

Apparently, Ralph Nader has come to T.O.’s defense as well. For reasons I can only imagine, the plight of a multi-millionaire athlete has garnered sympathy from washed-up left-wing activists. It’s only a matter of time before Ramsey Clark signs on as his agent.

A Tortured Debate

Torture’s not all that bad when you just call it “aggressive interrogation” instead. See?

Shorter concept inspired by busy, busy, busy, originally launched by Daniel Davies at D-Squared Digest with the original Shorter Steven den Beste. Disclaimer copied in part from busy, busy, busy.

Bonus points:

Former Defense Secretary Jim Schlesinger headed one of more than a dozen major inquiries into detainee abuse, and he explained last year that the Abu Ghraib abuses were simply sadistic behavior by poorly trained reservists on the “night shift.” The victims weren’t even intelligence targets.

The people US forces tortured sadistically behaviored weren’t even important! Well, that makes everything ok then.

This is one of Glenn’s most all-time retarded posts ever:

A PROBLEM FOR THE REVISIONISTS:

The administration’s overarching point is true: Intelligence agencies overwhelmingly believed that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, and very few members of Congress from either party were skeptical about this belief before the war began in 2003. Indeed, top lawmakers in both parties were emphatic and certain in their public statements.

(Via Paul Mirengoff, who wonders why it took Dana Milbank and Walter Pincus so long to admit that).

Oh my God. Glenn. Did you bother to actually read the entire Milbank/Pincus story, or just the little snippet you picked up at the PowerTools’ place? If you’re too lazy to read the whole thing (to coin a phrase), here are some snippets (emphasis added):

President Bush and his national security adviser have answered critics of the Iraq war in recent days with a two-pronged argument: that Congress saw the same intelligence the administration did before the war, and that independent commissions have determined that the administration did not misrepresent the intelligence.

Neither assertion is wholly accurate.

Holy crapinski! That doesn’t look like much of a “heh-indeedy” for the Bush administration, does it? Let’s continue:
Read the rest of this entry »

This’ll piss off the wingers:

Asterisks dot White House?s Iraq argument
Administration had access to intel that wasn?t shared with Congress
By Dana Milbank and Walter Pincus

President Bush and his national security adviser have answered critics of the Iraq war in recent days with a two-pronged argument: that Congress saw the same intelligence the administration did before the war, and that independent commissions have determined that the administration did not misrepresent the intelligence.

Neither assertion is wholly accurate.

Heh indeedily-doodily. Read the whole thing, as they say.

UPDATE: See also World O’Crap.