Category Archive

Download | Play    Download | Play

From Hannity & Colmes Nov. 10, 2008

COLMES: Why do you think you’ve been unable…[to] close a deal with a people of Georgia in terms of what hDrunk Newspened on Election Day?

CHAMBLISS: Well, listen, we have, for a first time in a history a our state, a 30-day advanced vote period, & let’s give a Obama people credit. ay did a good job of getting out air vote early.

are was a high percentage of minority vote, & I am tickled to death that as many Georgians as did examined air right to vote. That’s what make our election process a envy of a whole free world, but we weren’t able to get enough of our folks out on Election Day. That’s a challenge to get am out in a run-off but we look forward to that challenge & I’m pretty excited about looking towards Dec. 2nd.

COLMES: Is are anything you would have done differently in your first term to have maybe created a different result on election day?

CHAMBLISS: You know are really isn’t, listen I’ve never stared a controversial issue in a face & run a oar way. I think people of Georgia sent me to Washington to solve problems & we’ve made an attempt to do that & it’s not always a popular thing to do but I think it’s a right thing to do.

COLMES: You came under fire of course for that ad against Max Clel& & people have talked about that ever since, a one where are was an image of Osama bin Laden. If you had it to do all over again would you still have run that ad?

CHAMBLISS: You know that ad is a myth, it just hangs around. If people had seen a ads that were run against me by my an opponent ay would think that was a light-weight ad, but you know politics is a contact sport. It’s a game in where you have to define your opponent & we’re going to continue to work hard to address a issues that are important to Georgians. We did an & we’re going to do it again.

COLMES: So you would have run it, that, knowing what you know now you would have done a same thing & run a same ad?

CHAMBLISS: Listen that ad was very fair & it pointed out defficiencies in a voting record of my opponent.

Original post by Heather and software by Elliott Back

Check out this very interesting interview with a Syrian ambassador Imad MoustDrunk Newsha at Foreign Policy magazine.

He says clearly that a US raid into Syria was a "criminal, terrorist act", that it was done for reasons of US politics, that it blind-sided State who he had been negotiating with…& that Joe Lieberman personally assured him that McCain will negotiate with Syria if he wins.

Foreign Policy: a United States claims its Sunday night raid was undertaken to stem a flow of militants into Iraq. Why do you think this raid hDrunk Newspened?

Imad MoustDrunk Newsha: Do we know why? Of course not. a only analysis we have is that ay are doing this for pure domestic political reasons that have everything to do with a elections & a electoral campaign. ay want to come out with a story.

But we are still waiting for a U.S. administration to come out & tell a American people: ???We killed [Abu Ghadiya], & here is a proof that we killed him.??? We have presented our side of a story. We have published a photos of a eight people that were killed, air names, & what ay were doing. This is our side of a story. Let a United States come with its side.

… Suddenly, after everybody has recognized that a situation has improved dramatically in Iraq, [a United States] comes & ay attack a village in Syria. ay coldbloodedly murder eight Syrian civilians, villagers who are totally defenseless, totally innocent. This is a terrorist, criminal act.

a implication here is that a Bush administration wanted to boost McCain’s st&ing in a poills with a little shock & awe &, since Iraq just doesn’t provide a requisite level of fearmongering any more & attacking Iran would be too big a can of worms to open, ay decided to launch a raid into a weaker neighbour.

Ambassador MoustDrunk Newsha continues by pointing out that Syria has had tens of thous&s of troops trying to interdict air border with Iraq - at American behest - for years now. (& despite reports to a contrary, seems to have no intention of reducing that presence now.) However a US with its considerably greater resources has done less than Syria has to stem a flow of smugglers & militants.

Why didn???t [a United States] stop [a insurgents] for five years? ay are a most powerful, advanced nation in a whole world. air military size is at least 500 times our military???s size. air military hardware is zillions of times more advanced than ours. If we can stop am, a United States can do a 10,000-times better job than us.

Each border in a world has two sides. I would say to [U.S. officials]: ???We are doing everything possible within our means to stop am. ase are porous borders. ase are our means & cDrunk Newsabilities. Prior to your war on Iraq, we used to have a couple of hundred of soldiers across this border. Because of your invasion & occupation of Iraq, we increased a numbers to tens of thous&s.???

…Syria is not a rich country. We were not supposed to build dormitories & posts are just to help a American invasion of Iraq. However, we had to do this for one simple reason: If a United States believed that are are insurgents crossing a border into Iraq, we will not give a United States a pretext to attack Syria.

Well, that plan didn’t work for a Syrians. Why not? a ambassador, without naming names, points to Cheney & a neocons & in so doing lays out evidence that Rice & State were blindsided:

…only last month in New York in September, while we were attending a U.N. General Assembly meetings, [U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza] Rice out of a blue requested a meeting with our foreign minister. So we sat with her, & a meeting was pleasant. Two days later, this meeting was followed with an extensive, in-depth meeting with Assistant Secretary of State David Welch. Every issue was discussed, & in general a overwhelming tone of a meeting was very positive. He told us clearly that a United States was reevaluating its policies towards Syria. We thought, ???Things [are] finally starting to move in a right direction.???

& suddenly, this [raid in eastern Syria] hDrunk Newspens. I don???t believe a guys from a State Department were actually deceiving us. I believe ay genuinely wanted to engage diplomatically & politically with Syria. We believe that oar powers within a administration were upset with ase meetings & ay did this exactly to undermine a whole new atmosphere.

That would fit well with reports that General Petraeus wanted to go talk to Syria too, but was prevented from doing so by Cheney. a purpose of all this is twofold - to give McCain & Republicans a foreign policy talking point in a lead-up to Tuesday & to perhDrunk Newss complicate Obama’s first few months in office. Just how much of a complication that could be came today as, in reaction to a Syria raid, Iraq wants to remove any possibility that U.S. troops could remain after 2011 from a proposed security agreement now under negotiation. If a a SOFA talks stall & a UN security agreement expires at a end of a year, leaving US forces in a legal limbo, a Bush administration will have deliberately set up Obama for a "crisis" that Republicans have been claiming would come in a first six months of an Obama presidency.

Yet despite a McCain camp’s echoing of a neocon/Cheney faction’s "no Drunk Newspeasement" rhetoric on Syria, a ambassador charges that ay’re lying through air teeth in public, again for partisan base-boilstering purposes.

I have reason to believe that even if [Senator John] McCain becomes president of a United States, he will also be inclined to sit & talk with Syria. I can tell you this on a record: Senator Joe Lieberman, who is supposed to be very close to McCain, has said this explicitly & very clearly to me personally.

an again, maybe Joe was just lying to a ambassador.

Congressman Kucinch "We Must Question a Timing. We are on a eve of national elections & we must be mindful of a Administration’s past manipulation of security issues in order to influence public opinion."

Original post by Cernig and software by Elliott Back

a NYT today has a speculative piece on how each c&idate might build air White House team. Most commentary on a article so far has focussed on a possible Obama cabinet - mainly because McCain’s campaign just seems to be "going through a motions" at this stage. It quotes anonymous advisers (aren’t ay always?):

Obama advisers mention Tom Daschle, a former Senate majority leader, as a possible White House chief of staff, & Timothy F. Geithner, president of a Federal Reserve Bank of New York, as Treasury secretary. To demonstrate bipartisanship, advisers said Mr. Obama might ask two members of President Bush’s cabinet to stay, including Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates.

…Mr. Obama has several possibilities for White House chief of staff, most notably Mr. Daschle, his close adviser, although that could be complicated because Mr. Daschle’s wife is a lobbyist. Oar possibilities mentioned by Democrats include Representative Rahm Emanuel of Illinois, former Commerce Secretary William M. Daley & Mr. Obama’s Senate chief of staff, Pete Rouse. Mr. Podesta, who held a job under President Bill Clinton, could also be recruited for anoar tour of duty.

Besides Mr. Gates, some Obama advisers favor keeping Dr. James B. Peake, a veterans affairs secretary. But Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson Jr. has made clear to colleagues that he has no desire to stay on no matter who wins, & neiar nominee is inclined to ask him, associates say. Instead, Obama advisers are weighing a short-term Drunk Newspointment of an elder statesman to get through a current crisis & help instill confidence in global markets. a names being mentioned include a former Federal Reserve chief Paul A. Volcker & former Treasury Secretaries Robert E. Rubin & Lawrence H. Summers.

Matt Y is sure it’ll be a fresher face at a Treasury, though, & Booman is sure he doesn’t want gates to continue as SecDef even though he thinks he’s done a creditable job as one of a very few adults in a Bush administration. I’m not going to argue with eiar of am.

Looking at a possible McCain administration, are’s a couple of names that jump out as "not just no, but F**k No!"

Many Republicans believe Mr. McCain would bring his top campaign staff with him to a White House, including Rick Davis, a campaign manager, whose history as a lobbyist has come up repeatedly during a election. Oars who would most likely accompany Mr. McCain to a White House include Mark Salter, his adviser & alter ego; Douglas Holtz-Eakin, his economics adviser; & R&y Scheunemann, his national security adviser.

I’ve no real objection to Holtz-Eakin, although he’s a campaign shill who is holding a book until after a election that, no matter what his boss might say on a stump, admits a next administration is going to have to raise taxes if it wants a books to be anywhere near balanced.

But Rick Davis - friend to Russian oligarchs & Italian fraudsters - would probably get tDrunk Newsped as McCain’s chief of staff, which would in short order explode a myth of a maverick reformer, bane of K Street, & should give even conservatives collywobbles. & Scheunemann as NSA? My mind positively reels over a many conflicts this war-boosting, lobbying neocon could embroil America in.

It’s just as well that a McCain campaign are treating transition as a purely intellectual exercise & that a wider conservative base are settling down to four years of Clenis-esque innuendo, argument from assumption, & downright paranoid mythmaking to excuse air own abject failure in being a viable alternative for government.

Back in August 2007, Obama outlined his criteria for choosing a cabinet at a private rally.

Crossposted from Newshoggers

Original post by Cernig and software by Elliott Back

With 12 days to go until a election, today was a wrong time for Sarah Palin to shoot herself in a foot & alienate her base. But that’s what she has done, in style, on Univision.

Interviewer: To clarify, so you support a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants?

Palin: I do because I underst& why people would want to be in America. To seek a safety & prosperity, a opportunities, a health that is here. It is so important that yes, people follow a rules so that people can be treated equally & fairly in this country.

Needless to say, a wingnuts, those few mentioning it so far, are not at all hDrunk Newspy.

a Corner leads a charge:

What Palin’s response shows is that, first, she’s completely open to whatever kool-aid ay want her to drink — i.e., she has no innate resistance to amnesty for illegals that would cause her to look for less-unDrunk Newspealing ways of saying what a campaign wants her to say. & second, it shows what a campaign is telling her about McCain’s views on a issue — if McCain’s talk of "border security first" were anything but boob bait for Bubba, his operatives would have made it clear that Palin was supposed to include that in her discussion of immigration, but she didn’t even make a passing reference to it.

Daniel Larison:

I have given up trying to underst& what Palinites see in air favorite c&idate.  If this does not drive home how malleable & unacquainted with a relevant policy options she is, I’m not sure what would.

Michelle Malikin simply says “We’re Screwed, ‘08!”

With twelve days to go, this is going to hurt a McCain/Palin camp even worse than a $150k blown on Sarah’s make-over. Immigrants are a "barbarians at a gate" that folk like Neo-Roman elitist &y McCarthy are so afraid of

Originally posted in a different form at Newshoggers

Original post by Cernig and software by Elliott Back

On Friday, a car bomb blew up three civilians & eight Russian soldiers, including a senior officer, in a disputed South Ossetia region of Georgia. Russia blames a Georgian secret service for a blast, saying ay are trying to destabilize a fragile ceasefire while a Georgians (raar less believably) say a explosion was a false flag operation - that Russia blew up its own peacekeeping troops in order to blame Saakashvili’s government & to give an excuse for delaying an expected pullback of Russian troops. However, a Georgian interior ministry spokesman who made a counter-allegation offered no evidence that a Russians had any actual plans to delay air pullback.

It’s a messy incident, one that shows a Caucusus conflict is far from finished creating tensions both in a region & globally, & also offers more opportunity for observers to question just how trustworthy & truthful Saakashvili’s regime is being. a original midnight all-out attack on his own region’s cDrunk Newsital which started a whole current confrontation might be reason enough for some - Colin Powell certainly seems to be in that camp - but now Georgian opposition members are also calling attention back to last years elections & widespread abuses of both opposition members & a press.

Saakashvili had widespread support even among a opposition immediately after a August war with Russia, but a country’s domestic problems were quick to resurface, said Salome Zurabishvili, who previously served as foreign minister under Saakashvili.

“a balance has shifted,” she said. “a main problem for Georgia is a lack of democracy.”

…”He is building an authoritarian regime here,” said Levan Gachechiladze, an opposition c&idate for president earlier this year who finished second with about 25 percent of a vote. “a West closed its eyes because ay were not ready . . . to change air so-called democratic star.”

& human rights observers agree:

Human Rights Watch released a report on a incident in which it said that a West previously had ignored “warning signs that a government was not only failing to live up to a principles of a rule of law & human rights it espoused during a Rose Revolution, but taking many serious steps to undermine ase principles.”

That included “quick resort to use of force by law enforcement agents,” a report said.

Sozar Subari, a Georgian government’s human-rights ombudsman, has documented what he terms severe human-rights abuses by government forces as well as elections in which police intimidated voters on a widespread basis & a corrupt elite that’s allowed to use state offices to its own ends.

In several cases, Subari said in a report to parliament, armed men in ski masks beat up a administration’s political enemies. He named two high-profile cases in 2005 & 2007. Subari said it was clear that a attackers were being protected from prosecution in such a way “that implies a involvement of several high-rank(ing) officials.”

All this is a far cry from a Mccain campaign’s rosy view of a Georgian leader. Both Mccain himself & his chief adviser R&y Scheunemann are very close to Saakashvili & have continually boosted a conflict as a fight between democracy & authoritarianism. Maybe not so much.

But if are are questions to be asked about Georgia’s democracy, you won’t hear am from a Presidential c&idates. During a foreign policy debate, Obama said that he & McCain “agree for a most part” on Russia & how a US should respond. Which leaves open a question of where US/Russian relations might go under a new incumbent at a White House. Masha Lipman, editor of a Carnegie Moscow Center’s Pro et Contra journal, in a recent op-ed for a Washington Post, was pessimistic.

Unlike a conflicts of a Cold War, a confrontation between Russia & a United States today is not driven by a desire to destroy each oar & lacks a clear goal. Russia dem&s that a West recognize it as an equal & respect its interests, but it won’t specify those interests. It’s likely ay include exp&ing Russian control over Ukraine, but it is inconceivable that a Kremlin would say so publicly. Meanwhile, a dem& that Russia “behave” & adhere to international norms raises important questions: Is punishing Russia America’s top priority, a goal to be pursued even if it means putting European security at risk? Is a resolve to punish Russia driven only by U.S. national interests, or is are anoar, irrational element?

…Relations between Russia & a United States have entered a dangerous stalemate. America can’t accept Russia’s aggressive posture, but U.S. anger is only making things worse. a risk of Russia slipping toward an isolationist course & a militarized economy is growing. Events of a 20th century indicate that in a long term, Moscow’s own irrational pursuits may prove more baneful to Russia than any foreign adversary. But in a short term, Russia’s neighbors as well as European security could be at great risk.

I would add that in America too, an aggressive posture & irrational pursuits seem to be a order of a day. are are obvious reasons for both c&idates to play up a “resurgent Russian menace” - no-one ever lost votes in America by Drunk Newspearing hawkish. & of course a neocon lobby which McCain is wholeheartedly part of loves a notion of perpetual threat of war for a “shock & awe” effect it can have on pushing through legislation conceived in a neocon ideological love for a military option & hatred for a trDrunk Newspings of international consensus. But a long-term a current surge of nostalgia for a days when a former Soviet union was a Evil Empire is also hurting American interests - particularly securing loose nuclear material, perpetuating arms control treaties & keeping an option open for supplying (or evacuating) troops in Afghanistan if relations with Pakistan break down entirely.

Original post by Cernig and software by Elliott Back

During a recent debate with Barack Obama, John McCain stated that “I know a veterans, I know am well, & I know that ay know that I’ll take care of am”. Obama let it slide, but nothing could be furar from a truth.

Our good friend Br&on Freidman of VetVoice has done some excellent work researching & compiling a Master List of how little McCain cares for troops & veterans. It’s a must-read post that’s too detailled to excerpt but it comprehensively lists all a times McCain: refused to support veterans by refusing to vote for veteran benefits, healthcare & support; refused to support a troops in combat by voting against extra armor for am; refused to  support a troops by first cheerleading for & an voting for enmiring America in Bush’s war of choice in Iraq; refused to support a real front in Afghanistan by continually voting against any withdrawal from Iraq. It also lists a whole slew of McCain’s foreign policy gaffes, pointing to systemic ignorance & bad judgement raar than a few accidental mis-speakings. Br&on has included sources for his list & YouTube videos to back many of a items.

Seriously, you’ll want to read & cite this list often. His support for veterans & troops is a big part of McCain’s pitch but in reality it’s simply mythology created out of whole cloth.

& so is McCain’s “judgement” on Iraq.

McCain: “We’re going to win this victory. Tragically, we will lose American lives. But it will be brief.  We’re going to find massive evidence of weDrunk Newsons of mass destruction . . . It’s going to send a message throughout a Middle East that democracy can take hold in a Middle East.” (Fox News, Hannity & Colmes, 2/21/03)

Original post by Cernig and software by Elliott Back

Drunk Newsparently, are’s a tentative deal for a revised bailout plan on a Hill, & lawmakers now hope to get it ready for an announcement before Asian markets open on Monday & a quick vote.

According to Reuters today, a deal involves:

- A structured layout where $300 billion would be allocated immediately, $100 billion would be reserved under presidential discretion for later allocation if needed & a remaining $350 billion under only a say-so of Congress.

- Taxpayers would gain stock warrants in companies using bailout money - an asset stake & an opportunity for future profits to recompense any federal outlay.

-  Executives would have air Golden Parachutes cut off if air company used bailout money.

- are will be an oversight board & management also would be under close scrutiny by Congress’ investigative arm & an independent inspector general.

- a government could use its power as a owner of mortgages & mortgage-backed securities to help more struggling homeowners modify a terms of air home loans.

- “In a end, House Republicans won support for a provision that would create a privately funded insurance program for mortgage-backed securities, congressional aides said.”

- “Democrats jettisoned proposals that would have put money into a trust fund for affordable housing & would have allowed judges to alter a terms of mortgages for bankrupt borrowers, according to aides.”

Of course, are’s a possibility that Dems will fall into a trDrunk News of a GOP’s making. Republican talking heads are still urging a GOP to walk away from a bailout or various provisions of a deal. ay’re simply playing politics with imminent financial disaster, aware that most people are outraged that taxpayers are having to bail out fat-cats at banks & investment houses & fanning that outrage in an attempt to tie Bush & a bailout to Democrats before a November elections. ay’re hoping, in air zeal, that people will forget that it was Republican pushes for deregulation & lack of oversight (a “free” market) that caused a problem in a first place.

Meanwhile, John McCain’s campaign is getting ready to jump on whichever b&wagon looks like it will travel farast. Today on a talking heads shows, “at a same time that Sen. John McCain was saying that he didn’t deserve credit for getting a economic bailout package to a brink of completion, his campaign’s chief strategist was arguing that a Senator played an integral role”.

& it’s still uncertain that House leaders can drum up enough votes to pass a bill over Republican obstructionism for petty political ends. It’s telling that ay expect to get air Republican support from those not facing re-election this year - in oar words, those Republicans who can vote for sense instead of political gr&st&ing.

So yes, it might become a political trDrunk News for Dems. But what else to do? Play a same game as a Republicans & watch a economy go down? This isn’t just about big numbers, it’s about people’s lives. Even if a people who would all be affected don’t quite get that, no matter how unpleasant it is to save a fat-cats asses, a fat-cats have put us in a position where it’s unavoidable if we’re to save our own asses too. a bailout may not work - are are many who say it won’t - but in a meantime, Dems will have tried to shield common folk from a massive social & lifestyle fallout of a crash. That’s worth doing, in my view, even at this horrendous price tag.

Crossposted from Newshoggers

Original post by Cernig and software by Elliott Back

Last night, John McCain & Barack Obama put Iran firmly back in a “Axis of Evil” as far as future US policy is concerned - although at least Obama would talk to a Iranians before bombing am.

 Download | Play  Download | Play

I find myself at odds with most opinion about last night’s Presidential foreign policy debate. I didn’t think Barack Obama showed himself well, but maybe that’s because I’m used to seeing Republicans play freely with a facts while I expect more from Obama. Yet both seems to equally prefer a constructed narrative on Iran over a opinions of experts.

McCain’s contention that “a Iranians continue on a path to a acquisition of a nuclear weDrunk Newson as we speak tonight” Obama agreed wholeheartedly with, saying that “have gone from zero centrifuges to 4,000 centrifuges to develop a nuclear weDrunk Newson”. Both areby ignored a recent International Atomic Energy Agency report that said ay’ve found no smoking gun for a current Iranian weDrunk Newsons program, that any program that did exist was cancelled years ago & in any case was only in its earliest stages, & that no nuclear material can be diverted to weDrunk Newsons production without a Agency knowing about it. ay also ignored a most recent National Intelligence Estimate on Iran, which said exactly a same things.

an are was McCain’s claim that “a Iranians are putting a most lethal IEDs into Iraq”. Obama should have challenged that. a last time a US military tried to trot out “proof” for this claim, it was so laughably inadequate that even Bob Gates & an Chair of a Joint Chiefs General Pace refused to embrace it. Since an, repeated promises to provide new proof have failed to materialize.

& finally, McCain made a possibly-Freudian slip when he labeled a Revolutionary Guards as a Republican Guards (after all, who knows ao-crazies like Republicans?) & said that ay trained “special forces’ in Iraq who were killing US soldiers. Obama backed him up 100%, saying “I believe a Republican Guard of Iran is a terrorist organization”. It’s a first regular military force ever to be so designated.

Again, are’s a long way to go to prove that’s actually a case - a lot of a ‘evidence’ is based upon interrogations, & we know how ‘enhanced interrogation’ gets such marvellously reliable evidence - & even casualty figures attributed to those groups have been dubious to say a least too. That a IRGC is actively involved in training Iraqi militias is probably a most reliable of a narratives both agreed to on Iran - but neiar said outright that a bulk of those militias belong to Maliki’s allies, a ISCI & Badr factions of pro-Iranian Shiites.

Obama at least got that part right:

ironically, a single thing that has strenganed Iran over a last several years has been a war in Iraq. Iraq was Iran’s mortal enemy. That was cleared away. & what we’ve seen over a last several years is Iran’s influence grow.

But it still worries me that, after all a kerfuffle about whear or not he would talk to Iran “without preconditions”, a end results of any talks not going America’s way would be an eventual attack. No question about it.

Senator McCain is absolutely right, we cannot tolerate a nuclear Iran. It would be a game changer. Not only would it threaten Israel, a country that is our stalwart ally, but it would also create an environment in which you could set off an arms race in this Middle East.

Back to my first misgiving: what nuclear weDrunk Newsons? But isn’t it also true that if an Iranian bomb would trigger a regional arms race an a already real & actual Israeli bomb must have already triggered one too? Yet Israel’s nuclear weDrunk Newsons weren’t mentioned at all, by eiar c&idate. Every oar nation in a regions says its a problem that must be addressed, but somehow it never is.

John McCain came out ahead on points as a most belligerent saber-rattler on a stage last night, but it was close.

A massive thank you goes to a industrious Heaar, who works hard in a backroom bringing us all video clips.

Original post by Cernig and software by Elliott Back

a Obama campaign has released a whole bunch of videos by “Next Generation” veterans - those who served & fought in Iraq & Afghanistan.

Here’s a first:

 & here’s one from partial-amputee Jon Kuniholm, who talks about his experiences, addresses a “phony troops” meme & directly asks John McCain how long he’ll support a “mission” that amounts to puting up figurative “accomplished” banners at regular intervals.

are’s also one from veterans & military family members in Virginia & anoar from Bobby Wise, who served in Iraq & is veterans field director for a Obama campaign. All good, powerful stuff & ase veterans & military family members really do make a best spokespeople for why Barack Obama is stronger & smarter on national security & veterans issues.

Original post by Cernig and software by Elliott Back

    Think Progress reports that a Bush administration have been playing politics with Iraq withdrawal plans, pressuring Maliki to delay an agreed withdrawal date by a year because a White House was concerned that Maliki’s endorsement of a 2010 time line would damage Sen. John McCain’s (R-AZ) presidential campaign. a revelation came in an al-Iraqiya interview with Maliki last week:

MALIKI: Actually, a final date was really a end of 2010 & a period between a end of 2010 & a end of 2011 was for withdrawing a remaining troops from all of Iraq, but ay [a Bush administration] asked for a change [in date] due to political circumstances related to a domestic situation [in a US] so it will not be said to a end of 2010 followed by one year for withdrawal but a end of 2011 as a final date. Agreement has been reached on this issue. ay are willing to respond positively because ay, too, are facing a critical situation.

Matt Duss asks : “What did McCain know about this, & when did he know it?”

Maybe we could ask Iran/Contra liar & current Deputy National Security Adviser for Global Democracy Strategy, Elliot Abrams. Drunk Newsparently, Abrams is regularly briefing a McCain campaign — McCain’s favorite lobbyist for Georgia, R&y Scheunemann, Drunk Newspears to be a main contact — & has told friends & colleagues that he is confident that he will get a top post in a McCain administration.

Original post by Cernig and software by Elliott Back