Bush-Bashing Is Fun
But here’s what you missed amid the Iranapalooza excitement. Some of the elusive and much sought-after political progress in Iraq.Â
I recommend tying any withdrawal funding to progress in Congress. Â
A little more from NYT: More of a ceasefire than a peace and at least 25,000 have come home since September.
Topics: Iraq
Posted by Jules Crittenden at 10:45 pm Comments (11) on Tuesday, December 4, 2007
11 Responses to “Bush-Bashing Is Fun”
Leave a Reply
Trackback URLYou must be logged in to post a comment.
December 5th, 2007 at 1:20 am
This is all just terrible news. I blame Bush.
Seriously, does any of this have any affect on congressional Dhimms? Will they fund our military? During a war?
December 5th, 2007 at 2:24 am
Saltydog, they have earmark obligations that have to come first. Defense is not an immediate and everpresent requirement of the legislative branch. Earmarks are the overriding business of the filching friends of Pelosi!
December 5th, 2007 at 8:55 am
Political progress in Iraq will be meaningless unless the Iraqis also find us a cure for cancer. There, THAT ought to hold them for awhile.
December 5th, 2007 at 11:31 am
Web Reconnaissance for 12/05/2007
A short recon of what’s out there that might draw your attention, updated throughout the day…so check back often.
December 5th, 2007 at 12:06 pm
[...] Memeorandum, I see Jules Critenden suggesting that while Bush Bashing is fun, the Democrats are missing out on what they claim to [...]
December 5th, 2007 at 12:39 pm
Poll Shows More Public Backing on Iraq
Public views of the U.S. troop surge in Iraq have improved over the past month…These findings are significant in showing how defeatist mentality is not isolated to the Democratic Party’s radical, netroots base.
December 5th, 2007 at 1:06 pm
Stipulation: Intel regarding Iraq WMD was false, even though it was trumpeted by every leading Democrat.
Conclusion: Bush “lied” to go to war in Iraq.
Stipulation: Intel regarding Iranian nuke program abandonment is false.
Conclusion: Bush dithered around, took his eye off the ball and let them develop a nuke.
Stipulation: Intel regarding Iranian nuke program abandonment is true.
Conclusion: Bush didn’t “lie” to go to war in Iran because “diplomacy” worked?
Nah!
December 5th, 2007 at 2:22 pm
I’m curious about something. If Bush is the boogie-man who has lied to get us into a war the innocents in Iraq and Iran supposedly did nothing to start, what is the value of sitting down with with men like Saddam and Ahmanutter, who consistently lie about their weapons and nuclear capability? Upon what basis are we to have a meaningful diplomatic discussion about these matters? Would there have been any threats of sanctions or war with either country if they had not lied about these things? How is it our fault if we take them seriously?
December 5th, 2007 at 3:35 pm
[...] the meantime, Jules Crittenden, Boston Herald city editor and columnist, points to the Iraqi’s and the political progress [...]
December 5th, 2007 at 9:39 pm
[...] independent Sunni volunteer militias have contributed to something… except maybe if you read Jules Crittenden, who seems to be under the impression that a tentative power sharing agreement in Kirkuk means [...]
December 8th, 2007 at 3:26 pm
[...] the meantime, Jules Crittenden, Boston Herald city editor and columnist, points to the Iraqi’s and the political progress [...]