(i guess that explains why Hastert pulled the Armenian genocide resolution.)
* notjonathon:
"We can hope that the group led by Waxman, Conyers, Rangel, etc., get us so far into the corruption and lawbreaking that the rest of the party have to go along. One of the jobs of the nets is to pressure the corrupt(ible) Dems (the ones who want their turn at the lobby trough) by warning them that they will face serious primary challenges next time around if they don't act right and fly straight from now on."* Noise:
"Whatever the Dems do, I hope they make sure Lee Hamilton IS NOT included!"
* will Bunch:
"Maybe it's just because the Democrats actually won something, but for the last few days, something has just not felt quite right about either Tuesday's election, or the White House's handling of the voting and the aftermath. We have no doubts that a majority of American voters wanted change on Election Day, and they wanted the Democrats to be the agent of that change.
But we've also followed politics -- and the rise of George W. Bush and Karl Rove -- intensely these past six or seven years, and so beginning on Tuesday night, we were increasingly surprised at all the dogs that did not bark in the 2006 election -- dogs that raised quite a ruckus in the last three national elections."
* eli:
"Hold your shock - the United States has vetoed yet another U.N. resolution condemning Israeli actions in Palestine (specifically Gaza in this instance). How far will the U.S. go to "protect" its clients in Israel? This particular resolution also "would have called on the Palestinian Authority to 'take immediate and sustained action to bring an end to violence, including the firing of rockets on Israeli territory.'" Even that wasn't good enough for the U.S., though."
* driftglass:
"Years ago, thoughtful professionals warned that the day would come when Bush Policies in Iraq would render the situation unfixable.
The day would come when anything and everything we could do would be too little, too late.
Those people were called America-hating traitors, and were told to shut the fuck up."
* here's a 6 minute clip from the simpsons - war of the worlds meets iraq. p3wnd.
2 comments:
I too am wondering why the GOP lost. Of course, I knew they couldn't win a fair election. Problem is that they haven't been partial to fair elections of late.
Cynical answer (aka morbid speculation): Boiling frog. Meaning by the time the Dem base is thoroughly disappointed with the Dems lack of opposition even while in the majority...it will be too late. Economic collapse? Attack on Iran?
Less cynical but still cynical answer: The Establishment was showing their cards...a rigged system with no checks and balances and no accountability. So to reinstate the perception that the system works, electoral accountability was implemented (by simply having peoples' votes actually count). There will be limited investigations and minor reductions to WoT excesses.
Here is another take that I found very interesting (1)
The new talking point (being used to push Gates and explain Rumsfeld's firing) suggests that the PNAC (ideologue) faction is being replaced by the realist faction. That is the theory proposed by Mike Whitney (linked in my previous comment).
I disagree with the idea that Iraq turned out like it did because the PNAC faction (including Bush) was incompetent. IMO, that is extremely effective spin because in truth Bush and many of his PNAC armchair warriors are incompetent.
But Iraq turned out like it did because the Iraq occupation policy was sinister. Privatization and war profiteering came at the expense of stability.
Post a Comment