These Sumbitches ain't about to let reality stand in the way of their predetermined narrative, are they?

I am watching the events unfold around the Petraeus testimony, and I can't believe the idiocy.

They keep bleating endlessly that "the Surge™ worked" but they aren't looking at the reality on the ground now that it is of necessity winding down. It can't be sustained, it was never more than a shell game, and it screwed over a lot of soldiers in the process. And now that the "Surge™" troops are being withdrawn, the violence is ratcheting up. Eighteen American deaths in the last three days. The only way it can be painted as a success is the fact that it allowed the idiot son to run out the clock. That is the only metric by which it can be deemed a success.

And by the way, who reintroduced the al Qaeda talking point? Everyone from Ambassador Crocker to that pesky little wingnut Adam Putnam are issuing dire warnings of al Qaeda having a base of operations in Iraq if the United States leaves. What the hell? It's a myth that al Qaeda is a significant threat in Iraq, and it has been debunked by everyone from Cato to Center for American Progress. There was no al Qaeda in Iraq before the invasion, and their won't be once the United States, of necessity, leaves.

The facts are easily verifiable, so why won't the M$M call any of these assholes on their blatant and overt dishonesty? What the fuck, over?

The Rebranding Effort is Under Way

Let me state my position unequivocally to preempt spin. I am not necessarily anti-war across the board, but I am and have always been anti Iraq war. I am as pro-G.I. as you can possibly be, but I am as opposed to Resident Evil and his 'policies' as is possible as well. He is a warmongering toad, and a danger to the Republic.

But the MBA president sure has a good marketing team. The marketing team is so effective that they have convinced staunch withdrawal advocates that another Friedman is called for.

The most vapid bullshit is being repackaged and sold...and Democrats are lining up to buy it. Hillary has been so fished in that she swallowed the hook.

"We've begun to change tactics in Iraq, and in some areas, particularly in Anbar province, it's working," Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) said in a speech to the Veterans of Foreign Wars on Monday.

BZZZTTT!!! Wrong! What is happening in Anbar has nothing - nothing - to do with the so-called Surge™/troop buildup and everything to do with deals being struck with Sunni insurgents that involves massive amounts of firearms and ammo. Consider this for a moment: 170 million mostly 9 mil. rounds for Iraq, and stateside our police forces train with paintballs because there is insufficient ammo. (I have been very vocal about pointing out that the Romney boys and the Bush twits are ducking duty, but Chelsea Clinton isn't in uniform either, and if Mommy is going to be a war-monger on the stump, it's only fair to point that out.)

John Edwards called her on it, too. "Senator Clinton's view that the President's Iraq policy is 'working' is another instance of a Washington politician trying to have it both ways," Edwards campaign manager David Bonior said in a statement. "You cannot be for the President's strategy in Iraq but against the war. The American people deserve straight talk and real answers on Iraq, not double-speak, triangulation, or political positioning."

Rep. Ellen O. Tauscher (D-Calif.), an Armed Services Committee member seems to get it. "I don't know of anybody who isn't desperately supportive of the military," she said. "People want to say positive things. But it's difficult to say positive things in this environment and not have some snarky apologist for the White House turn it into some clipped phraseology that looks like support for the president's policies." (emphasis mine)

Congress comes back in two weeks, tanned rested and refreshed, having sold out the Fourth Amendment on their way to the beach. But when they come back, they are in for a surprise, because America will be standing watch, silently scrutinizing from the gallery. And it will just get worse for them from there. We, the People, have had it, and we are taking matters into our own hands. On September 4, we begin to stand watch, and on September 21, we observe the first Iraq Moratorium Day.

Participate, people. Be a worthy descendant to the founders who put it all on the line to give us a Republic that these fools have pissed away.

Some Perspective For You

...on the feckless tool Francona.

He eviscerates the cracked kernel in red...

Lack of equipment in Kansas is symptomatic of a larger problem

COMMENTARY

By Lt. Col. Rick Francona

Military analyst

MSNBC

The governor of Kansas claims that recovery efforts in the tornado-devastated town of Greensburg are being hampered by shortages of Kansas National Guard equipment – Humvees, front loaders, trucks – currently deployed to Iraq and not in her state.

Okay, let’s get the politics out of this up front. I am not sure how much her party affiliation – she is a Democrat – plays into her remarks. It does make a nice sound bite and checks the “attack the administration” block. That said, she has a point.

[So Governor Sebelius--who is under attack from Press Secretary Tony Snow--is "playing politics?" Now, how much do you want to be if she were a Republican, not a whisper or a word would be said in response to her very accurate and level-headed assessment? The fact of the matter is, LTG Blum, head of the National Guard, said last month that there was a shortage of equipment. Every reserve and National Guard unit in the ENTIRE COUNTRY is short of equipment. And Sebelius is playing politics when she says the same thing LTG Blum is saying? When a Republican says something, it's just a Republican saying something. When a Democrat says something, it's politics. Thank you for clearing that up--now that we know that the Republican Party doesn't play politics, I'm sure that we'll stop seeing every member of the Republican Party give speeches in front US servicemen and women from now until the end of time. And how long before the President stands in front of servicemen and firemen and anyone else he can use for a prop? After all--he's not playing politics, is he? No, you moonbat. He's not.]

When the governor complains that much of the Kansas National Guard’s equipment is in Iraq, including 15 of its 19 Blackhawk helicopters, she is describing a symptom of a larger problem that goes far beyond Kansas, and far beyond the present situation. The problem is lack of serviceable equipment and it is not limited to the National Guard and reserves. On average these units have only 40 percent of their authorized “TO&E” –- table of organization and equipment –- and it is not in the best of shape. The Guard is supposed to get $21 billion for new equipment over the next five years –- basically a Band-Aid fix. Our regular forces fare only a bit better.

[That's right--but why not state the facts. The DoD and the Bush Administration have left the United States of America undefended. That, my friends, is the impeachable offense that trumps any other impeachable offense.]

War's toll on military equipment
The five-plus year "global war on terror" has taken its toll on military equipment, especially on the vehicles assigned to the ground forces. The problem is most acute in Iraq, where constant improvised explosive device attacks, combined with a harsh operating environment, have degraded the normally robust Humvees. Modifications to the Humvees to make them fighting vehicles (something they were not designed to be) have added weight and changed the driving characteristics dramatically, and shortened their service life. Many, if not most, need to be replaced. Units rotating back to the States often leave most of their Humvees in Iraq.

[Why is that? Why does a unit leave behind their equipment? Because there is no transportation available to ship them back. Once a unit's gear goes forward, there isn't enough resource available to ship it back to where it came from. And if the gear isn't being replaced, the unit goes without critical equipment. Remind me again--who's running this fucking country? Who's the Decider?]

Whether you agree or disagree with the presence of U.S. troops in Iraq, the fact is that American troops are deployed in a combat zone. Combat operations are tough on equipment, and equipment is expensive. It must be replaced at a much higher rate than during peacetime training rotations. For whatever reason, we have not done that. The administration is reluctant to request the actual funds that are required to keep our forces equipped at the optimum level. Yes, the figure would be shocking, but would you deny an American soldier or Marine the very best hardware, and enough of it? Of course not.

Talk about soft-pedalling the obvious--troops are dying because they are not getting the gear they need. Who vetoed the funding legislation again?

Adequate reserves
As I have noted in the past, our armed forces are too small to protect the worldwide national interests of a superpower. One half of one percent of our population in uniform is not enough if we are to fight essentially two wars, maintain forces in other potential hot spots, support relief efforts, provide forces for United Nations commitments, and still have adequate reserves to respond to emergencies at home.

[United Nations commitments? Like, one battalion for duty in the Sinai peninsula?]

I chose the words “adequate reserves” carefully. In the final analysis, the National Guard is a reserve component of the United States Army –- about half of the Army’s combat units are in the National Guard. While the governor is correct that 20 percent of the Kansas Army National Guard is deployed to Iraq, its primary mission is to provide forces for the United States Army. It is the federal government that funds the National Guard, not the governor.

[And he patently ignores the fact that Bush can Federalize the Guard and take it away from Blue State governors at will--courtesy of a rule change rammed into law by the last Republican Congress. And, he can Federalize the guard and use them to put down citizen insurrections--such as when the Quakers get rowdy and have a peace rally. Yes, the full weight of the US Military can be used to kill American citizens and there isn't a goddamned thing anyone can do about it. Remind me again--who's in charge?]

What is a governor to do when his or her state’s Guardsmen are deployed on federal service? The governor of each state is authorized to organize, train and equip a State Defense Force, not subject to federal service, to be used specifically when the National Guard is away. Kansas has such a force; I assume the governor has mobilized them.

[Otherwise known as the Citizen's Auxilliary? Is he serious? What few people would still be available have just had their homes destroyed. Everyone else is just trying to survive. All of the useful and critical people are deployed or busy keeping everyone alive in their own communities. They are shorthanded and need help--hence, you call out the Guard. Oh, wait--they're in Iraq! Brilliant.]

When all is said and done, the United States needs a larger Army. Until we reestablish an adequate force level to meet the requirements levied on our active duty armed forces, we will continue to call up the National Guard and reserves.

[No, until we bring our troops home and spend hundreds of billions of dollars to retrain, re-equip and rebuild the forces that are charged with defending this country, there will be more US cities wiped off the face of the Earth. Remind me again--who's in charge and who's responsible for this debacle? ]

So how many American cities, exactly, have to disappear before the people finally wake up and "get it"?

Question everything these mendacious pricks say, folks.