Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Posted at 9:13 AM ET, 03/ 5/2011

Open Thread

By Greg Sargent

All yours.

By Greg Sargent  | March 5, 2011; 9:13 AM ET
Categories:  Miscellaneous  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Happy Hour Roundup
Next: New ad turns up heat on Wisconsin Republicans as Walker's poll numbers sink

Comments

Was Mike Huckabee actually calling for Ms. Portman to have an abortion?

She is pregnant, and Mike Huckabee has denounced her for that, so he must want her to abort the fetus; right all you right wing men, who know so much, from personal experience about being pregnant?

I must say though, that Mike Huckabee has done a terrific job off dropping all that weight he gained during his last pregnancy.

Posted by: Liam-still | March 5, 2011 9:25 AM | Report abuse

Open Thresd: new results from the Large Hadron Collider aren't promising for supersymmetry. Inconclusive, of course, but at current energies and under many versions of SUSY the neutralino, the one stable superpartner, might have shown up by now.

No SUSY, no string theory.

Essence of SUSY: particles are divided into fermions (matter) and bosons (forces). Electrons, neutrinos, and quarks are fermions, photons, gluons, and the W and Z particles are bosons. SUSY says each fermion has a matching boson superpartner and vice versa. There are books about these things wriitten as though they're proven.

All superpartners are unstable except the neutralino, which is a fermion corresponding to the photon. It's a prime candidate for Dark Matter.

Developing...

Posted by: caothien9 | March 5, 2011 9:28 AM | Report abuse

Huckabee also says Obama grew up in Kenya and harbors anti colonial sentiments.

He's showing himself to be little more than a buffoon whom even George Will, no stranger to nutsy beliefs, says is bad for his beloved Republican Party.

Posted by: caothien9 | March 5, 2011 9:33 AM | Report abuse

Was Mike Huckabee actually calling for Ms. Portman to have an abortion?

She is pregnant, and Mike Huckabee has denounced her for that, so he must want her to abort the fetus

Posted by: Liam-still | March 5, 2011 9:25 AM
=======================================

Another display of liberal logic. Why, yes, Liam (patting him on the head), based on his statement, I don't see how anyone could come to any other conclusion.

Posted by: Brigade | March 5, 2011 9:51 AM | Report abuse

Iraq's signature injury was the IED brain damage, leaving many vegetative or severely disabled.

Afghanistan is turning up a new one: leg amputations, often both, often with loss of one or both testicles.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/03/04/AR2011030403258.html?hpid=artslot

What is the USA doing in this hellhole again ...?

Posted by: caothien9 | March 5, 2011 9:53 AM | Report abuse

Funny ha ha how Huckle had nothing to say about Palin's little slụt of a daughter, parading her around like a 4H winning sow.

Posted by: caothien9 | March 5, 2011 9:56 AM | Report abuse

Idiot? Me? I am not the one defending the bushies and the biggest foreign policy blunder of the 20th century---(srw3)

==

hate to issue a correction to a post I agree with in so many particulars, but the ginning up of and the invasion of Iraq were in the 21st century, which is off to an inauspicious start.

Posted by: caothien9 | March 5, 2011
========================================

Don't burst the bubble. It's good to have srw3 on record saying the actual blunders which led to the invasion of Iraq must have occurred during the Clinton administration.

Posted by: Brigade | March 5, 2011 9:58 AM | Report abuse

@brigade:Sorry to rain on your liberal, union, propaganda parade but Walker is becoming a national hero

The national hero in farrightwingnutistan. Here in the US he is just another union busting, millionaire coddling, scab suppporting, loser...

Posted by: srw3 | March 5, 2011 10:01 AM | Report abuse

This just in:

Mike Huckabee announces that he is going to divorce his current wife, and marry Bristol Palin, in order to provide a stable family environment for Bristol's child.

Posted by: Liam-still | March 5, 2011 10:06 AM | Report abuse

@Brigade: I would have said the worst of the 21st century but there is no one to compare his perfidy to then. I stand corrected, Bush is the worst president of the last hundred years. I hope that clarifies this for you. Iraq was the worst foreign policy disaster since VietNam and probably much worse as Bush clearly learned nothing from the failure of vietnam.

Posted by: srw3 | March 5, 2011 10:06 AM | Report abuse

All, check out this very hard hitting new ad labor is airing against Scott Walker starting today:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2011/03/new_ad_turns_up_heat_on_wiscon.html

Posted by: Greg Sargent | March 5, 2011 10:08 AM | Report abuse

Open Thresd: new results from the Large Hadron Collider aren't promising for supersymmetry. Inconclusive, of course, but at current energies and under many versions of SUSY the neutralino, the one stable superpartner, might have shown up by now. . .

Developing...

Posted by: caothien9 | March 5, 2011 9:28 AM
==========================================

Aren't you the fellow who (under another moniker) once posted the following dire predictions, among others, at the Fix---along with equally calamitous warnings about global warming?

---

"One of them, Professor Otto Rossler, a retired German chemist, said he feared the experiment may create a devastating quasar – a mass of energy fuelled by black holes – inside the Earth.
‘Nothing will happen for at least four years,’ he said. ‘Then someone will spot a light ray coming out of the Indian Ocean during the night and no one will be able to explain it.
‘A few weeks later, we will see a similar beam of particles coming out of the soil on the other side of the planet. Then we will know there is a little quasar inside the planet.’
Prof Rossler said that as the spinning-top-like quasar devoured the world from within, the two jets emanating from it would grow and catastrophes such as earthquakes and tsunamis would occur at the points they emerged from the Earth.
‘The weather will change completely, wiping out life, and very soon the whole planet will be eaten in a magnificent scenario – if you could watch it from the moon. A Biblical Armageddon. Even cloud and fire will form, as it says in the Bible.’
He said that attempts were still being made in the European Court of Human Rights to halt the experiment on the grounds that it violated the right to life. The court has, however, already rejected calls for a temporary delay in the project, and it is unlikely to come to a speedy decision about whether the CERN experiment should be halted for good.

"Meanwhile Dr Walter Wagner, an American scientist who has been warning about the dangers of particle accelerators for 20 years, is awaiting a ruling on a lawsuit he filed a fortnight ago in his home state of Hawaii.
He fears the experiments might unwittingly create something he calls a ‘strangelet’ that could result in a fusion reaction that might ultimately turn the Earth into a supernova, or an exploding star."---dailymail.co.uk;j.petrie
-------

Remember?

Posted by: Brigade | March 5, 2011 10:09 AM | Report abuse

How does Mike Huckabee feel about all those Republicans, such as Newt, Rudi, Donald Trump, etc, who fathered children, while married, and then got divorced, and married, and divorced again, and married, and.....?

Posted by: Liam-still | March 5, 2011 10:11 AM | Report abuse

Correction: Bush clearly learned nothing from the failure of vietnam...except how to use his privilege to avoid fighting in a war he was perfectly happy to cheer lead for and wave goodbye at the poor draftees who didn't have rich connected daddies to keep them safe, protecting texas from the viet cong ....

Posted by: srw3 | March 5, 2011 10:12 AM | Report abuse

Was Mike Huckabee actually calling for Ms. Portman to have an abortion?

She is pregnant, and Mike Huckabee has denounced her for that, so he must want her to abort the fetus; right all you right wing men, who know so much, from personal experience, about being pregnant?

I must say though, that Mike Huckabee has done a terrific job of dropping much of the weight he gained, during his last pregnancy.

Posted by: Liam-still | March 5, 2011 10:13 AM | Report abuse

"Afghanistan is turning up a new one: leg amputations, often both, often with loss of one or both testicles."
=======================================

I don't think Liam's ever been to Afghanistan, but this sounds remarkably like his situation. RUK can get him a discount on some choppers, but I don't know about the testies.

Posted by: Brigade | March 5, 2011 10:15 AM | Report abuse

This just in:

Mike Huckabee announces that he is going to divorce his current wife, and marry Bristol Palin, in order to provide a stable family environment for Bristol's child.

Posted by: Liam-still | March 5, 2011 10:06 AM
=========================================

Huck would be getting the best of that deal. Don't tell me, Liam, that you wouldn't trade Ruby for Bristol in a heartbeat.

Posted by: Brigade | March 5, 2011 10:17 AM | Report abuse

Iraq was the worst foreign policy disaster since VietNam and probably much worse as Bush clearly learned nothing from the failure of vietnam.

Posted by: srw3 | March 5, 2011 10:06 AM
===========================================

I was talking about George W. Bush, not Reggie Bush.

Posted by: Brigade | March 5, 2011 10:19 AM | Report abuse

Bush included N. Korea in his "axis of evil". They threatened to use their confirmed weapons of mass destruction, but yet he never even considered invading them. How come?

We all no the answer to that question. No Oil, and fear of the Big Dog on that block.

"Freedom Agenda, and planting the seeds of Democracy" my Arse!!!

Posted by: Liam-still | March 5, 2011 10:20 AM | Report abuse

Correction: Bush clearly learned nothing from the failure of vietnam...except how to use his privilege to avoid fighting in a war he was perfectly happy to cheer lead for and wave goodbye at the poor draftees who didn't have rich connected daddies to keep them safe, protecting texas from the viet cong ....

Posted by: srw3 | March 5, 2011 10:12 AM
========================================

Did he ever wave goodbye to Slick Willie? Oh, wait---Willie was probably protecting Arkansas.

Posted by: Brigade | March 5, 2011 10:21 AM | Report abuse

Bush included N. Korea in his "axis of evil". They threatened to use their confirmed weapons of mass destruction, but yet he never even considered invading them. How come?

We all know the answer to that question. No Oil, and fear of the Big Dog on that block.

"Freedom Agenda, and planting the seeds of Democracy" my Arse!!!

Posted by: Liam-still | March 5, 2011 10:22 AM | Report abuse

srw3,
When it came to decorated veterans vs. draft dodgers, you voted for Bush41 and Dole rather than Clinton, right? Yes? No? Maybe? I can't remember?

Posted by: Brigade | March 5, 2011 10:23 AM | Report abuse

"Funny ha ha how Huckle had nothing to say about Palin's little slụt of a daughter, parading her around like a 4H winning sow."

Hi Cao! Hope all is well with you! ;-). Are you of the opinion that unwed mothers should be locked away? Forced into an abortion? Also, do you have questions, like A. Sullivan, as to whether Sarah Palin is Trig's actual mother? Just curious? ;-)

Great comments everybody! Keep up the good work!

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | March 5, 2011 10:25 AM | Report abuse

Hi Troll! :-)

Don't bother talking to me, Ok? :-)

I don't give a rats!! ;-) Go lick a dog's rear! :-)

Posted by: caothien9 | March 5, 2011 10:29 AM | Report abuse

George W. Bush's Invasion and Occupation of Afghanistan, is also causing Democracy to flourish in that region of the globe. Why, just the other day, inspired by the example of tolerance and Democracy that was established by George W. Bush, one of the few remaining non muslim politicians in Pakistan was assassinated, because he spoke out against blasphemy laws in his country.

Charles Krauthammer will surely write a column, lauding President Bush for having set such an example in Afghanistan, that it's neighbors are all becoming flourishing Democracies. Yup Yup; You Betcha!!

Posted by: Liam-still | March 5, 2011 10:29 AM | Report abuse

Bush included N. Korea in his "axis of evil". They threatened to use their confirmed weapons of mass destruction, but yet he never even considered invading them. How come?

We all know the answer to that question. No Oil, and fear of the Big Dog on that block.

==

Had there been ANY chance of Iraq offering any resistance do you really think the USA would have invaded? The invasion only happened after it was conclusively confirmed that three was nothing but a ragtag army with no real weapons, and we STILL lost 4400 soldiers and had ten times as many maimed.

Think the USA will lay a finger on Iran? With a real military? No, but we'll let Israel bomb them and we'll bear the real pain, so Israeli settlers can go on stealing land and shooting little kids in the back from the air.

Posted by: caothien9 | March 5, 2011 10:42 AM | Report abuse

No one ever glorified Bristol Palin's pregnancy, see the difference now?

Posted by: clawrence12 | March 5, 2011 10:53 AM | Report abuse

Like hell. Her tramp of a mother paraded her around like bearing the child of a dumb redneck was some sort of Second Coming.

Posted by: caothien9 | March 5, 2011 10:56 AM | Report abuse

"Hi Troll! :-)

Don't bother talking to me, Ok? :-)

I don't give a rats!! ;-) Go lick a dog's rear! :-)"

Thanks for responding Cao, but if you don't care, why did you state "parading her around like a 4H winning sow.?" the reasonable conclusion to be drawn for what you wrote is that you think unwed mothers should be locked away, or forced into an abortion. I just wanted to confirm your opinion. I'm also curious, since you've expressed a belief in a 9/11 conspiracy if Sullivan's "Trig Trutherism" was another conspiracy you believed in.

Thanks in advance, and I look forward to your reply. Hope your evening is fantastic! ;-)

Great spirited debate everybody! I thank you. ;-)

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | March 5, 2011 10:56 AM | Report abuse

In fact, she learned the lesson so well that she goes around the country urging teens to NOT make the same mistake she did (being to have unmarried sex in the first place). Natalie Portman, on the other hand, boasts about it on the Red Carpet.

Posted by: clawrence12 | March 5, 2011 10:58 AM | Report abuse

TrollMcWingnut, it's even worse than that since caothien9 has called Sarah Palin an idiot for NOT aborting Trig. So much for pro "choice" huh? It really is pro abortion with them.

Posted by: clawrence12 | March 5, 2011 11:02 AM | Report abuse

This just in;

Natalie Portman proposes marriage to Mike Huckabee, in order to raise her baby in a Traditional Sad Marriage environment.

Posted by: Liam-still | March 5, 2011 11:11 AM | Report abuse

Mike immediately starts putting the fat back on and has a huge plasma TV installed pre tuned to ESPN so the child will be raised as NORMAL as PASSABLE.

Homeschooling in brand loyalty too.

Posted by: caothien9 | March 5, 2011 11:16 AM | Report abuse

"TrollMcWingnut, it's even worse than that since caothien9 has called Sarah Palin an idiot for NOT aborting Trig. So much for pro "choice" huh? It really is pro abortion with them."

Hi clawrence! Hope all is well with you! I respect your pro-life passion, but I don't think it's fair to put those words in cao's mouth. You know he wouldn't do that to others. I just want to confirm my suspicions that cao's rather colorful description of Sarah and Bristol Palin are drawn from the well of good natured political disagreement rather than contempt for individuals he doesn't know. ;-)

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | March 5, 2011 11:16 AM | Report abuse

Yeah Jake having an unwed sow preaching abstunence makes a lot of sense. Almost as much as having an amniocentesis and ignoring the result.

Posted by: caothien9 | March 5, 2011 11:19 AM | Report abuse

Why on earth didn't Ms. Portman heed the advice from Bristol Palin?

Posted by: Liam-still | March 5, 2011 11:19 AM | Report abuse

Having a baby causes several months of quasi spiritual emotions that many women enjoy.

Posted by: caothien9 | March 5, 2011 11:22 AM | Report abuse

Greg,

I just need to compliment you again on the sterling quality and character of the liberal commenters you've gathered here.

Heckuva job! You should be proud.

Posted by: quarterback1 | March 5, 2011 11:27 AM | Report abuse

The cuts will be devastating:

http://nationsreportcard.gov/science_2009/g8_state.asp?subtab_id=Tab_6&tab_id=tab1#tabsContainer

[National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP); for you folks in AnnArbor]

2009 4th Grade Math

White students: Texas 254, Wisconsin 250 (national average 248)
Black students: Texas 231, Wisconsin 217 (national 222)
Hispanic students: Texas 233, Wisconsin 228 (national 227)

2009 8th Grade Math

White students: Texas 301, Wisconsin 294 (national 294)
Black students: Texas 272, Wisconsin 254 (national 260)
Hispanic students: Texas 277, Wisconsin 268 (national 260)

2009 4th Grade Reading

White students: Texas 232, Wisconsin 227 (national 229)
Black students: Texas 213, Wisconsin 192 (national 204)
Hispanic students: Texas 210, Wisconsin 202 (national 204)

2009 8th Grade Reading

White students: Texas 273, Wisconsin 271 (national 271)
Black students: Texas 249, Wisconsin 238 (national 245)
Hispanic students: Texas 251, Wisconsin 250 (national 248)

2009 4th Grade Science

White students: Texas 168, Wisconsin 164 (national 162)
Black students: Texas 139, Wisconsin 121 (national 127)
Hispanic students: Wisconsin 138, Texas 136 (national 130)

2009 8th Grade Science

White students: Texas 167, Wisconsin 165 (national 161)
Black students: Texas 133, Wisconsin 120 (national 125)
Hispanic students: Texas 141, Wisconsin 134 (national 131)

H/T Iowahawk, and BTW Krugman is a tool and the NYTimes is as straight as Col. Gaddafi.

{{{also posted in the above thread cuz I like to share...hey, I'm a giver}}}

Posted by: tao9 | March 5, 2011 11:40 AM | Report abuse

TrollMcWingnut, I'm not putting words in his mouth. Look up the prior threads.

Posted by: clawrence12 | March 5, 2011 11:42 AM | Report abuse

I just need to compliment you again on the sterling quality and character of the liberal commenters you've gathered here.

==

This from the wall-puncher whose contribution is limited to personal attacks and wounded sarcasm

Posted by: caothien9 | March 5, 2011 11:47 AM | Report abuse

"I just need to compliment you again on the sterling quality and character of the liberal commenters you've gathered here.

Heckuva job! You should be proud."

Now QB, you know I respect you, so please accept my "tut-tutting" and "steeple-fingered pomposity" in the spirit it's given. We both know that the mere existence of Sarah Palin and her family is an affront to our liberal co-commentors here. I for one, apologize for their existence. Show your magnanimity and shame for offending our co-commentors!

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | March 5, 2011 11:49 AM | Report abuse

Ship Abandoning It's Sinking Rat!

David Koch now says that he had never heard of Scot Walker, until that prank phone call brought the name to his attention.

This despite the fact that Koch has contributed huge sums of money to the Walker campaign, has his AFP front group running a massive TV ad, in support of the Walker Union busting effort, and has an AFP bus load, including Joe The Plunger, touring Wisconsin in support of Walker.

Since David Koch is now running away from Scott Kochdaffi, that mean that the guy is political road kill.

In A Nutshell:

Ship Abandoning It's Sinking Rat!

Posted by: Liam-still | March 5, 2011 11:49 AM | Report abuse

"This from the wall-puncher whose contribution is limited to personal attacks and wounded sarcasm"

Hi Cao! Fascinating as usual! ;-) I want to personally thank you for setting such a good example! You ate, unarguably, the exact opposite, and I appreciate it.

Let's use cao's style as an example for us to emulate! The comments would be, we can all agree, a much more civil place if we did that!

Cao, I thank you and offer my hand in friendship! ;-)

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | March 5, 2011 11:54 AM | Report abuse

Whoops! Ate=are. I'm sorry! :-(

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | March 5, 2011 11:56 AM | Report abuse

Save it, Troll!! :-) The perky an' chirpy crap doesn't do a thing for me! ;-)

GRIN GRIN GRIN!! :-)

Posted by: caothien9 | March 5, 2011 12:04 PM | Report abuse

David Koch sure sounds like a perky little fellow.

I bet his cell phone has a really upbeat ringtone.

Posted by: caothien9 | March 5, 2011 12:07 PM | Report abuse

Who couldn't love a guy who is worth Sixty Billion dollars, running a group named Americans For Prosperity, that wants to slash the incomes and benefits of the Working Class.

The full name of the group should be: American Idiots For Koch Billionaire's Increased Prosperity.

Posted by: Liam-still | March 5, 2011 12:12 PM | Report abuse

Troll,

I know, I know! Why ever would you think I was being sarcastic. It's a true wonder what a group of brilliant, magnanimous progressive humanitarians comment here. I'm in awe of the erudition, their incisive observations, their cogency, and especially their compassion and generosity.

Posted by: quarterback1 | March 5, 2011 12:17 PM | Report abuse

"Save it, Troll!! :-) The perky an' chirpy crap doesn't do a thing for me! ;-)

GRIN GRIN GRIN!! :-)"

Hi Cao! Thanks for responding! Such a kidder! ;-). We gotta defend ourselves from the knuckledraggers!

Again, thanks for the good natured ribbing! ;-). You're such a card!

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | March 5, 2011 12:20 PM | Report abuse

"I know, I know! Why ever would you think I was being sarcastic. It's a true wonder what a group of brilliant, magnanimous progressive humanitarians comment here. I'm in awe of the erudition, their incisive observations, their cogency, and especially their compassion and generosity."

QB, let's not forget their tolerance, sweet Jesus their tolerance. Unequaled, unrivaled, and, from what I've seen here from the Con's, undeserved.

Great work all! :-) Many, many thanks!

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | March 5, 2011 12:25 PM | Report abuse

Will Natalie Portman be able to to try and big foot Traffic Cops, like Mrs Mike Huckabee was, when she was issued a ticket for swerving into another lane, and cutting of another driver?

Just want to get those Traditional Family Values Marriage Rules, sorted out for Ms. Portman, before she places her order.

Posted by: Liam-still | March 5, 2011 12:35 PM | Report abuse

"able to to try and big foot"?

Posted by: clawrence12 | March 5, 2011 12:45 PM | Report abuse

94% Evangelicals View Obama* Unfavorably
http://bpnews.net/BPnews.asp?ID=34771

*Radical, pro-abortion Leftist POTUS unpopular with evangelical voters.

Grade: F- (miserable failure)

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | March 5, 2011 1:01 PM | Report abuse

Ship Abandoning It's Sinking Rat!

David Koch now says that he had never heard of Scot Walker, until that prank phone call brought the name to his attention.

This despite the fact that Koch has contributed huge sums of money to the Walker campaign, has his AFP front group running a massive TV ad, in support of the Walker Union busting effort, and has an AFP bus load, including Joe The Plunger, touring Wisconsin in support of Walker.

Since David Koch is now running away from Scott Kochdaffi, that mean that the guy is political road kill.

In A Nutshell:

Ship Abandoning It's Sinking Rat!

Posted by: Liam-still | March 5, 2011 1:07 PM | Report abuse

Should you be in Tripoli or something?

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | March 5, 2011 1:10 PM | Report abuse

After charging large fees to tell single women not to have sex, but after she had a baby without being married, Bristol Palin got back together with the guy who impregnated her, and shacked up with him again, for a brief period.

What a role model for young women to have held up to them as someone to emulate.

Do as Bristol Says, Not As She Does.

Posted by: Liam-still | March 5, 2011 1:11 PM | Report abuse

"@Brigade: I would have said the worst of the 21st century but there is no one to compare his perfidy to then. I stand corrected, Bush is the worst president of the last hundred years. I hope that clarifies this for you. Iraq was the worst foreign policy disaster since VietNam and probably much worse as Bush clearly learned nothing from the failure of vietnam. Posted by: srw3 "
'
Well, since what little actual thought or planning (step 1, start a war, step 2, declare victory. step 3, be a hero, that about does it, OK?) got done was dine by Cheney, Rumsfield, Wolfowicz, Feith, and the rest of the reincarnation of Clausewitz and his staff was noodled out in 1999, it is a twentieth century thing. It is infinitely worse as a Foreign Policy disaster because it was a whole cloth fabrication where Viet Nam at least was an attempt to learn from WW II and the early Cold War, whereas Iraq was an attempt to teach all those old foggie cold warriors on Bush Senior's team that they were wrong, wrong, wrong.

M<aybe the better comparison would be the worst Foreign Policy Decision since the Spanish American War.

I sure hope Iraq doesn't end up another Cuba.

Posted by: ceflynline | March 5, 2011 5:36 PM | Report abuse

Excuse me, but didn't we win the Spanish American War?

Posted by: clawrence12 | March 5, 2011 5:48 PM | Report abuse

"Excuse me, but didn't we win the Spanish American War? Posted by: clawrence12 "

I hate to treat your posts as if they had any validity, but stupidity like this is too good to waste.

Comparison between the Spanish American War and Little Georgie's War:

We had no real reason to want a war with Cuba, but Grant had wanted to annex Cuba, BEFORE the Civil War, as a distraction to the Secessionists, and tried throughout his administration to do that very thing. McKinley was a Grant Loyalist and, goaded by Hearst sought grounds for a war. (The apocryphal story that artist Frederic Remington telegrammed Hearst to tell him all was quiet in Cuba and "There will be no war." Hearst responded "Please remain. You furnish the pictures and I'll furnish the war." )

George, having been brushed aside by the adults in his father's cabinet, especially on NOT trying to take Baghdad and depose Saddam Hussein, spent the next eight years planning to show them HE was right.

Having sought every pretext he could to start that war, McKinley seized on the Battleship Maine's sinking as his causus belli, (poor seamanship in dealing with flammables probably sank the ship).

George let terrorists kill 2200 people so he would have an excuse, and when that wasn't enough declared Saddam had WMD's that he knew full well weren't there.

When Spain agreed to treat with America over McKinley's complaints, thus taking away his excuse, McKinley brushed off Spain's response and declared war any way.

With Saddam totally opening his country to U.N. inspectors, and thus showing that his WMD program was all talk, George order red the Army in, totally unprepared even to over run a virtually disarmed country. (He couldn't wait, since the U.N resolution he needed for his attack was about to be rescinded.)

McKinley had given no thought to other Spanish territories, and so wasn't really prepared to take over the Philippines, Guam, of Puerto Rico. He also sent his attack force for Cuba off with horses, and no way to get them ashore in Cuba.

That pretty much covers the amazing similarities between the farces that led up to both wars. Neither was justified, and the U.S. was totally against permitting the results to go to their natural conclusion, essentially declaring that, when we won we would have to give most everything back.

Results compared next 4k word post.

Posted by: ceflynline | March 5, 2011 6:23 PM | Report abuse

The stupidity of Iraq and the Spanish American war compared, Part II

Neither Iraq nor Spain had any real answer to America attacking them. The Spanish commander responded to an American warship firing a range finding round at his Fort by sending out a boat to apologize for not returning the salute because he had no gun powder. Neither the Spanish Fleet in Manila nor the one at Santiago were in any condition to fight and both were sunk with little effort when they fought. Both Santiago and Manila were given up under a pretend assault by U. S. forces, choreographed to let the Spanish troops save face.

Upon America's crossing the border in its assault on Iraq, Saddam essentially disbannded his Army and told it to go home.

And at that point, in each case, the U.S. realized that it had done something very stupid, and would not like the logical results.

McKinley immediately realized that he had just acquired islands all over full of brown skinned people who had every right to demand organization and statehood if their territories, won it the war, weren't immediately declared not American territory. The Philippines required many years of pacification even as we moved to the announced date for full independence of 1944. Puerto Rico was acquired and we STILL haven't quite solved the conundrum of what to do with that Commonwealth. Guam we hold as part of the Marianas, and can't quite figure it out either.

And Cuba was dealt with by the U. S. taking over Spain's governance and running Cuba exactly as Spain had been running it, let the Rich have whatever they wanted, and do their level best to crush the occasional uprising by the poor.

Iraq was obviously not a place that the U.S. really wanted to even try to govern, (although Ambassador Crocker at least wanted to give Iraq the benefits of the U. S. health care lack of system by doing away with free health care for everybody paid for from oil revenues. Can't have socialism, especially when you can afford it. Better to let Shell and their friends have the oil wealth than to use it to provide health and education to ordinary Iraqis.

And so the current problem is, how do we avoid making the same mistakes McKinley made and find Iraq our bext Cuba.

Just some grade school history to remind us that Republicans are quite capable of totally forgetting U.S. History if necessary to avoid it getting in the way of stupid Foreign Policies its current Napoleons want to pursue.

So let's HOPE Iraq isn't our next Cuba.

Posted by: ceflynline | March 5, 2011 6:44 PM | Report abuse

"I hate to treat your posts as if they had any validity, but stupidity like this is too good to waste.

Comparison between the Spanish American War and Little Georgie's War:"

You know, all the faux intellectualism that comes after garbage like that is pretty much a waste. Just say you hate Bush and the GOP and don't bother with with the rest of the claptrap.

Posted by: quarterback1 | March 5, 2011 6:50 PM | Report abuse

"McKinley was a Grant Loyalist and, goaded by Hearst sought grounds for a war."

McKinley is generally regarded as having tried to avoid war.

"George, having been brushed aside by the adults in his father's cabinet, especially on NOT trying to take Baghdad and depose Saddam Hussein, spent the next eight years planning to show them HE was right."

Spun from whole cloth from beginning to end.

Ignoring the silly "eight years" stuff, just consider that Cheney was Sec Def for the Gulf War, and Powell was CJC. Cheney, who defended Bush I's decision not to depose Hussein.

This is also rather an ironic spin, from a person who claims to be championing the adage of learning from history. (Yeah, I'm sure you'll have to think about that one, but I promise it's right in front of your nose.)

"George let terrorists kill 2200 people so he would have an excuse, and when that wasn't enough declared Saddam had WMD's that he knew full well weren't there."

A truther, too. Figures.

"When Spain agreed to treat with America over McKinley's complaints, thus taking away his excuse, McKinley brushed off Spain's response and declared war any way."

Complete hogwash. You might want to check which branch has the power to declare war and which one did.

"George order red the Army in, totally unprepared even to over run a virtually disarmed country. (He couldn't wait, since the U.N resolution he needed for his attack was about to be rescinded.)"

Also hogwash. Unprepared? We overran the country in short order. The go order actually came as a result of intelligence on Hussein's location that said bombing had a good chance to kill him. Your UN Resolution claim is sheer fabrication.

"Upon America's crossing the border in its assault on Iraq, Saddam essentially disbannded his Army and told it to go home."

Yet you claim we were totally unprepared for the invasion.

"And at that point, in each case, the U.S. realized that it had done something very stupid, and would not like the logical results."

Um, no.

"And so the current problem is, how do we avoid making the same mistakes McKinley made and find Iraq our bext Cuba."

Not the problem at all, considering that we haven't in the least handled Iraq like Cuba.

This commenter obviously rights fiction and fantasy disguised with "facts," many of which . . . aren't. Won't even bother with the overall goofiness of the stretch to compare to the Spanish American War.

Posted by: quarterback1 | March 5, 2011 8:18 PM | Report abuse

"Yet you claim we were totally unprepared for the invasion. Posted by: quarterback1 |"

You might try to produce a few facts to back your denials.

Like this one.

The intended plan for invading Iraq called for troops to enter Khurdistan from Turkey, but there were two minor problems with that. Turkey wouldn'tlet us and we didn't really have the troops available.

Meanwhile, the 101st was direvted to move on Baghdad along a route that led right through Iraq's largest ammunition depot. The 101st went in, l;ooked around and noticed that the magazines were loaded with high explosives, and went on, doing NOTHING to secure or destroy all tgose munitions. They were on a strict timeline to get into Baghdad, and couldn't wait one day to try to destroy at least some of the magazines. They had no reserves available to relieve them, so for more than two years those magazines were available for terrorists to use to get explosives. The Army, and the marines, NEVER dedicated any large number of assets to rectify that problem, (Don't believe me, check the Army times and see if there were ever any brigade sized elements tasked with destroying the munitions. Never happened. Eventually DOD and contract civilians got th task, with virtually no military security provided, because from start to finish we never had the troops available to do the simple things we should have been doing to safeguard our own people.

Much of the explosives used in all the IEDs we still face probably came from unsecured ammunition depots from Saddams says. not enough troops to go out, find them, and blow them up.

Gen Eric Shinseki got cashiered for telling Bush that there weren't nearly enough troops on hand to properly invade Iraq, but Bush did it anyway.All that has come out in the pages and blogs of WAPO and other papers. No secret at all.

We went in because Bush was using as his authorization the U.N. resolution giving the U.S. and NATO the go ahead, SHOULD SADAAM NOT COOPERATE WITH U.N. INSPECTORS. But by that time it was obvious that Sadaam HAD NO WMDs. Hans Blix was preparing to announce that to the U.N. Bush knew it. But in fact, from the information he MUST have been getting from his technical intelligence sources, he also knew that Blix couldn't possibly have found anything because there was nothing there to find. (Proof of this has been provided many times in these blogs, as you are well aware.)

He went in because if he waited even a month, the U. N. would have declared that Sadaam HAD cooperated and there was no cause to invade. No U.N. resolution and George has no grounds to send in the troops.

All out here in print in LOTS of newspapers.

But that is inconvenient so you declare it faux intellectualism and reject it.

But it is that rejectionism that usually causes me to totally ignore your posts as a total waste of time.

As I intend to go back to doing.

Posted by: ceflynline | March 5, 2011 9:27 PM | Report abuse

So, after all that, the U.S. won the Spanish American War, thanks.

Posted by: clawrence12 | March 5, 2011 10:13 PM | Report abuse

"You might try to produce a few facts to back your denials."

I did. You don't touch a single one. You prefer fiction and fantasy.

I'm sure you could find many more examples of things gone wrong in the Iraq War. But you said we were totally unprepared and suggested there was no planning. Now you are citing examples of, surprise surprise, planning gone wrong.

That's the nature of war. Look at any significant war and you'll find the same thing. Study the invasions of North Africa and France if you doubt that. How did Eisenhower and his team not know that there were hedgerows in France? Idiots, right? How did they not anticipate massive loss of landing craft and have such an inept plan for shipping material to North Africa? Egotistical, unAmerican idiots, right?

"Gen Eric Shinseki got cashiered for telling Bush that there weren't nearly enough troops on hand to properly invade Iraq, but Bush did it anyway.All that has come out in the pages and blogs of WAPO and other papers. No secret at all."

False. Shinseki's term as COS expired, and he retired as scheduled as all others have since WWII. There were a lot of views within the admin and the military. Bush weighed the advice he got and made decisions. Hindsight is wonderful.

"We went in because Bush was using as his authorization the U.N. resolution giving the U.S. and NATO the go ahead, SHOULD SADAAM NOT COOPERATE WITH U.N. INSPECTORS."

"But by that time it was obvious that Sadaam HAD NO WMDs."

It was obvious only to partisans like you in your revisionist mindset. Saddam had been playing the hide and seek game for years. In January Blix reported he wasn't cooperating. Admin officials later met with him and came away convinced nothing was changing in Saddam's game of stalling. His own generals thought they had WMD. Again, hindsight is wonderful.

"But in fact, from the information he MUST have been getting from his technical intelligence sources, he also knew that Blix couldn't possibly have found anything because there was nothing there to find. (Proof of this has been provided many times in these blogs, as you are well aware.)"

That's a logical fallacy and hardly anything that has been or could ever be subject of "proof."

"He went in because if he waited even a month, the U. N. would have declared that Sadaam HAD cooperated and there was no cause to invade. No U.N. resolution and George has no grounds to send in the troops."

That's complete speculation, not fact.

"But it is that rejectionism that usually causes me to totally ignore your posts as a total waste of time."

What a wonderful faux intellectual term.

You're a truther, so you have no credibility on any of this. I just enjoy knocking your fictional history to pieces.

Why don't you explain how Bush was planning for eight years? Or how he was "brushed off" by the "adults" when Cheney and Powell were in his cabinet? Because you are full of it, that's why.

Posted by: quarterback1 | March 6, 2011 7:45 AM | Report abuse

Btw Blix's March 7 report said in substance that, while Iraq was providing more cooperation, it was not in compliance with 1441, and that many questions remained unanswered about the existence of WMD and WMD production. E.g.:

"It is obvious that while the numerous initiatives which are now taken by the Iraqi side with a view to resolving some longstanding, open disarmament issues can be seen as active or even proactive, these initiatives three to four months into the new resolution cannot be said to constitute immediate cooperation. Nor do they necessarily cover all areas of relevance. They are, nevertheless, welcome. And UNMOVIC is responding to them in the hope of solving presently unresolved disarmament issues."

There was no imminent rescission of 1441. Just differing opinions about how long to let Saddam drag out "diplomacy" and the inspection run-around.

But then cef is a truther, so what else would we expect but bunk and lies and speculation asserted as "fact."

Posted by: quarterback1 | March 6, 2011 8:02 AM | Report abuse

[ceflynline drooled: "We went in because Bush was using as his authorization the U.N. resolution giving the U.S. and NATO the go ahead"]

*RUBBISH* The Iraq War Resolution provided the President with bi-partisan Congression authorization to use military force "as he determines to be necessary and appropriate."

Congress clearly cited 22 legitimate casus belli. Saddam did try to kill a former American president; the U.N. embargo was violated (as were its inspection protocols); the 1991 accords were ignored; the genocide of brave Kurds did happen; suicide bombers were being given bounties; terrorists (including those involved into the 1993 World Trade Center bombing) were given sanctuary by Saddam; and on and on.
http://www.husseinandterror.com/

Try harder to show some gratitude for the liberation of newly democratic allies in Iraq by our brave American military and Coalition allies.

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | March 6, 2011 2:13 PM | Report abuse

Wisconsin voters can also sign up for the recall efforts against the 12 AWOL State Senators:

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread667819/pg1

Posted by: clawrence12 | March 7, 2011 8:43 AM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company