Doug Thompson embraces & hugs sexism

Doug Thomspon's on a high horse about how great he thinks he and his website (Capitol Hill Blue) are. Today he's noting their policy "Posts that contain racism, homophobia, bigotry or Antisemitism will be removed and the posters banned." Notice what's missing? Sexism. But Capitol Hill Blue loves to traffic in sexism. Which is why a T. J. Flapsaddle can post to that crappy website:

Perhaps if her mother had not spent so much of her married life enabling her father's philandering, Chelsea Clinton might be fielding other questions instead of those referring to Monica Lewinsky.

T.J. gets called on his sexism and responds:

There's a division of responsibility here. Bill Clinton shouldn't have done it, and Hillary Clinton shouldn't have helped rake it under the rug.
I have suggested that Hillary Clinton made a Faustian bargain to put up with her husband's antics simply because he was ultimately her road to the White House.

Here's little Dougie himself expressing his feelings about the woman in the race and catch his LIE in this:

Also ironic is her campaign's coining of the "Tanya Harding Strategy" to describe their plans to "kneecap" Barack Obama and destroy his credibility before the convention. Harding, a third-tier Olympic skating hopeful, hatched a plan to injure rival Nancy Kerrigan by busting her knee with a baseball bat so she couldn't compete on the ice.
Harding was, and probably still is, a cold, calculating, scheming blond bitch. Is that really the comparison the Clinton campaign wants?

Barack Obama coined "The Tanya Harding Strategy" in 2007, to a reporter. It's published, Dougie. Reading's hard. Too many words and some written by women!

What a sexist pig.

Here's a typical and 'loveable' comment:

According to Joyce's notes she found a belligerent bitch instead of a new first lady and tried to get out of the assignment.

And Dougie writes about a "political whore" and includes this: "Claiming Bush is worse than Clinton when it comes to corruption and scandal is like saying Britney Spears is more of a slut than Paris Hilton." I'm really not sure where Dougie gets off calling either woman a s**t. I don't follow Britty but I wasn't aware she was sleeping around in extreme (I kind of thought she had some mental issues that had nothing to do with sex) but it's nice to Father Dougie can peer into the bedroom windows of her soul. As for Paris, where does he get off? (Alone in his own bed, most likely.) Notice women can be called sluts and bitches and much more at his site. That's because sexism is encouraged by Dougie. How about this gem: "and Pelousy - hell - I wouldn't touch that slut with a ten foot cattle prod." Pelosi's a slut as well? I don't care for Pelosi but, and I live in her district, I've never her sexual rumors about her. So he just applies "slut" willy nilly?
Remember, sexism a-okay at Capitol Hill Blue. Dougie loves sexism, he breathes it, he is it.

I bumped that up when it was pointed out to me. That's my lead. Here's what I had been writing.

I got back to the hotel about a half hour ago and have booted up the laptop and stared at the TV. Not even news. Just flipping the channels trying to find something that would inspire me to write while I searched around online (also hoping for inspiration). Nothing appears to be arriving.

Ava and C.I. just got back (I skipped the evening speaking to eat and then I wondered around soaking up the local scene) and Ava says, "Jeremiah Wright, the fun never ends." She suggested I check out Caryl Rivers who fancies herself a journalist. Rivers quotes 'expert' Melissa Harris Lacewell. That's cute. Rivers should have told readers that Melissa Harris Lacewell campaigns for Bambi Obama and has done so since 2007. She is part of the campaign and should be identified as such. Caryl Rivers, that's journalism rule one. (No link, I don't link to The Huffington Post -- too many crazies and too much trash.)

Rev. Wallace E. Joice writes The Joplin Globe to express his distate for Wright's statements (he's Native American as well as a pastor). This is from the ABC News blog:

Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., was forced to deal with another question about the racially polarizing Minister Louis Farrakhan out on the stump in Levittown, Pennsylvania, a town with it's own history of racial tensions.
Obama was asked about his church's magazine giving Louis Farrakhan an award, saying he "epitomized greatness."
The questioner at the town hall was referencing Trumpet Newmagazine, launched by Obama's Trinty United chuch in Chicago, which used to be headed by Obama's controversial former pastor Rev. Jeremiah Wright. The newsmagazine was published by Wright’s daughters.
"How can praise for any anti-Semitic demagogue be considered a minor difference between you and the reverend?" the woman asked.


Meanwhile James Kirchick (The Advocate) writes:

In October, Barack Obama's presidential campaign invited Donnie McClurkin -- a notorious "ex-gay" singer and minister -- to participate in its Southern Gospel Tour event in South Carolina. McClurkin claims that homosexuality can be "cured" through prayer and that gay people are "trying to kill our children." While Obama later claimed that he did not agree with McClurkin about gays, he had no problem giving the performer a platform to preach his bigotry, knowing that such views are widely held among the conservative Southern black voters whose support he needs to win the Democratic nomination.

Here's the latest "HUBdate: Commander-in-Chief on Day One" (HillaryClinton.com):

Commander-in-Chief: Hillary hosts a town hall with senior retired military officers and Keystone State veterans in Aliquippa, PA.
Strong on Iraq: At yesterday's Senate hearings with General David Petraeus and Ambassador David Crocker, Hillary said, "The administration and supporters of the administration’s policy often talk about the cost of leaving Iraq, yet ignore the greater costs of continuing the same failed policy." TIME's Jay Carney on Clinton: "In tone, demeanor and command of the facts, she was - I thought - very impressive." Watch here.
On Air: Hillary launches five new ads in Pennsylvania. Watch Get it Done, Spectacular, Scranton, Falling Through, and Nuestra Amiga. Read more.
Hoosiers for Hillary: Yesterday, Hillary released her 'Blueprint for Indiana's Economic Future,' her plan to put the American Dream back within the reach of middle class Indianans. Volunteers at phone banks in six cities across the state spread the word. Read her plan.
Offices in Indiana: The campaign opened offices yesterday in Kokomo, Marion, and Lafayette bringing the total number to 21. Read more.
NCAskMe.com: Volunteers across the state today will gather to answer more than 6,000 questions that have been submitted since the launch of NCAskMe.com last Friday. Said one voter, "Hillary is not only prepared to listen; she is prepared to offer real solutions to the real problems experienced by real people." Read more.
Real Differences in Oregon: Hillary has supported the rights of local communities to locate liquefied natural gas facilities. Senator Obama supported the Bush-Cheney energy policy that removed that right. Read more.
On Tap: Tomorrow, Hillary delivers the keynote address at the Allegheny County Democratic Committee’s Jefferson-Jackson dinner in Pittsburgh, PA.
Unifying Force?: "Senator Barack Obama has asked voters to see him as a unifying force...Unfortunately, Obama has failed in his first test to unify his own party. His campaign has failed to recognize the results of the Florida primary -- and Michigan -- for political gain...a decision that could disgruntle Democratic voters in Florida in November and years beyond." Read more.


Closing with C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"

Wednesday, April 9, 2008. Chaos and violence continues, the US military announces more deaths, The Petraeus & Crocker Variety Hour continues, and more.

Starting with war resistance. The Guardian of London notes Joshua Key's The Deserter's Tale. Key is an Iraq War veteran who returned to the US on leave, spoke with his wife Brandi and they decided to go underground rather than for Joshua to continue fighting an illegal war. Eventually, they and their children moved to Canada. Key suffers PTSD and is haunted by his time in Iraq. From his book (written with Lawrence Hill), pp. 98-99:

Not long into our second tour of duty in Ramadi, I was working at a traffic control point, pulling over vehicles. The standard practice was to order everybody out of the car and to have the driver open the hood and the trunk. A black, four-door Mercedes-Benz pulled up carrying a driver and three male adult passengers. Glancing inside the car, I spotted four grenades tucked between the two front seats.
The driver was a young man, and he didn't say or do anything to provoke me. However, the mere presence of those grenades set me off. I hauled him from the car and began kicking and punching him. An older man in the car began screaming at me in Arabic. I could not understand a word he said, and he would not shut up, so I beat him badly too. By the time I finished with them, both men were bleeding profusely. With the help of my squad mates, I zipcuffed the men, threw one of them in the trunk, and stuffed the other three in the backseat.
Sergeant Fadinetz got into the passenger seat, I jumped into the front, and we drove ten minutes through Ramadi to the police station, where we turned over the men for arrest. I have no idea what became of them, but I do know what happened to their car: I stole it for the use of my squad. We had no keys, so I hot-wired it and attached a switch to make it easy for my squad mates to start. We kept the Mercedes and used it on our house raids, preferring to arrive in an unmarked vehicle to disguise our approach.
When I beat up the two me, I justified it to myself on the grounds that they had grenades in the car. But the truth was that, strange as it may seem to someone just outside the war, grenades were everyday items in Iraq, just like the rifles we routinely left behind on our house raids. Although we always confiscated grenades, I had no good reason to attack the men. My own moral judgement was disintegrating under the pressure of being a soldier, feeling vulnerable, and having no clear enemy to kill in Iraq. We were encouraged to beat up on the enemy; given the absence of any clearly understood enemy, we picked our fights with civilians who were powerless to resist. We knew that we would not have to account for our actions. Because we were fearful, sleep-deprived, and jacked up on caffeine, adrenaline, and testosterone, and because our officers constantly reminded us that all Iraqis were our enemies, civilians included, it was tempting to steal, no big deal to punch, and easy to kill. We were Americans in Iraq and we could do anything we wanted to do.

War resisters in Canada are attempting to be granted safe harbor. The Canadian Parliament will debate a measure this month on that issue. You can make your voice heard. Three e-mails addresses to focus on are: Prime Minister Stephen Harper (pm@pm.gc.ca -- that's pm at gc.ca) who is with the Conservative party and these two Liberals, Stephane Dion (Dion.S@parl.gc.ca -- that's Dion.S at parl.gc.ca) who is the leader of the Liberal Party and Maurizio Bevilacqua (Bevilacqua.M@parl.gc.ca -- that's Bevilacqua.M at parl.gc.ca) who is the Liberal Party's Critic for Citizenship and Immigration. A few more can be found here at War Resisters Support Campaign. For those in the US, Courage to Resist has an online form that's very easy to use.
There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes Matt Mishler, Josh Randall, Robby Keller, Justiniano Rodrigues, Chuck Wiley, James Stepp, Rodney Watson, Michael Espinal, Matthew Lowell, Derek Hess, Diedra Cobb, Brad McCall, Justin Cliburn, Timothy Richard, Robert Weiss, Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross Spears, Peter Brown, Bethany "Skylar" James, Zamesha Dominique, Chrisopther Scott Magaoay, Jared Hood, James Burmeister, Eli Israel, Joshua Key, Ehren Watada, Terri Johnson, Clara Gomez, Luke Kamunen, Leif Kamunen, Leo Kamunen, Camilo Mejia, Kimberly Rivera, Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Agustin Aguayo, Justin Colby, Marc Train, Abdullah Webster, Robert Zabala, Darrell Anderson, Kyle Snyder, Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Kevin Lee, Mark Wilkerson, Patrick Hart, Ricky Clousing, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, Blake LeMoine, Clifton Hicks, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Logan Laituri, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Joshua Casteel, Katherine Jashinski, Dale Bartell, Chris Teske, Matt Lowell, Jimmy Massey, Chris Capps, Tim Richard, Hart Viges, Michael Blake, Christopher Mogwai, Christian Kjar, Kyle Huwer, Wilfredo Torres, Michael Sudbury, Ghanim Khalil, Vincent La Volpa, DeShawn Reed and Kevin Benderman. In total, at least fifty US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum. Information on war resistance within the military can be found at The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline [(877) 447-4487], Iraq Veterans Against the War and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters. Tom Joad maintains a list of known war resisters. In addition, VETWOW is an organization that assists those suffering from MST (Military Sexual Trauma).

Today The Petraeus & Crocker Variety Hour continued its Congressional tour. Performances were held for the US House Armed Services Committee in the morning and the US House Committee On Foreign Affairs. Gen David Petraeus and US Ambassador Ryan Crocker stuck to the same scripts; however, Crocker tried to spice up today's matinee performances by introducing a character tic (no doubt borrowed from US Senator Barack Obama's performance yesterday) by repeated usage of the words of "Uh" and "Uhm." In additition to allowing him to add a layer of stumbling buffoon to his performance, it also proved a time eater (think of it as Word Helper from Betty Crocker). Since the five minute rule was enforced in both hearings, it allowed Crocker to avoid answering many things.

Ike Skelton chairs the House Armed Services Committee and he opened the hearings this morning noting, among other things, "We should not begin this hearing without recalling how we got here. Iraq was invaded on incorrect information. The turbulent aftermath following the initial military victory was not considered, despite warnings of the aftermath, including two such warnings from me. Now we are in our sixth year of attempting to quell this horrendous aftermath. Preparing for this hearing, I went back and read my opening statement from our last hearing with you in September. I think I could have delivered the same statement today as I did then, which means either I repeat myself, or things haven't changed that much in Iraq."

After Petraeus and Crocker made the same prepared opening statements. To comments that the US could 'stand down' when Iraq 'stood up,' Skelton would point out "we've been at this for years" (Iraq War) so "how do you do that? How do you take the training wheels off?" Gen David Petraeus didn't get a laugh from this yesterday but seems sure there's a laugh in somewhere, so he repeated that al-Maliki's puppet government 'stood up' in Basra ("That's exactly what Prime Minister Maliki" did "as commander in chief in Iraq!"). He stuck to the script of the puppet of the occupation deciding to assault Basra all by himself, "That was not something that we pushed him to do, candidly. ... That's something they wanted to do" and insisting that this was not a case of "us twisting their hand." Basra, for al-Maliki, was a failure. Petraeus might try mugging in a Norman Fell manner the next time he delivers this line.

US House Rep Solomon Ortiz noted the human costs and that the alleged "security gains are arguable" as well as the crisis in readiness for the military. House Rep Silvestre Reyes would probe the issue of withdrawal and the buzz words of this tour "conditions-based" (which really needs a big production number). By the testimony being offered by Petraeus, Reyes felt that if violence flared up in one area, Petraeus would be arguing to "reinstate the sruge" and Petraeus felt that wasn't likely and stated anything like that was something that the puppet government could take care of.

US House Rep Ellen Tauscher noted the opposition to the Iraq War, that more people are saying (in polls) that the Iraq war was "not worth it) and how "my constituents repeatedly tell me that we can't sustain" the costs (human and monetary). Tauscher noted that a new president would be elected in November and sworn in at the start of 2009. "If you report to a commander-in-chief . . . that wants a plan" for withdrawal "what would you advise?" Petraeus stated, "My response would be dialogue again on what the risk would be." He then tried to take the curtness off his response by noting the US military is under civilian control: "we are not self-employed, we take orders and we obey." Tauscher moved on, "Mr. Crocker, considering that we will have a new president on January 20 . . . what would you advise the president on what would be available and how we could" withdraw? Crocker's response was hilarious.

"That's looking fairly far into the future uh and I've uh learned to keep my timelines short when it uh comes to do with things in Iraq."

He can't see that 'far' into the future? Eight months from now? It's like bad Woody Allen parody. Manhattan, Diane Keaton plays Mary, Allen's Isaac. Mary's decided to leave Isaac for Yale who is married.

Isaac: I give the whole thing . . . four weeks.

Mary: I can't plan that far in advance.

Isaac: You can't plan four weeks in advance?

Mary: No.

Isaac: What kind of foresight is that?

The US Ambassador to Iraq can not ponder how he would advise the next president (elections are less than seven months away) on how to go about withdrawal if that was his or her determination. He can't think that far ahead.

US House Rep Robert Andrews attempted to pin Petraeus and Crocker on the lack of political/diplomatic process in Iraq. Crocker used a lot of words (and "uh"s and "uhm"s) to say nothing. At one point, he declared, "The most important power they [Iraqis] have is access to resources" which led Andrews to point out, "At this point and time the most important resource in Iraq is oil" and there's been no sharing agreement passed. ("No, it hasn't," Crocker admitted.) Crocker had tried to pitch the de-de-Baathification law but Andrews pointed out that this non-implemented legislation bans "former members of the Baath Party" from the military and defense occupations. He noted that it's now five years with no progress and "why should the American people wait five more minutes for that to happen?"

US House Rep J. Randy Forbes expressed his worries about "housewives" and "premature withdrawal." He appeared to be confused at what hearing he was attending and what topics were being discussed.

US House Rep Susan Davis noted Senator Hillary Clinton's questions to Petraeus and Crocker yesterday in the Senate Armed Services Committee about the treaty the White House wants which they call a Status of Force Agreement. Yesterday Clinton had noted that "it seems odd to Americans" that "the Iraqi Parliament may have a chance to consider this agreement" while "the United States Congress does not." Davis referenced that and noted, "That strikes people in our districts as strange. I wonder if you could talk on that" and how such an agreement might or might not "be used as leverage?"

Crocker attempted to eat up time via "Some uh uh 80 other agreements with different countries uh uh each other country has different aspects us uh . . . uh uh this one will have uh uh . . . " Davis wanted to know if the Status of Force Agreement was "a vehicle for leverage that would actually bring about a result that would not occur without the agreement?" Crocker responded with, "I'm sorry, could you repeat that?" Again, he was eating up time. Davis restated again (this was really the third time she'd done so), "I'm interested in knowing how we use the State of Force Agreements for leverage?"

Crocker went back to his same nonsense, "I think that like other agreements, this is a geustion of mutal agreements uh uh we both have interests in uh uh . . . it's not a question of uh uh having something to give to them uh uh . . ." Davis noted, "The public believes that there is some role that we [Congress] should be playing to be a larger part of that aggreement" but "going back to the Awakening Councils . . . I think others are concerned that the 80,000 or so of indivduals that are not going to be included in the army or police that that, perhaps, marriage of convenience is going to shift back" to violence and "is that a concern to you?" Crocker replied, "Actually Congresswoman, we've had that discussion with the Prime Minister" who "is commited to ensuring that the remainder receive employment in the civilian sector," that they receive "job training and employment opportunites." These are the 91,000 thugs that are costing the US $16 million a month (as Wolf Blitzer noted on CNN -- and he was referenced in the hearing for noting that the bought loyalties could easily turn). Petreaus and Crocker repeated their points from yesterday about how, by paying them, US vehicles aren't damaged. Again, it's the strategy of fork over your lunch money to avoid getting beat on the playground -- a strategy that must make everyone proud.

Howard Berman chairs the House Foreign Affairs Committee and he noted at the start of the afternoon hearing, "Our witnesses are in the home stretch of a congressional testimony marathon; to some, this hearing may even seem like the fourth time around an endless loop. That's why we are asking both Ambarassador Ryan Crocker and General David Petraeus more or less to summarize the main points of their testimony, at their discretion, a report to Congress that has been heard once in the House and twice in the Senate already. This way, we'll move along more quickly to the questions posed by members of the committee." He also noted that "the surge was intended to quell the violence primarily in order to create political space for Iraqis to move on toward national reconcilliation" but that hasn't happened.

US House Rep Gary Ackerman observed that "we seem to have gotten ourselves into a fix and we don't really know how to get ourselves out of it or unfix it." He noted the many "reasons we've gotten into this mess" including non-existant WMDs, 'democracy,' "getting rid of Saddam." After all of those various reasons, "it seems that we've achieved all of our golas and every time we do, a new goal comes up." Ethnic violence appears to be the new excuse. While Crocker and Petraeus have their jobs, Congress does as well and "our job is just the opposite, our job is to question. Our job is to raise those points". He compared the circular nonsense going on today with a WWII military song: "We're heare because we're here." "Why are the troops there? Because we went there. So we're there because we're there and we're there because we're there." Which raises the question of "How do you fix it?" Ackerman compared it to Sisyphus struggle in Greek mythology (every day he attempts to roll a rock up a mountain and has to start from the beginning each day). So "when you can stop pushing it? . . . When does this end? When do you stop pushing that big stone up the hill? And the answer is you really can't see beyond that big stone . . . You can't see around it." He noted that while the escalation/surge provides a "re-do," those who have died do not get a re-do. What is winning? Ackerman pointed out, "How do you know we've won because at the end of this thing, unless we decide it's an end, nobody's going to hand you a revolver, nobody's going to hand you a sword. Nobody seems to know the answer to that question."

Certainly Crocker and Petraeus didn't know the answer to that question.

US House Rep Brad Sherman provided a summary of points raised such as, "As the chair pointed out, in our war with Saddam, it's possible the winner has been Iran." He declared ("as Mr. Ackerman pointed out") that, "We're there because we're there." And moved to the Status of Force of Agreement wanting to know, "Will there be anything in this agreement that ties the new president's hand?"

Ryan Crocker: Congressman, uh uh, in a word, uh, no.

He asked Petraeus, "Will you begin on November 5th . . . to prepare plans to execute the policies of the incoming president or alternatively, will the incoming president . . . find a dilemma where if they order immediate withdrawal it will be an unplanned withdrawal" which would lead to more of the same currently going on (stuck in a quagmire).

Petraeus: Congressman, I can only serve one boss at a time.

"As a transition approaches," he continued, "obviously there is going to be back and forth to facilitate and not me, this will be the Secretary of Defense, the chair of the Joint Chiefs and, at some point, there will be contingency plans directed."

Brad Sherman asked, "So you would expect to get contingency plans?" And David Petraeus replied, "I'm very uncomfortable candidly describing" this. He spooks so easy.
He wanted Crocker to explain, considering the price of oil per barrel, "Why are we paying everything that we're paying" in Iraq? But he was out of time. US House Rep Dana Orbacher followed up on Sherman's questions and cautioned that "any Status of Force Agreement with Iraq" should "include a provision that the Iraqi government pay for any security that we're providing them with." Crocker replied, "Uh, Congressman, in the last few days, uh, uhm, had that message emphasized loud and clear. . . . That's uh something" to be discussed. Orbarcher responded that the correct answer was "yes" and "If not there's going to be trouble on the Republican side as well as the Democratic side" when the next war funding bill comes through.

"General, we often hear President Bush and [Senator John] McCain say we must win in Iraq," US House Rep Robert Wexler noted. "What is the definition of 'winning'?"

Wexler explained that he had sought out input from his constituents as to what question they would be asking if they were on the committee. Stuart Wolfer, 36-years-old, died in Iraq on Sunday. He was a major on his second tour of Iraq and "his family was relieved that he was in the Green Zone because they hoped he would be safe there." He was killed in an attack on the Green Zone. He leaves behind a wife Lee Anne Wolfer and three daughters. His parents, Esther and Len Wolfer, live in Boca Raton. Len Wolfer wanted Wexler to ask, "For what?" Wexler explained, "For what had he lost his son? What has all this been for and please, respectfully, don't tell us as you told Senator [John] Warner [yesterday] to remove a brutal dictator. What did Stuart Wolfer and the . . . others die for?"

David Petreaus: National interests.

Petreaus defined 'winning' as Iraq being "a country that is at peace with itself and its neighbors." Gee, when does the US make that a goal for itself?

US House Rep Eliot Engel noted the Status of Force Agreement proposal and how when Seantor Clinton noted it yesterday, she was told that "it was unclear whether they [al-Maliki] would bring it to a vote or simply read it to the Iraqi Parliament"; however, the Iraqi Constitution require it to be brought to the Parliament. So, Engel wanted to know, "If the Maliki governemtn bypasses the Iraqi Parliament and approves this agreement unilaterally, will the Bush administration . . . reject any agreement?" Time ran out and no answer was provided.

US House Rep Sheila Jackson opened with, "May I ask a simple question? How do we get out of this mess?" She showed photos of a recent trip to Iraq (noting that the photos weren't classified) and how she saw quality of life needs throughout her visit (trash, lack of potable water, etc.). She noted the Iraqis she spoke with and how Nouri al-Maliki is seen not as a leader of Iraq but as a sectarian leader. The 2002 Iraq resolution required UN approval, she pointed out, which never took place. "Now Saddam is gone, there's been a democratic election," she noted, so why is the US still in Iraq? Petraeus tried to avoid her questions including the most basic ones about whether al Qaeda exists outside of Iraq. "Certainly," he replied after dodging. "Let me say that I frankly believe we are operating without authority, the 2002 authorization has been completed . . . We should now bring our troops home."

Underscoring Sheila Jackson Lee's point, the US military announced today: "A Multi-National Division -- Baghdad Soldier died from non-combat related injuries at approximately 6:30 a.m. April 9." And they announced: "A Multi-National Division -- Baghdad Soldier died from non-combat related injuries at approximately 5:30 a.m. April 9." And they announced: "A Multi-National Division -- North Soldier was killed in an improvised explosive device attack in Salah ad Din Province, April 9." And they announced: "A Multi-National Division -- Baghdad Soldier was killed by an improvised explosive device attack at approximately 2 p.m. in northeastern Baghdad." And they announced: "A Multi-National Division -- Center Soldier was killed in an improvised explosive device attack while conducting operations east of Baghdad in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom April 8." Sunday saw at least 5 deaths announced, Monday saw 4, yesterday saw 2 and today sees 5. ICCC lists 19 for the month thus far and only one of those was before Sunday. So that's 18 announced dead so far this week. ICCC's current total for the number of US service members killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war is 4031.

Today, the fifth anniversary of the staged photo-op of the US military taking down a statue of Saddam Hussein in Baghdad to the cheering of . . . a few Iraqi exiles shipped in that weekend, was supposed to see a massive demonstration by Moqtada al-Sadr; however, he called off the action. Leila Fadel (McClatchy Newspapers) reports that while Petraeus and Crocker were hitting the war drums for war on Iran yesterday:
As they spoke, firebrand Shiite cleric Muqtada al Sadr threatened to unleash his Mahdi Army militia against U.S. and Iraqi forces. Once again, it was Iran that stepped into the political vacuum and urged a halt to militia attacks into the heavily fortified Green Zone, where U.S. and Iraqi officials, including Petraeus and Crocker, have their offices. The Iranian foreign ministry called for "restraint and prudence of various Iraqi groups," an implicit rebuke of Sadr, who is living and studying in Iran.


In some of today's other reported violence . . .

Bombings?

Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 2 mortar attacks on the Green Zone today. Reuters notes 2 Mosul car bombings that claimed the lives of 3 police officers and 1 civilian and left twenty people wounded. CBS and AP report 7 dead in a Sadr City mortar attack (three were children) on a home.

Shootings?

Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports an armed clash in the Sadr City section of Baghdad that left three people wounded. Reuters notes a Sadr City armed clash that resulted in 23 deaths and eighty-three people being injured, 1 police officer shot dead and 1 civilian in Tuz Khurmato, and 1 person shot dead in Tal al-Hadeed.

Corpses?

Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 2 corpses discovered in Baghdad and 2 discovered in Kirkuk.

Turning to US presidential primary news, "I don't actually think it's a bad idea to have an open convention, where we actually got to hash out what the differences [between the candidates] were and how important they are." That's Elizabeth Edwards speaking on ABC's Good Morning America today (link has text and video). Edwards endorsed no one and her husband (John Edwards) hasn't either. She did endorse Senator Hillary Clinton's healthcare plan, declaring, "You need that universality in order to get the cost savings. . . . I just have more confidence in Senator Clinton's policy than Senator Obama's on this particular issue." On her own health, she stated, "I'm doing great. I still have cancer in my bone. I get tested periodically. But it's under control. It doesn't seem to be growing, knock on wood. And i'm continuing taking some sort of treatment for the rest of my life, and hope that medicine catches up with my disease." Edwards was interviewed by GMA's Robin Roberts who had surgery last year for cancer. It is not a minor issue, and we'll again note "Clinton Unveils Plan To Find Cure For Breast Cancer On The Ellen DeGeneres Show: Plan Includes $300 Million in Increased Funding For Research Annually And Increased Access To Treatment And Screening Services." Somehow, the news outlets couldn't give attention to that, couldn't acknowledge it. Though it effects many women, it just wasn't important apparently. Or it wasn't important to them. How nice it must be to be them.

At 11:30 a.m. EST tomorrow, the Bully Boy will prance in front of America to claim the illegal war is 'winnable' and more fairy tales. Hillary has released a statement on the Iraq War today:

"Yesterday in the Senate Armed Services Committee, I asked General Petraeus for the conditions under which he would actually support a change of course in Iraq, and to begin a drawdown of our troops, given that the surge has failed to achieve its stated goal of political reconciliation among the Iraqis. Well, he didn't really answer me.
"I also asked Ambassador Crocker if the United States Congress would have the same opportunity as the Iraqi Parliament will have to review any agreement or long-term security pact that President Bush is negotiating with the Iraqis. Ambassador Crocker said that the Congress, your representatives, would not have that chance.
"I have two requests of President Bush for his speech on Thursday. First, I call on the President to answer the question that General Petraeus did not. What is our end game in Iraq given the failure of surge to achieve the objective that the president outlined for it? Second, I call on President Bush to pledge to the American people, who have sacrificed greatly for this effort that the United States Congress will have the chance to review and vote on any long-term security agreement he has negotiated with the Iraqis.
"President Bush must not saddle the next president with an agreement that extends our involvement in Iraq beyond his presidency. We have lost more than 4,000 of our best sons and daughters. They have given their lives in service to our country in honor and for the objective of giving the Iraqi people the greatest gift another human being can bestow - the gift of freedom. Tens of thousands of our young men and women have suffered - wounds both visible and invisible - to their bodies, their minds and their hearts.
"This war has cost more than $1 trillion if you factor in the lifetime of care and support that is due to our returning veterans, and of course, we must. Our ongoing military involvement in Iraq has also undermined our efforts in Afghanistan and elsewhere. Admiral Mullen, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said last week that our continued involvement in Iraq has meant we cannot deploy the forces we need to that country.
"There has been a harsh and daily toll on our men and women in uniform, many of whom are on their second, third, and even fourth tours of duty. Among combat troops sent to Iraq for the third or fourth time, more than one in four show signs of anxiety, depression or acute stress, according to an official Army survey of our soldiers' mental health. And we cannot forget the toll on military families. When fathers and mothers, sons and daughters, husbands and wives sign up to serve our country, their families sign up, too.
"So it is vital for our national security -- and for the health and safety of our men and women in uniform -- that we begin to end the war in Iraq and rebuild our military. A great Pennsylvanian, Benjamin Franklin once said, 'Well done is better than well-said.'"

iraq
joshua key
elizabeth edwardsgood morning america
leila fadelmcclatchy newspapers

Photo and comic (and ugh Pelosi!)

Thank you to Mike who passed on that the above photo was up at Flickr. That's Hillary with Patrick Bartholomew Ahern and if you're saying "Who?" that goes a long way towards explaining how the lie that Hillary's not worked on the peace in Ireland sets in. Bertie Ahern has met with Bully Boy and all world leaders, he was president of the European Council in 2004.

You can read more at Hillary's Senate site. You just can't count on the media. So let's go to Howard Wolfson's "HUBdate: ‘True Tale’:"

'True Tale:' Despite claims to the contrary, the aunt of a young woman who died after being turned away from one hospital for lack of $100 says Hillary "has been telling the story accurately." Read more.
Global Leadership: Yesterday, Hillary called on President Bush to boycott the opening ceremonies of the Olympics this summer in China. She said the Bush White House "has been wrong to downplay human rights in its policy with China." Read more.
Previewing Today: Hillary delivers remarks to the Communications Workers of America. Later this morning, Hillary questions General David Patraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker during a Senate Armed Services Committee Hearing.
If You Watch One Thing Today: In Indiana's first statewide television ad, Sen. Evan Bayh highlights Hillary’s innovative plan to strengthen the economy and emphasizes her proven record of delivering for hardworking Hoosiers and all Americans. Watch here. Meanwhile, groups say that Sen. Obama’s oil ad is "a little too slick." Read more.
Hoosiers for Hillary: The IndyStar reports Hillary "understand[s] the...challenges facing average Hoosiers" after speaking with her yesterday. Read Hillary's full Q&A.
Native American Issues: After the Montana Democratic Party's state dinner last Saturday, one leader said Hillary is "strong on native American issues" and another said Hillary was her "choice from the beginning." Read more.
Portland, OR: Rep. Darlene Hooley joined Beaver State supporters for the grand opening of the campaign's headquarters in Portland. “Echoing one of the staffer's given reasons for supporting Hillary -- 'to change the world' -- [Rep.] Hooley celebrated the opportunity that Clinton supporters have in Oregon... 'Her breadth of knowledge, her depth of knowledge and understanding is incredible.'" Read more.
Energy in Oregon: BlueOregon says the Cheney-Bush Energy Bill "is responsible for no fewer than three LNG facilities threatening Oregon coastline, rivers, [and] forests." Sen. Obama supported the bill; Hillary is fighting to restore Oregon’s stewardship of the environment. Read more and more.
Arkansas Support: Hillary picked up another superdelegate in Arkansas "Land Commissioner Mark Wilcox, who was selected last month as the Arkansas Democratic Party's last remaining superdelegate to the national convention." Read more.
In Case You Missed It: The Huffington Post reports: "Last night at a fundraiser in San Francisco, Barack Obama took a question on what he's looking for in a running mate. 'I would like somebody who knows about a bunch of stuff that I'm not as expert on...foreign policy is the area where I am probably most confident that I know more and understand the world better than Sen. Clinton or Sen. McCain.'" Read more.

Now Bambi has people who believe in him. People like Donna Brazile. Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "Message From a Heavy Weight"



If only to get Donna Brazile out of the Democratic Party, super delegates should choose Hillary. Donna Brazile announced she is leaving the Democratic Party if Bambi doesn't get the nomination. So kick her to the curb. Or roll her.

She's one of the pedestrian voices at Ms. these days. ("Voices" because you can't call Brazile a "writer.") By the way, Marcia's 100% correct (Ms. becomes "Little Miss magazine") and the magazine is really pissing me off.

So is Nancy Pelosi who needs to remember she is Speaker of the House and that Petraeus and Crocker are trying to snow the American people and Congress. So she really needs to butt out of the primaries. But she can't and she's yacking again because she's in love with Bambi. What's got her in a panic? Hillary's leading in super delegates. That's why Nancy's screaming that they need to reduce the current super delegates right now. Nancy needs to focus on her job and butt out of the presidential nomination. She did that Thursday at the press conference. She only looks like a stupid busybody who can't or won't focus on her own job. It's not like she's done a bang up job. Even in that press conference, which was supposed to be about Iraq, she couldn't stay focused. Is she on pep pills? Or is she just unable to stay focused? I have no idea. But someone needs to pull her aside and tell her, "Hey, Nancy, America didn't elect you. You were elected by the eighth district from California and you need to focus on your damn job."


Closing with C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"

Tuesday, April 8, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, Crocker and Petraeus put on a show, Prince Bambi demands to go early and demands more time and does nothing with it, al-Sadr calls off tomorrow's march, the US military announces more deaths, and more.

Staring with war resistance. Friday's snapshot noted: "War veteran Chad Hetman writes The Daily Targum to explain, 'People should be asking if ROTC instructors are teaching cadets that it is their legal duty under the Uniform Code of Military Justice to refuse and challenge unlawful orders. Since the illegal war began, only one soldier has had the sense and courage to do his duty, Lieutenant Ehren Watada. The military is supposed to be politically neutral, but not legally neutral and almost all troops never read or understand the Constitution that they blindly swear to 'Support and Defend Against ALL Enemies both Foreign And DOMESTIC'.' Watada is the first officer to publicly refuse to deploy to Iraq (June 2006). In February 2007, Watada was court-martialed. [. . .] Chad Hetman is not a war veteran. He is a US Army veteran. He does not claim to be a war veteran. The Daily Targum billed him as that (and still does today) but he did not claim that because he is not that. It's not a minor issue and he's attempting to get the paper to correct it. At this site, it was also noted in "Other Items" on Friday and I've added this to that entry "[CORRECTION ADDED APRIL 7TH: Chad Hetman is not a war veteran and does not present himself as such. The paper made a mistake. Hetman is a US Army Veteran and the paper's headline should have noted that and not that he is a "War vet." Again, Hetman does not claim and has never claimed to be a war veteran. The paper made a mistake. He is attempting to get the paper to correct the error. This correction will be noted in the April 8th snapshot.]" Hopefully, the paper made an honest mistake and will soon correct it but we'll correct Friday's snapshot in this one, he is a US Army veteran, not a war veteran. He never claimed to be a war veteran. Back to war resistance . . .

War resisters in Canada are attempting to be granted safe harbor. The Canadian Parliament will debate a measure this month on that issue. You can make your voice heard. Three e-mails addresses to focus on are: Prime Minister Stephen Harper (pm@pm.gc.ca -- that's pm at gc.ca) who is with the Conservative party and these two Liberals, Stephane Dion (Dion.S@parl.gc.ca -- that's Dion.S at parl.gc.ca) who is the leader of the Liberal Party and Maurizio Bevilacqua (Bevilacqua.M@parl.gc.ca -- that's Bevilacqua.M at parl.gc.ca) who is the Liberal Party's Critic for Citizenship and Immigration. A few more can be found here at War Resisters Support Campaign. For those in the US, Courage to Resist has an online form that's very easy to use.
There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes Matt Mishler, Josh Randall, Robby Keller, Justiniano Rodrigues, Chuck Wiley, James Stepp, Rodney Watson, Michael Espinal, Matthew Lowell, Derek Hess, Diedra Cobb, Brad McCall, Justin Cliburn, Timothy Richard, Robert Weiss, Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross Spears, Peter Brown, Bethany "Skylar" James, Zamesha Dominique, Chrisopther Scott Magaoay, Jared Hood, James Burmeister, Eli Israel, Joshua Key, Ehren Watada, Terri Johnson, Clara Gomez, Luke Kamunen, Leif Kamunen, Leo Kamunen, Camilo Mejia, Kimberly Rivera, Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Agustin Aguayo, Justin Colby, Marc Train, Abdullah Webster, Robert Zabala, Darrell Anderson, Kyle Snyder, Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Kevin Lee, Mark Wilkerson, Patrick Hart, Ricky Clousing, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, Blake LeMoine, Clifton Hicks, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Logan Laituri, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Joshua Casteel, Katherine Jashinski, Dale Bartell, Chris Teske, Matt Lowell, Jimmy Massey, Chris Capps, Tim Richard, Hart Viges, Michael Blake, Christopher Mogwai, Christian Kjar, Kyle Huwer, Wilfredo Torres, Michael Sudbury, Ghanim Khalil, Vincent La Volpa, DeShawn Reed and Kevin Benderman. In total, at least fifty US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum. Information on war resistance within the military can be found at The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline [(877) 447-4487], Iraq Veterans Against the War and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters. Tom Joad maintains a list of known war resisters. In addition, VETWOW is an organization that assists those suffering from MST (Military Sexual Trauma).


Today The Petraeus & Crocker Variety Hour took their act on the road. First stop, the Senate Armed Services Committee. Gen David Petraeus and US Ambassador Ryan Crocker are supposed to be providing a status report on the Iraq War. They didn't. In fact, Petraeus made clear that the status report would come . . . next September. When the results are this bad, you stall -- which is exactly what Petraeus did.

The most dramatic moment came as committee chair Carl Levin was questioning Petraeus and a man in the gallery began exclaiming "Bring them home!" repeatedly. (He did so at least 16 times before he was escored out). The most hilarious moment was hearing Petraeus explain that it's tough in the school yard and America needs to fork over their lunch money in Iraq to avoid getting beat up. In his opening remarks, Petraues explained of the "Awakening" Council (aka "Sons of Iraq," et al) that it was a good thing "there are now over 91,000 Sons of Iraq -- Shia as well as Sunni -- under contract to help Coalition and Iraqi Forces protect their neighborhoods and secure infrastructure and roads. These volunteers have contributed significantly in various areas, and the savings in vehicles not lost because of reduced violence -- not to mention the priceless lives saved -- have far outweighed the cost of their monthly contracts." Again, the US must fork over their lunch money, apparently, to avoid being beat up.

How much lunch money is the US forking over? Members of the "Awakening" Council are paid, by the US, a minimum of $300 a month (US dollars). By Petraeus' figures that mean the US is paying $27,300,000 a month. $27 million a month is going to the "Awakening" Councils who, Petraeus brags, have led to "savings in vehicles not lost". Again, in this morning's hearings, the top commander in Iraq explained that the US strategy is forking over the lunch money to school yard bullies. What a pride moment for the country.

Crocker's entire testimony can be boiled down to a statement he made in his opening statements, "What has been achieved is substantial, but it is also reversible." Which would translate in the real world as nothing has really changed. During questioning from Senator Jack Reed, Crocker would rush to shore up the "Awakening" Council members as well. He would say there were about 90,000 of them and, pay attention, the transitioning of them is delayed due to "illliteracy and physical disabilities."

Levin wanted to know about Basra. "Is that correct," he asked that the US didn't know about the planned assault on Basra until right before the action started? Petraeus replied, "It is, Senator. We had a Friday night heads up" and in a Saturday meeting about how to use the resources, they discussed it futher. Levin then asked, "It was not something that you recommended?" Petraeus replied, "No." Two points were raised in that and Senator Hillary Clinton caught them.

"In response to a question by Senator Levin," Clinton pointed out, "regarding when you knew of Prime Minister Maliki's plans to go into Basra, and I was struck by it so I wrote it down, you said you learned of it in a meeting of planning" to utilize our resources in southern Iraq. Senator Clinton pointed out that the US is not known for its presence in Iraq, that until the British pulled out, that had been the region the UK was responsible for. So "what did you mean by the resources you were planning to deploy and over what length of time?"

Petraeus responded that "A plan was being developed" for Basra but this US plan would have been "a fairly deliberate process" and instead al-Maliki was "moving up the time table and compressing . . . the resources" that the US was planning to use over time. So there was a US plan to assault Basra and, at best, al-Maliki merely jumped the gun on it.

Basra was a constant reference throughout the hearing. Senator Susan Collins wonder "why should American combat troops continue to take the lead" after all the money and years spent to train Iraqi forces? Petraues response was that the "US didn't take the lead in Basra." Which proves Collins point, though Petraeus seemed not to grasp that. Collins was pointing to all the years and money spent training the security forces and how it appears to have been wasted and Petraeus' response was to offer that Basra was where Iraqis led. And the whole world saw how that went but maybe Petraeus is unaware of that?

Senator Bill Nelson pointed out that last year's escalation was sold by the White House with that prediction "that the military surge would stabilize the situation" and allow for political progress and national reconciliation in Iraq. "Has political reconciliation happened?" It was a question Petraeus hemmed and hawwed around. He noted the passage of laws (none have been implemented) and then tossed to Crocker for help. Crocker could provide none. He spoke of "cross-bloc horse trading" in the Iraqi Parliament which was supposed to explain or excuse why nothing had taken place throughout the escalation.

Nelson noted the testimonies the Senate Foreign Relations Committee heard last Wednesday (he cited retired Gen William Odom in particular) and, along with Senator Clinton, was one of the few who appeared to be building on something other than the testimony they were being fed.

Senator Joe Lieberman was probably a suck up in school. Not just with the principal or the teachers but even with the substitute teachers. Lieberaman used his time to guest ("incredible service in the course of freedom") and earned the Eddie Haskell Award. Senator John Cornyn flashed his ignorance (he loves to do that) by conflating the Taliban and al Qaeda and rewriting history. Senator Roger Wicker embarrassed himself as well. He wanted to talk about the recruited. He proposed that most US combat troops in Iraq were made up of 20-year-olds and wanted Petraeus to go along with that which Petraeus did somewhat sheepishly. (Because Petraeus doesn't have know the average age -- neither did Wicker but that didn't stop him.) Wicker delcared that these people "made their decision to participate in this war in 2006." They decided to participate? So Wicker is arguing that service members make a decision which must mean he would at the very least agree that war resisters have a right to make the decision not to participate? Wicker felt that "history would view this Congress as very foolish" if they attempted to end the illegal war. He must have learned his history from John Cornyn.

But the most embarrassing performance by a Senator would have to be Lindsey Graham. "If you had to pick one example of success," Graham offered up, what would it be? Petraeus gave two (of which Anbar Province was one). Graham asked for an example. He was given two. It wasn't what Graham wanted to hear. "Would it be . . ." Graham, he answered your question. Sell the illegal war on what you're given instead of attempting to coax the witness.

In her time, Senator Clinton opened by noting the smears "that it is irresponsible or demonstrates a lack of leadership" to advocate for withdrawal. "I fundamentally disagree," she explained and added that it would be irresponsible to continue with the same failed policies. "We rarely talk abou the opportunity cost, the opportunity lost, because of this continued strategy." She explored the costs including noting that "the cost to our men and women in uniform is growing" referencing a New York Times article [Thom Shanker's "Army Is Worried By Rising Stress Of Returns Tours"] which found of those who had been repeatedly deployed, one in four exhibits anxiety, depression or acute stress. These costs and other cots are ignored to pursue "continuing the same failed policy."

"For the past five years," Senator Clinton pointed out, "we have continuously heard from the administration that things are getting better, that we're about to turn a corner." Still nothing. It's time "to begin an orderly withdrawal." With Petraeus, Clinton referenced the Washington Post [Cameron W. Barr's "Petraeus: Iraqi Leaders Not Making 'Sufficient Progress'"] and how the general had told them last month that "'no one feels there has been sufficient progress.' Those are exactly the concerns that my colleagues and I raised when you testified before us in September." At that time, Clinton pointed out, Petraeus responded that "if we reached that point in a year you'd have to think very hard about it. We're there now. . . . What conditions would have to exist for you to recommend to the President that the current strategy is not working?"

A fairly straight forward question, so naturally Petraeus ignored it. "What I said," he said in unmasked irriation, "was no one was satisified with the progress that was made, either Iraqi or American." Yes, Petraeus, everyone who read the Washington Post article or heard Clinton's summary got that point. Before you made it in the hearing. In the afternoon, Senator Chuck Hagel would also bring up the Post and Petraeus' remarks.

With Crocker, she brought up the treaty the White House wants to make with the puppet of the occupation, Nouri al-Maliki, "With respect to our long term challenge, Ambassador Crocker, the administration" is planning to make an agreement with Iraq and "will it be submitted to the Iraqi Parliament for ratification?" Crocker replied that it had been "indicated that" it would be brought "to the council of representatives." Well then, Clinton wanted to know, "does the administration plan to submit the agreement to our Congress?" No, Crocker replied, "at this point . . . we don't" because they don't believe it "would require the advice and consent" of the Congress. That "seems odd to Americans," Clinton noted, that "the Iraqi Parliament may have a chance to consider this aggreement" while "the United States Congress does not." She noted the legislation she introduced (December 6, 2007) calling for the Bully Boy "to seek Congressional approval for any agreement that would extend the US military commitment to Iraq." And it is very odd that the White House thinks they can make a treaty without the consent of Congress and that the Iraqi Parliament will be weighing in (their Constitution guarantees them that right -- the US Constitution guarantees that Congress also has that right).

Other points from the hearing would include (as Lara Logan's legwork for the US military brass Sunday conveyed) the White House wants war with Iran. Ironically, though happy to touch on that and any other country during their testimony, when Senator Evan Bayh made the point that many say the US presence in Iraq is making the US less safe and wondered about the fact that Pakistan is seen as a base for terrorism, Petraeus began insisting that he couldn't comment on any of that, his territory was Iraq. Again, he was happy to weigh in (as was Crocker) on Iran and other countries . . . until a question he didn't like came up. Petraeus was very nasty with Bayh and did not even want to acknowledge that people who favor a withdrawal are not unpatriotic or some pejorative (Bayh: "As I acknowledge your honor and patriotism, I hope you would acknowledge the honor and patriotism of those who look at this very complex set of facts and simply have a very different point of view."). Pressed repeatedly, Petraeus snapped (sounding like Jack Nicholson in A Few Good Men), "Senator, we fight for the right of people to have other opinions." Where is that? Outside the US? "Your mission is limited to Iraq. Congress and the President have a broader responsibility," US Senator Joe Biden would point out in the next hearing. Nancy A. Youssef (McClatchy Newspapers) reports the other big news from the morning hearing which is Petraeus' statement "that the U.S. will need a 45-day assessment period starting in July, after some 20,000 troops withdraw, to determine whether more soldiers can leave." During the morning's hearing, Petraeus wanted to debate with Levin what US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates had meant by a pause in withdrawal this summer. Petraeus likes to play word games.

This afternoon, they took The Petraeus & Crocker Variety Hour to the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Apparently, they had no post-show notes from the first performance because they pretty much repeated the same tired act. That included Petraeus again bragging that paying off bullies ("Awakening" Council members) allowed US vehicles not to be damaged. Fork over the lunch money, Petraeus, fork it over. With Senator Chris Dodd, Petraeus took offense to the idea that they were "arming" the "Awakening" Council members. Apparently, they provide their own guns. So the US just supplies the bullets?

Biden, chair of the committee, used his opening remarks to set out the basics, "The purpose of the surge was to bring violence down so that Iraq's leaders could come together politically. Violence has come down, but the Iraqis have not come together. Our military played an important role in the violence. So did three other developments. First, the Sunni Awakening, which preceded the surge. Second, the Sadr cease-fire. Third, sectarian cleansing that left much of Baghdad segregated, with fewer targets to shoot or bomb. These tactical gains are relative. Violence is now where it was in 2005 and spiking up again. Iraq is still incredibly dangerous and, despite what the President says, very far from normal. And these gains are fragile. Awakening members frustrated at the government's refusal to integrate them into the national security forces could turn their guns back on us. Sadr could end his cease-fire at a moment's notice. Sectarian chaos could resume with the next bomb. Most important, the strategic purpose of the surge has not been realized: genuine political power sharing that gives Iraq's factions to pursue their interests peacefully."

If only those serving under the chair could have maintained the same focus. Senator Chuck Hagel was probably the best in the first hour. He noted it appeared that Iraq was "holding our policy hostage" by day-to-day events. He wanted to know, "What are we doing" in terms of all this talk of a diplomatic surge he keeps hearing talk of but doesn't see any going on? He noted that he's not seeing US Secretary of State Condi Rice doing anything "Kissinger-esque" so "what are you talking about?" Crocker acknowledged that more could be done. When it will is anyone's guess because Crocker didn't seem to have a clue (and we know the administration doesn't). As Hagel said, quoting Petraeus' own words back to him, "there is no military solution" in Iraq. In the second hour of the afternoon hearing, Senator Barbara Boxer was clearly the strongest voice.

She wanted to know about the training, all the training, that had gone on and then on again. "We've done a lot for the Iraqis just in terms of the numbers themselves," Boxer declared. "I'll tell you what concerns me and most of my constituents, you said -- many times -- the gains in Iraq are fragile and reversable. . . . So my constituents and I believe that" after all the deaths, all the money, "you have to wonder why the best that you can say is that the gains are fragile and reversable." Noting the lack of military success and Hagel's points, Boxer pointed out that nothing was being done diplomatically "and I listened carefully to Senator Hagel and Ambassador Crocker -- from the answer you gave him, I don't get the" feeling that the White House has given anything, it's still "the status quo. She then turned to the issue of monies and the militias, "You are asking us for millions more to pay off the militias and, by the way, I have an article here that says Maliki recently told a London paper that he was concerned about half of them" and wouldn't put them into the forces because he doubts their loyalty. She noted that $182 million a year was being paid, $18 million a month, to these "Awakening" Council members and "why don't you ask the Iraqis to pay the entire cost of that progam" because as Senator Lugar pointed out, "It could be an opportunity" for the Iraqi government "to turn it into something more long term." This is a point, she declared, that she intends to bring up when it's time to vote on the next spending supplamental. Crocker tried to split hairs.

Boxer: I asked you why they couldn't pay for it. . . . I don't want to argue a point. . . I'm just asking you why we would object to asking them to pay for that entire program giving all that we are giving them in blood and everything else?

Crocker declared that he'd take that point back to Iraq when he returned. She then focused on Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad noting, "The Bush administration told the American people more than five years ago that we would be greeted as liberators in Iraq and supporters of the war said that they would be dancing in the street with American flags." That didn't happen and not only did that not happen but when Ahmadinejad goes to Iraq, he's greeted warmly while Bully Boy has to sneak "in, in the dead of the night." She wondered, "Do you agree that after all we have done, after all the sacrifices, and God bless all of our troops . . ., that Iran is stronger and more influential than ever before?"

Crocker wanted to debate that reality. He stated it was just militias. Boxer pulled out reports that demonstrated it wasn't, where Ahmadinejad was greeted warmly even by children who gave him flowers, kissed him on both cheeks. "I'm saying that after all we have done," Boxer declared, "the Iraqi government kissing the Iranian leader and our president has to sneak into the country -- I don't understand it." Crocker still wanted to argue leading Boxer to respond, "I give up. It is what it is. They kissed him on the cheek. . . . He had a red carpet treatment and we are losing our sons and duaghters every day for the Iraqi people to be free. . . . It is disturbing."

Those were the strong performances. Bill Nelson was methodical but strong in the afternoon hearing (which is still going on as I dictate this.) As for the others? In the afternoon, the most embarrassing performance was given by John Kerry who gushed and fawned over Petraeus for over two minutes. Then he moved slowly and offered little but, when Barack Obama went, you grasped why. Kerry was Bambi's hand-holder. Bambi tried hard to make Kerry's points his own by repeating . . . them . . . oh . . . so . . . slowly. Someday he may provide leadership. Thus far, he just plays follow the leader and spoiled brat. Bill Nelson asked permission to wave the cry baby ahead because Obama was pressed for time. Biden allowed it. If Obama was pressed for time maybe he should have stuck to the alloted time? Or, as he would word it, maybe . . . he should have . . . stuck to . . . the alloted . . . time. (Did he study voice with William Shatner?) He didn't stick to the time limit and whined that he needed more, "I know I'm out of time, if I could have the indulgence of the committe for one minute." One minute? Try seven minutes. Couldn't wait his turn and then got his allotted time plus seven minutes more. And offered nothing in all that time. Babara Boxer could have done something with an extra seven minutes (she did a great deal with her allotted time). But Bambi wasn't prepared. He repeated all of John Kerry's points (they're friends, so it's not theft -- ask David Axlerod). ". . . that are . . . doing harm to . . . uh, . . ." Is he unable to speak if the lines aren't written ahead of time? If so, can Bully Boy slide the ear piece over to him because he obviously can't speak on his own. Seven minutes. Obama went seven minutes over -- after he'd used his allotted time. After he'd claimed he'd only take one more minute. The Whiny Boy Prince gets his way . . . and does nothing with it.

In Iraq, Leila Fadel (McClatchy Newspapers) reports that Moqtada al-Sadr "announced a postponement of a march planned for Wednesday in Baghdad to protest the U.S. occupation of Iraq" and quotes him declaring in the statement, "I call those beloved Iraqi people who wish to demonstrate against the occupation to postpone their march, out of my fear for them and my concern to spare their blood. I fear that Iraqi hands will be lifted against you, although I would be honored if the Americans were to lift their hands against you." Fadel notes the cease-fire/truce as do CBS and AP, al-Sadr is floating the threat that he will end the cease-fire. The same statement declared that, "I call on the Iraqi government, if it exists, to work for the protection of the Iraqi people, stop the bloodshed and the abuse of its honor. . . . Let the Iraqi government be informed that the Imam Mahdi Army will stand hand-in-hand with the Iraqi people to ensure that the people have everything they need. If it is required to lift the freeze in order to carry out our goals, objectives, doctrines and religious principles and patriotism, we will do that later and in a separate statement."

Turning to some of today's reported violence . . .

Bombings?

Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad bombing that wounded nine people, a Baghdad mortar attack that claimed 2 lives with five other people left injured, a Baghdad bombing that wounded two people, a Kirkuk motorcycle bombing that left fourteen people wounded, a Diyala Province roadside bombing that claimed 6 lives and left five people wounded, a Nineveh bombing at a motorcycle repair shop that claimed 1 life and left two more people injured and a Salahuddin Province mortar attack that claimed the life of 1 woman and left three members of her family injured. Reuters notes that the US again launched an air attack on the Sadr City section of Baghdad today firing "four US Hellfire missiles" resulting in 12 deaths according to the US military

Shootings?

Reuters notes an armed clash in the Sadr City section of Baghdad claimed 13 lives with one-hundred and forty people injured.

Corpses?

Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 3 corpses were discovered in Baghdad.

Today the US military announced: "A Multi-National Division -- Baghdad Soldier was killed as the result of an improvised explosive device attack at approximately 12:30 p.m. in northeast Baghdad April 8." And they announced: "A Multi-Division -- Baghdad Soldier was killed from wounds sustained when an improvised explosive device struck his vehicle at approximately 9:30 p.m. April 7." Like Tina Susman's "Fighting intensifies in Iraq's capital" (Los Angeles Times), in the snapshot yesterday 3 deaths are noted but, as CNN points out, there were four deaths on Monday. There were at least five announced Sunday. With at least two announced today, that's 11 announced deahts since Sunday.


Turning to US presidential politics, Elaine's "AOL Poll 67% doubt Barack's patriotism" noted an AOL poll. The question was: "Do you have any doubts about Barack Obama's patriotism?" Last night when Elaine wrote, there were 145,327 votes. 48,158 (33%) said "none at all." 78,697 (54%) said "Yes, a lot" with 18,472 (13%) saying, "Yes, a little." Leading to a total of 67% saying they doubted Barack's patriotism. After she wrote, voting continued and over 100,000 more votes were cast for a total of 249,089 which led to 137,552 (55%) saying "Yes, a lot," 31,676 (13%) saying "Yes, a little" and 79,861 (32%) saying "None at all." As Elaine noted, "The Democratic Party better get serious and grasp that these doubts are HUGE and that they come after a non-stop media blitz where Barack's speech was universally praised. If that's the best he can do now, what happens if he gets the nomination and faces McCain? Forget McCain's promise not to question Bambi's patriotism. When elections are close, promises get forgoteen by the best and I doubt anyone visiting this site would assume McCain qualified as 'one of the best.' Regardless of what McCain does or does not do, independent groups will raise the issue repeatedly. And you'll see that 67% climb even higher. I would argue that anything over 7% was too high. This will be a close election, regardless of whom the Democratic nominee is and Dems don't need to destroy their chance to take the White House." B-b-but, the Wright issue is over, right? Wrong. Thomas Sowell (Creators.com) notes, "The same people who have gone ballistic when some prominet figure is found to belong to some all-male social club are full of excuses for why Barack Obama remained a member of a racist and anti-American church for 20 years." Richard Cohen (Washington Post) raises the Wright issue today. Michigan's Niles Daily Star editorializes on the Wright issue noting, "The controversy involving his pastor, Jeremiah Wright, was more about anti-Americanism than about race. His wife Michelle's unfortunate comment that the success of his campaign made her proud of America 'for the first time' in her adult life, coupled with an Islamic-sounding name and decisions not to wear a flag lapel pin like all the other politicians are being used to fan below-the-radar doubts about whether he is 'American' enough." Then there's Stuart Taylor Jr. (National Journal) who explores his own reaction to the Wright issue (he damned America from the front of the church, as a pastor, called on the Lord to damn America), notes "Obama's shifting explanations," and he notes how some Democrats dismiss the issue which seems the sort of willful denial evident as John Kerry's campaign began its non-stop tanking following the DNC convention but Dem and Panhandle Media kept insisting it wasn't happening, things were great, things were groovy. Nancy Kruh (Dallas Morning News) covers the patriotism issue today and notes the recent columns by Joe Klein and Fred Barnes on the issue. Meanwhile, an issue Ava and I have repeatedly raised in our TV commentaries (most recently here) is in the news: Barack's successful maternal grandmother. Yes, the woman was successful, yes, she did break the glass ceiling, yes, she did make money. It's not the poverty picture Bambi's played it as being. Dan Nakaso (USA Today) notes that Madelyn Dunham "blazed a feminist trail in Hawaii banking circles in the late 1960s and early 1970s and rose to become one of the Bank of Hawaii's first female vice presidents." He notes "Obama's campaign declined to make Dunham available for interviews" and that those who know her question his Philadelphia speech claims about her -- Dennis Ching, "I never heard her say anything like that" and Sam Slom, "I never heard Madelyn say anything disparaging about people of African ancestry."

University of Kentucky student Kyle Mills shares why he's supporting Hillary Clinton's bid for the Democratic Party presidential nomination, "As a college student and first time presidential election voter, it didn't take long to see that there was massive enthusiasm surrounding Senator Hillary Clinton and her run for the presidency. After doing research on her policies, I finally understood the energy behind her campaign and saw that she was best suited to lead our nation. Perhaps the most impressive thing to me was the depth and ingenuity of her plans. From the ending the war in Iraq to providing health care to every American, the differences between Hillary Clinton and the other candidates were easy to see. Many college students now know that Hillary stands for the only truly universal health care plan. Many students also know that Hillary knows how to get us out of Iraq in a safe, prompt manner. Most don't realize, however, that Hillary has a very aggressive plan to help students attend and afford college. Her college access plan calls for a $3,500 college tax credit, an increase in the Pell Grant, and the creation of a graduation fund to help increase the amount of students actually graduating. These points only scratch the surface of her plan to assist college students such as myself.

iraqehren watada
thom shankerthe new york times
the washington post
Cameron W. Barr
leila fadel
nancy a. youssef
mcclatchy newspapers
tina susmanthe los angeles times
like maria said paz

Hillary offers real change, Bambi offers slums

The plan would also improve access to screenings and treatment. Hillary's plan will eliminate Medicare co-pays for mammograms to make them more affordable for 22 million women and guarantee breast and cervical cancer treatment to every low-Income Woman in America. She will also establish a new Racial Disparities Research Project to coordinate and disseminate cutting edge research on the impact of breast cancer among African-American and Hispanic women and guide the federal research agenda towards closing these gaps in outcomes. In addition, Hillary will create a Young Women's Breast Cancer Research and Outreach Unit to help educate young women about the risks of breast cancer, develop more effective screening tools and treatments, and to help research and respond to the unique emotional needs facing young women with breast cancer.

The above is from Lindsay Levin's "Hillary Unveils Plan to Find Cure for Breast Cancer" (HillaryClinton.com) and let me echo Ruth (see her "Barack Obama's plan to continue the illegal war"), this is big news. 240,000 American women will be diagnosed with some form of breast cancer this year.

What is "poppycock"? I have no idea, I've heard the word before but I'm about to use it in a sentence. I've heard so much poppycock about 'change' from Barack Obama but there's no change, there's just inspirational sermonettes. He's a Tony Robinson clone who never really says anything. Want real change? Hillary Clinton's offering it. Like Ruth points out, there was a time when women didn't talk about it if they had breast cancer. I can remember, when I was a little girl, one of the women in the neighborhood crying with my mother in our kitchen.

We had a dining room with a table, a big table, and then we had the kitchen which was a smaller table. One wall had the garage on the other side (and a door to it) and another had a big window that looked out on the backyard. Another wall had a door leading into the room with the washer and the dryer. The fourth wall faced the living room and had a big opening (a window but no glass, I'm tired). We'd be in the living room, my brothers, sisters and I, watching TV after school -- Dark Shadows if we were lucky but there were always arguments -- and my oldest brother and I would be listening if Mom had a friend in the kitchen. The conversations were so interesting. If my oldest sister was home, we'd have to listen carefully because she was a real tattle-tale (fancied herself a mother hen) and would holler out, "They're listening, Mom!"

But anyway, the day I'm talking about, the nighbor had just learned that she had breast cancer. She really thought it was the end of her life. She didn't say "cancer" -- let alone "breast cancer." And my brother and I had to really puzzle over it to figure out what she had. (We saw after she returned from the hospital.) It really was seen as a death sentence to most women in those days. And the neighbor, during the conversation my brother and I overheard, was saying she rather be dead than to be 'cut up.'

So we've progressed some. We do have awareness. It's not a death sentence if it's caught early. Women can talk about without being ashamed or whispering. But the funding still isn't there. So this is real change Hillary's proposing.

I'll go ahead and note Howard Wolfson's "HUBdate: A Cure Within Our Lifetime" (HillaryClinton.com) right now:

A Cure Within Our Lifetime: Hillary unveils her plan to find a cure for breast cancer within our lifetime on The Ellen DeGeneres Show today. Hillary's plan would provide $300 million a year in increased funding for breast cancer research at the National Institutes of Health, the National Cancer Institute, and the Department of Defense Congressionally Directed Medical Research Program. Read more.
Tar Heels for Hillary: Hillary opened her Winston-Salem headquarters Sunday. Said one supporter, "I'm going to do everything I can to ensure her election...this is an exciting time." Read more.
All Voices Count in PA: "Five women, including a senior campaign adviser and a congresswoman, traveled to Penn State" as part of the "All Voices Count" Women's Tour... Heather Tom, an Emmy award-winning actress "said she wants a president with a plan, who can work in a bipartisan way, and that when Clinton sat down with her, she took the time to listen." Read more.
Missoula, MT: Hillary "brought a crowd of 1,500-some supporters to their feet time and again" at a town hall yesterday where she announced her plan to promote green energy in Montana. One Montana professor had this to say: "(Clinton) knows policy and can hold her own." Read more and more.
In Case You Missed It: Republican Senator Lindsey Graham on Sunday's This Week with George Stephanopoulos: "I worked with Senator Clinton to provide military health care to every guard and reserve member." Watch here.
On the Map: During her time as First Lady, Hillary visited over 80 countries. See more.
On Tap: Tomorrow morning, Hillary delivers remarks to the Communication Workers of America.

While Hillary's proposing real change, Bambi's to a plan of his own. No, not ending the war in Iraq. We all know he's lying there. His plan is to turn American into a slum. Evelyn Pringle's written the second part in her series. It's called "Barack Obama: Operation Board Games For Slumlords" and you can find it at Dissident Voice. This is a dense, intense article and that's in part because Pringle's having to do the heavy lifting that Panhandle Media has avoided. Among other things, you'll learn that the Rezco slums involved more than just Bambi and Rezco. You'll learn about their connection to Daley and much more. You'll learn that this is 'change he can deceive with." From the article:

During his speech, Obama himself spelled out why low-income housing developers get away with funneling tax dollars through poor people in cities like Chicago without drawing any scrutiny, when he stated:
"These Americans cannot hire lobbyists to roam the halls of Congress on their behalf, and they cannot write thousand-dollar campaign checks to make their voices heard. They suffer most from a politics that has been tipped in favor of those with the most money, and influence, and power."
In Obama's case, a whole gang of slumlords in Illinois made their "voices heard" by writing campaign checks to fund his rise to fame. But as long as the focus of the slumlord allegations remains solely on a crook named Rezko, the other members of the gang will not get the credit they deserve.
One fact is beyond dispute. Without the fundraising of his political Godfather, Rezko, Obama's rise to power would not have occurred. However, Rezko was not the pied piper of Hamlin who led Illinois politicians astray. It's the other way around. Without the cooperation of the corrupt government officials, Rezko would not have been able to fund their political campaigns.
In Illinois, favored politicians are joined at the hip when it comes to fundraising. For instance, from 1999 through 2006, an analysis by the Chicago Tribune shows Obama took in more than $1.5 million from some 700 people who also contributed to Mayor Daley during his political career.
A cursory review of Illinois campaign records shows Allison Davis and his family members giving close to $16,000 to Obama's presidential campaign. The Sun-Times reports that Davis has donated more than $400,000 to dozens of political campaigns, and the top beneficiaries include Mayor Daley, Blagojevich and Obama.
The truth about all the scams run by the political mafia operating in Illinois is only coming out now because of Rezko's corruption trial, and if the Democrats want to lose any chance of winning the White House, all they have to do is nominate Obama.


Closing with C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"

Monday, April 7, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, the US military announces more deaths, the snow-job begins tomorrow as the administration prepares to cry 'progress!', Hillary Clinton speaks out on major funding for breast cancer research, and more.

Starting with war resistance. "I guess the hardest thing for people to understand is the reason you join the military is not the reason you leave it," writes war resister Kimberly Rivera (Rivera Family). Rivera is a US war resister in Canada. Like war resisters Josh Randall and Brandon Hughey, Rivera is from Texas. February 18, 2007, she, her husband Mario Rivera entered Canada. Rivera is the first known female US war resister to apply for refugee status in Canada. (Skylar James arrived after Rivera.) Rivera writes:

Your basic role as a soldier being invalidated, finding out your job has no meaning. No reason. Higher command just let bad people past you demanding they do not get the same treatment as others who come in the base every day. This Is the same as jeopardizing every men and women on the front line. That was the most angering moment for me. From this point on I had no pride in my work, No reason for being in Iraq. It was obvious to me that security was not the top priority for the troops and as one person not allowed to do my job efficiently and to the highest ability was the final straw. Finding that out is the hardest. It was my last reason for staying. For giving my life. You believe you are doing the right thing.

At the end of last year, Courage to Resist spoke with Rivera about her deployment to Iraq:

While in Iraq losing soldiers and civilians was part of daily life. I was a gate guard. This was looked down on by infantry soldiers who go out in the streets, but gate guards are the highest security of the Foward Operation Base. We searched vehicles, civilian personnel, and military convoys that left and came back every hour. I had a huge awakening seeing the war as it truly is: people losing their lives for greed of a nation and the effects on the soldiers who come back with new problems such as nightmares, anxieties, depression, anger alcohol abuse, missing limbs and scars from burns. Some don't come back at all. On December 21, 2006 I was going to my room and something in my heart told me to go call my husband. And when I did 24 rounds of mortars hit the FOB in a matter of minutes after I got on the phone . . . the mortars were 10-15 feet from where I was. I found a hole from the shrapnel in my room in the plywood window. That night I found the shrapnel on my bed in the same place where my head would have been if I hadn't changed my plans and gone to the phone.

War resisters in Canada are attempting to be granted safe harbor. The Canadian Parliament will debate a measure this month on that issue. You can make your voice heard. Three e-mails addresses to focus on are: Prime Minister Stephen Harper (pm@pm.gc.ca -- that's pm at gc.ca) who is with the Conservative party and these two Liberals, Stephane Dion (Dion.S@parl.gc.ca -- that's Dion.S at parl.gc.ca) who is the leader of the Liberal Party and Maurizio Bevilacqua (Bevilacqua.M@parl.gc.ca -- that's Bevilacqua.M at parl.gc.ca) who is the Liberal Party's Critic for Citizenship and Immigration. A few more can be found here at War Resisters Support Campaign. For those in the US, Courage to Resist has an online form that's very easy to use.
There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes Matt Mishler, Josh Randall, Robby Keller, Justiniano Rodrigues, Chuck Wiley, James Stepp, Rodney Watson, Michael Espinal, Matthew Lowell, Derek Hess, Diedra Cobb, Brad McCall, Justin Cliburn, Timothy Richard, Robert Weiss, Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross Spears, Peter Brown, Bethany "Skylar" James, Zamesha Dominique, Chrisopther Scott Magaoay, Jared Hood, James Burmeister, Eli Israel, Joshua Key, Ehren Watada, Terri Johnson, Clara Gomez, Luke Kamunen, Leif Kamunen, Leo Kamunen, Camilo Mejia, Kimberly Rivera, Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Agustin Aguayo, Justin Colby, Marc Train, Abdullah Webster, Robert Zabala, Darrell Anderson, Kyle Snyder, Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Kevin Lee, Mark Wilkerson, Patrick Hart, Ricky Clousing, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, Blake LeMoine, Clifton Hicks, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Logan Laituri, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Joshua Casteel, Katherine Jashinski, Dale Bartell, Chris Teske, Matt Lowell, Jimmy Massey, Chris Capps, Tim Richard, Hart Viges, Michael Blake, Christopher Mogwai, Christian Kjar, Kyle Huwer, Wilfredo Torres, Michael Sudbury, Ghanim Khalil, Vincent La Volpa, DeShawn Reed and Kevin Benderman. In total, at least fifty US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum. Information on war resistance within the military can be found at The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline [(877) 447-4487], Iraq Veterans Against the War and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters. Tom Joad maintains a list of known war resisters. In addition, VETWOW is an organization that assists those suffering from MST (Military Sexual Trauma).

On Saturday, US Senator Joe Biden delivered the Democratic Radio Address (link has text and audio):

In January 2007, President Bush announced the surge of an additional 30,000 American forces into Iraq. Next week, the President is expected to tell the American people what comes next. It's an important moment for America's future. "The purpose of the surge was to bring violence in Iraq down so that its leaders could come together politically. Violence has come down, but the Iraqis have not come together. The country remains terribly divided among Sunni, Shi'a and Kurds. There is little evidence the Iraqis will settle their differences peacefully any time soon. "Our military has done a heroic job in bringing violence down since last summer. But even these gains are relative. Violence is just getting back to levels we saw in 2005 -- when 846 Americans lost their lives and 5,945 were wounded. Iraq is still an incredibly dangerous place -- and very far from normal. "Despite this reality, the President is expected to announce that when the surge ends, we will not be in a position of drawing down American forces. There could be no clearer acknowledgment from the President himself that the surge has not succeeded in achieving its stated purpose--namely, moving Iraq toward the day it can govern itself, defend itself and sustain itself in peace. "So, where are we after the surge? Back to where we were before it started. With 140,000 troops in Iraq -- and no end in sight. The best that can be said is we've gone from drowning in Iraq to treading water. That's better, but we can't keep doing it without exhausting ourselves. "Every extra day we stay in Iraq with 140,000 troops, that's exactly what we're doing. And the price we're paying keeps getting steeper: The continued loss of the lives and limbs of our soldiers -- every day; The emotional and economic strain on our military families due to repeated, extended tours -- lasting up to 15 months; The drain on our Treasury -- $12 billion every month that we could be spending on housing, education or healthcare here at home; The impact on the readiness of our armed forces -- tying down so many troops that we don't have any leftover to deal with a new emergency; The inability to send enough troops to the border area between Afghanistan and Pakistan -- the real central front in the war on terror; And finally: the damage done to America's standing in the world;"I believe the President has no strategy for success in Iraq. His plan is to muddle through -- and hand the problem off to his successor. Our troops and their families deserve better than that. We owe them a strategy worthy of their sacrifice. "We Democrats understand that this war must end so that America can regain the credibility to lead around the world and the flexibility to meet our challenges here at home. That's what the American people want -- and it's what America's security needs. Thank you for listening."

Biden's radio address continued the Congressional plan to set out criteria ahead of the Congressional testimonies of US Ambassador Ryan Crocker and Gen David Petraeus (they begin testifying Tuesday). Wednesday and Thursday, Congress utilized the Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearings and a press conference to lay down. On Wednesday, Biden noted (at the opening of the afternoon hearings), "We are told that we must continue to support a strong central government, when that government does not enjoy the trust of many Iraqis, and has little capacity to deliver security and services." Last fall, Congress was basically unprepared (or unwilling) for the wave of Operation Happy Talk the White House launched. As Biden noted Wednesday morning, the escalation ('surge') was announced by the White House at the start of 2007, "The following September, when Ambassaodr Ryan Crocker and General David Petraeus testified before Congress, they told us that the surge would start to wind down this spring, at which point they would give the President and Congress their recommendations for what should come next. That's the context for the two weeks of hearings we start today in the Foreign Relations -- and for the basic questions we'll be asking: One, has the surge accomplished its stated goals? We're interested not just in tactical military progress, but also the strategic objective of buying time for political reconciliation. And two, where do we go from here, both in terms of U.S. force levels and U.S. policy for succeeding in Iraq?"

"General David Petraeus, our top man in Iraq, returns to Washington this week to talk about where we go from here," was how Bob Schieffer (CBS' Face The Nation, link has text and video) introduced the topic on yesterday's broadcast. CBS News' Lara Logan appeared to give an overview of recent events and McClatchy Newspapers' Nancy A. Youssef and the Washington Post's Rajiv Chandrasekaran were the panelists for the discussion after Logan finished her report.

Bob Schieffer: Is Iraq any better? Have things calmed down at all over this last year because suddenly many Americans were surprised over the last couple of weeks when you had this new round of violence. What -- what's the situation there now?

Lara Logan: Well the last few weeks have really been brutal for General Petraeus because he really was looking at a year where he managed to be quite successful in reducing violence particularly in Baghdad and some of the surrounding areas. One of the main reasons for that is the agreement with the Sunni tribes and also with some Shi'ite tribes -- the militias that they were forming and working with the Americans but those gains have almost disappeared in the face of the recent violence which spread so quickly from Basra in the south of Iraq. And what that fight -- it's really about two things. It's a fight amongst the Shi'ites for power in Iraq -- what the future of this country is going to look like, how the Shi'ites will divide Iraq among themselves -- but perhaps even more importantly it's a fight between the US, who backs the Iraqi government and Iraqi security forces, and Iran, who backs those militias. And this is really the proxy war that everybody talks about behind closed doors but nobody wants to admit to in public, Bob.

Logan did something very helpful. It wasn't journalism and shouldn't be mistaken for it. There's very little reality in anything she declared. But she has stuck to the talking points that Petraeus and Crocker will. (A) Violence was reduced. (B) That's wonderful! (C) The "Awakening" Councils are a plus. (C) It's all Iran's fault. (D) Let's go to war with Iran. As a journalism, Logan's 'report' fails on every level. As a sneak peak to the arguments Petreaus and Crocker will try to make, it's illuminating. Taking the four points one by one. (A) Reduced violence all these years later is a rather pathetic 'goal.' January 10, 2007 Bully Boy announced the surge. One day after his announcement, the US death toll stood at 3018. The current total is 4023. 1005 US service members have died since then. Bully Boy's laughable speech (containing one kernal of truth: "Where mistakes have been, the responsibility rests with me.") promised to "put down sectarian violence" (didn't happen) "and bring security to the people of Baghdad" (ditto). He stressed that the escalation went "beyond military operations" and that "America will hold the Iraqi government to the benchmarks it has announced" (actually pushed by the White House). No benchmarks were reached since September. A de-de-Baathification law kind of got passed, it hasn't been implemented, it's largely inoperable even if the puppet government attempts to implement it. There has been no political progress. (B) Wonderful? That's embarrassing. (C) Actually, the assault on Basra by the puppet government (at the request of the White House) caused large scale violence and would still be ongoing were it not for Iraqi Parliamentarians and Iran working towards a cease-fire. (D) Bully Boy already has ongoing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan with the military stretched to the limits so unless he's enlisting the Bush family into a brigade, war with Iran is impossible. (Bully Boy's a big believer in trying the impossible when it risks harming America.)

Bob Schieffer: Now Rajiv, how could the US basically have been blindsided when the prime minister decided to launch this attack on Sadr's militia?

Rajiv Chandrasekaran: I'm not entirely sure that the American command there was entirely blindsided.

Bob Schieffer: Really?

Rajiv Chandrasekaran: The Iraqi military at the most senior levels does coordinate with the United States military. I think it was pitched and described to General Petraeus and his senior commanders as a more narrowly targeted operation. [. . .] And I think the American command wanted to see Maliki step up and take some actions aimed at doing so. But obviously what we saw was an operation that was ill conceived, ill planned and wound up really provoking a much harsher response from Moqtada al-Sadr's militia then I think had been envisaged both by Maliki's government and by the American officials.

Bob Schieffer: Well do you think the United States wanted him to do this, Nancy?

Nancy A. Youssef: I think they were in a precarious position because on one hand there had been a lot of pressure on Nouri al-Maliki to step up and really take a leadership postion and Basra is a big problem. It's a big security problem. It's unstable. It's not controlled by anyone. And it's that last major stronghold that Moqatad al-Sadr, the rebel cleric, has in the south. And the US military officials that I've talked to say that they were working with Nouri al-Maliki to craft a longterm, thoughtful plan. It appears that what the US military didn't want was what happened -- which was a very sudden, ill-planned attack that potentially put the gains of the surge in jeopardy. [. . .] It also showcased Iran's influence on the security and politics in Iraq in a very pronounced way. It exposed not only how much they influence the Badr organization as I think a lot of people had assumed but also Moqtada al-Sadr who had promoted himself as an Iraqi nationalist. And so it put the gains of the surge in question and I think it also raised questions about what would the US role be vis a vis the Iraqi security forces if there was a drawdown. In this case, the US says it wasn't informed about what the plan was and then had to rush and get air combat support in place when the Iraqi security forces couldn't handle the fighting.

Chandrasekarn would go on to note that the Iraqi military began defecting -- which is the term for it, not "desertion." Desertion implies that they left the battle, defecting described what happened -- they switched to the other side. He also noted that the "intra-Shi'ite fighting" proves just how difficult any national reconciliation is (all these years later).

Today at the White House, Tony Fratto, Deputy Press Secretary, attempted to give the appearance that the White House was not coordinating the testimonies of Petraeus and Croker. Helen Thomas corrected that noting, "You acted like the President wouldn't know what Petraeus and Crocker are going to testify. Do you mean he's going to be surprised tomorrow when they say the surge is working and all?" Fratto backed off ("No, I hope I didn't leave that impression.") but Thomas pressed, "But he's the President, isn't he calling the policy? I mean, we don't have President Petraeus, do we?" Fratto agreed that the US didn't and then tried to spin that security was the "mission" leading Thomas to (rightly) dub it the White House's request "to continue the occupation of Iraq". He refused to answer her question of whether the "mission" including "paying off 90,000 Iraqis not to fight?" The "Awakening" Council members are paid $300 in US dollars by the US government.

The latest wave of Operation Happy Talk will include testimonies from US Sec of Defense Robert Gates, Joint Chiefs of Staff chair Michael Mullen. CNN reported yesterday that it would also include a Thursday morning address by the Bully Boy. It will, no doubt, be as fact based as Douglas Feith's 'zany' appearance on 60 Minutes (link has text and video) yesterday where Steve Kroft had to repeatedly correct him. Feith was the Under Secretary of Defense and told Kroft the illegal war was "anticpatory self-defense" and claimed that no one in the administration had floated the threat of WMDs to the public in the leadup to the Iraq War. Kroft responded by quoting Donald Rumsfeld, Bully Boy and Dick Cheney doing just that. Attempting to stay with reality, on Friday, 16 members of Congress -- led by US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid -- sent a letter to the White House noting that "the strategic purpose of the surge strategy you announced more than a year ago -- creating the conditions for Iraqis to forge a political solution in order to hasten the day our troops can return home -- has not been achieved. In fact, your Administration recently indicated that more U.S. troops will remain deployed in Iraq after the surge has ended than were there when the surge began. This is not what the American people were led to expect when you announced the surge nearly fifteen months ago." Nancy A. Youssef (McClatchy Newspapers) quotes US Senator Carl Levin declaring al-Maliki "has shown himself to be a political leader who is excessively sectarian, who is incompetent and who runs a corrupt administration. . . The purpose of the surge clearly has not been achieved."

Meanwhile at least 69 Iraqis and 5 US service members were reported dead over the weekend. Among the many deaths was this one that Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reported on Saturday: the assassination of priest Yousef Adel in Baghdad. The priest deaths follows the February 29th kidnapping of Archbishop Palos Faraj Rahho whose corpse was discovered March 13th. Of latest priest murdered, Iraq's Alsumaria TV reports, "The assassination of Father Youssef Adel was a multilateral message delivered from terrorists to concerned parties. This incident targets at first Iraq's social diversity and strikes national unity and coexistence." Zenit reports that Father Youssef Adel Abudi was assassinated "in his home in Baghdad," "at the entrance." Asia News notes the funeral was at Saints Peter and Paul Church in Baghdad and that mourners included "[v]arious members of the faithful and religious representatives from all the Christian denominations . . . including Athanase Matti Shaba Matoka, the Assyrian Catholic bishop of the capital, the patriarch of the Chaldeans, Cardinal Emmanuel III Delly, the apostolic nuncio in Iraq and Jordan, Archbishope Francis Assisi Chullikatt." Catholic World News notes the funeral was presided over by Syrian Orthodoz Bishop Matti Shaba. Catholic News Agency reports the mourners numbered 300. Leila Fadel and Mohammed al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reported Sunday that armed clashes were yet again taking place in Baghdad as al-Maliki was sending militias into the Sadr City section of the capital to attack the followers of Moqtada al-Sadr. That would be Shi'ite vs. Shi'ite conflict. Sudarsan Raghavan (Washington Post) reports that "intra-sect struggles, after five years of war, are increasingly defining the nature of conflict in Iraq, as violence lessens between Sunnis and Shiites" and notes the funeral for Mustafa, the sixteen-year-old son of Abu Abdullah, who was shot and killed by an Iraqi soldier and whose father says, "I want to do to them exactly what they did to my son, and even more." As the attacks on Sadr City continue, CNN reports on their interview with Nouri al-Maliki (link has text and video) where he "demanded al-Sadr disband his Mehdi Army and threatened to bar al-Sadr's followers from the political process if the cleric refused." Khaled Farhan (Reuters) notes that Moqtada al-Sadr's response, he "will consult senior religious leaders and disband his Mehdi Army militia if they instruct him to, a senior aide said on Monday. The surprise announcement was the first time Sadr has proposed dissolving the Mehdi Army, one of the principle actors in Iraq's five-year-old conflict and the main opponent of U.S. and Iraqi forces during a recent upsurge in fighting." But a later report by Farhan quotes a spokesperson for Moqtada al-Sadr declaring that "this is an old idea and didn't come in response to Maliki's orders."

In some of today's reported violence . . .
Bombings?

Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports two Baghdad roadside bombings that left ten people wounded (five were police officers), another Baghdad roadside bombing that wounded another five police officers, a Baghdad mortar attack on the Green Zone that wounded two people outside the Green zone, a Baghdad mortar attack that claimed 9 lives (thirty-one more wounded), a Basra explosion that claimed 7 lives, a roadside bombing outside Basra that targeted Ministry of Interior spokesperson Abdul Kareem Khalf and resulted in four bodyguards being wounded and a Diyala Province roadside bombing that claimed the life of 1 Iraqi soldier and left another wounded. Reuters notes a Baghdad missile attack that claimed 9 lives and a US helicopter strike on Sadr City that claimed 4 lives (five more people wounded).

Shootings?

Reuters notes an armed clash in Baghdad that resulted in 5 deaths.

Corpses?

Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 4 corpses discovered in Baghdad.

Meanwhile the US military announced today: "Two Multi-National Division -- Baghdad Soldiers were killed in a rocket-propelled grenade attack at approximately 6 p.m. April 7." And they announced: "A Multi-National Division -- Baghdad Soldier was killed as the result of small-arms fire after the vehicle he was traveling in was struck by an improvised explosive device while on patrol in eastern Baghdad April 7." 5 announced dead yesterday, three today for a total of 4023 since the start of the illegal war.

Turning to US presidential race news. Cynthia McKinney is running for the Green Party nomination and, on Saturday, Rhode Island Greens "picked a slate of delegates that favors" her. Mark Reynolds (The Providence Journal) reports McKinney was appointed six delegates to the Green Party's July national convention (in Chicago) and Jesse Johnson was appointed two. As various candidates run for their parties' nomination, one ticket is already know: Ralph Nader and Matt Gonzalez. The Nader-Gonzalez website continues their media critique -- one all third party and independent candidates should be taking part in as they are not just shut out of the MSM coverage but scorned by so-called 'independent' media. Last week, The Progressive's Matthew Rothschild was rightly critiqued (click here for Third's piece on that) and today Team Nader wonders about "prominent American liberals" (Rothschild, Katrina vanden Heuvel, Medea Benjami, John Nichols, etc.) who "continue to support the corrupt Democratic Party" despite agreeing with the Nader-Gonzalez ticket on issues such as "single-payer, Canadian-style, private delivery, public health insurance system," "cutting the bloated, wasteful military budget, cutting off the corporate welfare kings," "cracking down on corporate crime," "reversing U.S. policy in the Middle East and ending the military and corporate occupation in Iraq." Team Nader announces that last week more than enough signatures have been collected for the Nader-Gonzalez ticket to be on the New Mexico ballot and more than enough to be on Hawaii's ballot while the current focus is on Arizona and Kansas is the next planned state to target.

Turning to the Democratic Party where Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama remain in a dead heat for their party's presidential nomination. Christopher Willis (AP) explains that Barack spent the weekend repeating over and over how he loves the United States which is necessary, as Willis outlines, as a result of an impression left unanswered: no flag lapel pin, not placing his hand over his heart during the "Star Spangeled Banner," Michelle Obama declaration earlier this year that she was "proud of America for the first time" and his pastor of 20 years, Jeremiah Wright, standing in front of the congregation and calling on God to damn the United States. That issue is not going away and it's amazing that some really think these warning signals can be ignored. Barack's given his big speech that was supposed to silence any questions about Wright but he continues to spend time trying to address the problem. Repeating, it is not going away. Meanwhile, Helen Thomas (Seattle Post-Intelligencer) explores the two campaigns and observes, "Obama stresses he was against the invasion of Iraq, but he doesn't say he was not in the Senate when it was initiated. Since becoming a senator, he has twice voted to fund the war. I am still trying to find the key that has made Obama a prime candidate for the presidency, and to understand what he has done for the country beyond his middle-of-the-road political moves to make his name known and to steer clear of hot-button issues." On the issue of the dead-heat the two candidates are in, Sean Wilentz (Salon) notes, "Crucially, Team Obama doesn't want to count the votes of Michigan and Florida. (And let's note that in a winner-take-all system, Clinton would still be leading in delegates, 1,430 to 1,257, even without Michigan and Florida.) Under the existing system, Obama's current lead in the popular vote would nearly vanish if the results from Michigan and Florida were included in the total, and his lead in pledged delegates would melt almost to nothing. The difference in the popular vote would fall to 94,005 out of nearly 27 million cast thus far -- a difference of a mere four-tenths of 1 percentage point -- and the difference in delegates would plummet to about 30, out of the 2,024 needed to win. Add those states' votes to the totals, and take a sober look at Clinton's popular-vote victories in virtually all other large states, and the electoral dynamic changes. She begins to look like the almost certain nominee." Meanwhile Hillary Clinton continues demonstrating leadership. On Friday she proposed a cabinet level position to address and end poverty. Today, she appeared on The Ellen Degeneres Show. Ellen and Hillary bowled and, on charges that Hillary should drop out of the race, Ellen explained, "Just keep going and I think the people should decide. It's wrong for anyone to tell somebody -- whoever you're for, everyone has a right to vote for whoever they want -- but to tell someone to get out -- It's our vote. It's we the people that should choose." On the program, Hillary announced that, as president, there would be a "$300 million a year in increased funding for breast cancer research at the National Institutes of Health, the National Cancer Institure and the Department of Defense Congressionally Directed Medical Research Program." Clinton explained, "I know your mom is a survivor, and we've lost my incredible mother-in-law to breast cancer during Bill's first term and first year in office, and I've just been really committed. I've had so many friends, and we all know people who survived and people who haven't. And I just think we should set a goal of curing breast cancer within the next decade." Marcia will cover more of the Ellen appearance this evening.

iraq
brandon hughey
kimberly rivera
joe biden
mcclatchy newspapersnancy a. youssef
the washington post
rajiv chandrasekaran
lara loganface the nation
helen thomas
leila fadelmohammed al dulaimy
sudarsan raghavan
christopher willis