Olbermann, Congress talk back
Video: Olbermann systematically demolishes the idea that Bush should have any credibility whatsoever about Iraq.
He has said more troops were not necessary, and more troops are necessary, and that it's up to the generals, and removed some of the generals who said more troops would be necessary.
He told us of turning points: The fall of Baghdad, the death of Uday and Qusay, the capture of Saddam, a provisional government,the trial of Saddam, a charter, a constitution, an Iraqi government, elections, purple fingers, a new government, the death of Saddam. ...
The war would pay for itself, it would cost 1-point-7 billion dollars, 100 billion, 400 billion, half a trillion dollars.
And after all of that, today it is his credibility versus that of generals, diplomats, allies, Republicans, Democrats, the Iraq Study Group, past presidents, voters last November, and the majority of the American people.
I just watched Ron Paul (R-TX) talking what seemed like good sense on C-Span: how the three words in Iraq are "occupation, occupation, occupation"; how we claim to be promoting democracy, although we're theoretically targeting Moqtada Al-Sadr who is very popular among Iraqis; how the death squads we're going after are really part the government. He went on to say he feared a "Gulf of Tonkin-like incident" that would lead to us or Israel bombing Iran, even though Iran presents no real threat to either of us. "You know it's bad when" Bush is losing Republicans from Texas.
According to ThinkProgress, the current tally in Congress stands at 30 opposed, 11 in favor, and 16 not telling. Although, I don't think their list is very up-to-date, since they list Ted Kennedy's position as unknown, when he introduced legislation against it two days ago. (I emailed ThinkProgess.)
It seems like, if Congress had any say in it, this surge would not happen. The question now is whether Congress will have any say in it. They talk a good game, but I'm not sure if they'll succeed in wresting any control away from the Mad Emperor.
Meanwhile, we've spent $1 million per dead Iraq (civilians included), and if this whole thing seems familiar, it should: not only have we done these troops increases before in Iraq, Bush's speech sounded similar notes as Lyndon Johnson's SOTU speech forty years ago.
He has said more troops were not necessary, and more troops are necessary, and that it's up to the generals, and removed some of the generals who said more troops would be necessary.
He told us of turning points: The fall of Baghdad, the death of Uday and Qusay, the capture of Saddam, a provisional government,the trial of Saddam, a charter, a constitution, an Iraqi government, elections, purple fingers, a new government, the death of Saddam. ...
The war would pay for itself, it would cost 1-point-7 billion dollars, 100 billion, 400 billion, half a trillion dollars.
And after all of that, today it is his credibility versus that of generals, diplomats, allies, Republicans, Democrats, the Iraq Study Group, past presidents, voters last November, and the majority of the American people.
I just watched Ron Paul (R-TX) talking what seemed like good sense on C-Span: how the three words in Iraq are "occupation, occupation, occupation"; how we claim to be promoting democracy, although we're theoretically targeting Moqtada Al-Sadr who is very popular among Iraqis; how the death squads we're going after are really part the government. He went on to say he feared a "Gulf of Tonkin-like incident" that would lead to us or Israel bombing Iran, even though Iran presents no real threat to either of us. "You know it's bad when" Bush is losing Republicans from Texas.
According to ThinkProgress, the current tally in Congress stands at 30 opposed, 11 in favor, and 16 not telling. Although, I don't think their list is very up-to-date, since they list Ted Kennedy's position as unknown, when he introduced legislation against it two days ago. (I emailed ThinkProgess.)
It seems like, if Congress had any say in it, this surge would not happen. The question now is whether Congress will have any say in it. They talk a good game, but I'm not sure if they'll succeed in wresting any control away from the Mad Emperor.
Meanwhile, we've spent $1 million per dead Iraq (civilians included), and if this whole thing seems familiar, it should: not only have we done these troops increases before in Iraq, Bush's speech sounded similar notes as Lyndon Johnson's SOTU speech forty years ago.