White House compares grizzled Nam vet to chubby Hollywood liberal

It's McClellan, ergo I laugh. He's not saying anything different from what a number of goofs are, and the relative lack of universal traction resulting from it amuses me. (Keep in mind I DO think that it would be a mistake to oversell Murtha's speech as a 180 given comments in 2004; that said Murtha's timing and rhetoric is sharp and necessary, and forces a lot of issues that I think the right hawks are overconfident about.)

I saw this. One of the most brazen "opposing our policy means you HEART TERRORISTS" attempts I've ever seen.

'McClellan called Murtha, a retired Marine colonel who earned a Bronze Star and two Purple Hearts for his service in Vietnam, "a respected veteran and politician who has a record of supporting America."'

...we are to infer that calling for the pullout of troops is the opposite of supporting America.

Looks like there actually IS going to be a vote on pulling the troops tonight, I hear. It'll go down, of course, and Hewitt et all will be all smug, but it'll keep them dangerously lulled as well, I figure.

Meanwhile, today's mosque double-bombing illustrates the recent change in the conflict. You have people that are trying to get to heaven by BOMBING THE FAITHFUL in mosques... A bonafide sectarian war was begun.

McClellan is the most dyspeptic-looking of the ventriloquists' dummies who've held that post recently.

yeah i saw the drudge siren; iraq's a tough issue for the gop right now but dems need to fight harder on it, punch harder than this 'surrender' bullshit the gops' flinging, considering how the gop kept tacking that 'ok, troops in bosnia ok but only for twelve months and then we vote again' it's pretty bizarre to see them taking this 'exit strategy = surrender strategy omg!!', anything that stops them from distancing themselves from bush or yapping that we need to stay in iraq forever works, the dems need to hit harder on bush allowing 2000 troops and counting to die cuz he was too lazy and stupid to do the work necessary in the buildup, they should draft articles of impeachment - even if just for rhetoric value, which is all this vote is - on bush losing what was still a very winnable (if unjust no matter what) war. they should be harping at how he has overstretched, demeaned, and seriously weakened our military in a time of fucking war. they should draft articles of impeachment over him pulling troops and blowing one war we practically had in hand so he could go lose another war. they should draft articles of impeachment over his failure to capture or kill bin laden or to devote adequate resources towards this end and when the gop doesn't hop on board ask why the gop wants to surrender to bin laden and why the gop is afraid to go after al qaeda. they should ask repeatedly how many americans have to die before the republicans get serious about actually fighting terrorism. they should harp on things like say that one north dakotan senator's resistance to national catastrophe/terrorist attack insurance on the grounds 'places like north dakota don't get attacked so why should we pay?' or bill o'reilly calling on al qaeda to do america a favor and plz attack coit tower in san francisco, shades of anne coulter wishing terrorists would do america a favor and attack new york back in 95 (ie. WATCH OUT FRISCO), they should ask how many terrorist attack favors the gop will be asking for down the pipeline. they should draft a bill raising veteran's benefits, restoring combat pay, draft an 'apology' to the troops for how they have been treated and failed by their govt, not adequate preperation, pay, equipment, vague 'we can all agree we have not done enough for them and we need to do more' and wait for republicans to disagree. they need to present themselves as a party with a plan for victory AND withdrawal and use that to harp on how the gop has neither and is proud of it. they need to avoid hindsight 20/20, slip 'obv mistakes were made, that's apparent to everybody' as passing dismissal/slam of bush incompetence/negligence and act like the grownups who are finally here with a way to get us out of this mess while trying to avoid leaving a mess behind us. and they need to stay angry and get angrier and stay on the offensive.

The rant of all rants! Fax it to Teddy!

i need sleep, badly!!!

I want Zell Miller to challenge John Murtha to a duel.

Who just heard Rep. Jean Schmidt(R-OH) call Murtha a coward on the House floor? The resulting hubbub got to Parliament-level harrumphs!

relevant Wonkette bit:
The bill is technically a Republican one -- it's not Murtha's bill at all, but Republican Rep. Duncan Hunter's -- which means all the GOP congressmen that rail again this "Democrat plan" are wrong. Indeed, the meme swept through the Democratic ranks quickly, with Rep. Jim McGovern pointing out early on that "Republicans are talking about how irresponsible the Democrats are for wanting an immediate withdrawal from Iraq without a plan or safety net: I would like to point out that no Democrat has called for that this evening, only Mr. Hunter has."

That's a great rant, Blount. Dump some paragraph breaks into it and send it off to Harry Reid.

ah, here it is:

...The fiery, emotional debate climaxed when Rep. Jean Schmidt, R-Ohio, the most junior member of the House, told of a phone call she received from a Marine colonel.

"He asked me to send Congress a message — stay the course. He also asked me to send Congressman Murtha a message — that cowards cut and run, Marines never do," Schmidt said.

Democrats booed and shouted her down — causing the House to come to a standstill.

Rep. Harold Ford (news, bio, voting record), D-Tenn., charged across the chamber's center aisle screaming that it was an uncalled for personal attack. "You guys are pathetic. Pathetic," yelled Rep. Marty Meehan (news, bio, voting record), D-Mass...

Oh, there was much stamping of canes!

Still, two bits: Murtha is a Navy vet, and Schmidt almost lost her special election to Paul Hackett, a Marine and Iraqi war vet(and who is not running for Senator in Ohio).

oops, correction: Hackett is NOW running for Senator.

further correction: Murtha is a Marine vet.

i suck today.

It makes for a colorful partisan battleground, but the real battleground needs something else: If the US largely departed, could they persuade a UN Force to come in at this point? And what of creating a pan-Arabic peacekeeping force, much like the African Union troops currently working in Sudan?

That's an idea, but a very unlikely one; remember the guy we currently have representing us at the U.N.

"on bush losing what was still a very winnable (if unjust no matter what) war"

Say what?

"If the US largely departed, could they persuade a UN Force to come in at this point? And what of creating a pan-Arabic peacekeeping force, much like the African Union troops currently working in Sudan?"

I think this administration would have a tough time convincing the UN (or any Arab nation) to send handy wipes to Iraq let alone troops.

The Prez said they won't stop without "total victory!" Somehow I think his definition of total victory will change in the next year or so.

...like it hasn't already...

So, is Murtha himself going to vote against the stupidified version of his resolution?

Haha, 403-3 vote (Murtha did indeed vote against it). Some Republicans really thought this was going to shake up the Dems! What a stupid fucking stunt.

Jean Schmidt: Cunt or Dud?

Well, it's easy to see how even a patriotic vet like Hackett could lose that election, opposed by such charisma.

the fun continues:

"Murtha's just getting his 15 minutes of fame like Cindy Sheehan got..."