Archive for February 9th, 2007

h1

technorati test

February 9, 2007

Technorati Profile

h1

Bushbots On A Mission

February 9, 2007

Mark Noonan and Matt Margolis, editors of the internet’s most obvious independent kool-aid stand for Bush supporters (Blogs For Bush), have turned their attention to the subject of corruption. Not Bush and Cheney’s corruption, mind you, but the alleged actions of a handful of Democrats. You see, when you’ve planted your flag in the camp that unconditionally supports the worst president in US history, there comes a time when denial reaches critical mass and you have no choice but to start the process of deflection and begin lashing out at his critics in Congress:

For years, Democrats have tried and succeeded in using a phony ethics war to punish Republicans for being in power. Newt Gingrich and Tom DeLay have both paid the price for Democrat scandal-mongering. Enough is enough.

Caucus of Corruption by Matt Margolis and Mark Noonan is the first book to specifically discuss the hypocrisy and corruption of today’s Democratic Party. The book not only exposes the hypocrisy of the Democratic Party’s ongoing plan to regain power by portraying the Republicans as corrupt, it also details the rampant corruption deep in the Democrat’s ranks.

Caucus of Corruption provides readers with concrete evidence of the hypocrisy within the Democratic Party and tells the story of a Democratic Party that plans to employ a phony ethics war to regain power.caucus-of-corruption.gif

In Caucus of Corruption, you will learn about

  • Nancy Pelosi’s penchant for cronyism,
  • Harry Reid’s connections to Jack Abramoff,
  • Rahm Emanuel’s love for dirty money.
  • Chuck Schumer’s clashes with campaign finance laws.

and much, much, more!

  • Who in the Democratic Party is connected to embattled lobbyist Jack Abramoff?
  • How many have run afoul of campaign finance laws?
  • Who are taking free trips, accepting bribes and lobbyist cash?

It’s all in Caucus of Corruption!

As the definitive resource on Democrat corruption and hypocrisy, Caucus of Corruption is a must have for conservatives, Republicans, political junkies, and anyone concerned with cleaning up politics in Washington.

I’m sure it’ll be a real page-turner! I wonder if Scooter reserved a copy? Mr. ‘Freedom Fries‘, too? The cover appears to proudly display the endorsement of congressional corruption expert Tom Delay (although I can’t make out what it says), so I assume he’s getting one!

The book couldn’t come at a more critical time, as we’ve recently seen the decider’s approval rating drop to an abysmal 32 percent. Time to kick that deflection and denial into high gear!

(cross-posted at fbblue.gif;I posted it here because they seem to be getting defensive about it now)

h1

Rove: “I don’t want my 17-year-old son to have to _____ or _____ in _____.”

February 9, 2007

If you guessed:

“I don’t want my 17-year-old son to have to pick tomatoes or make beds in Las Vegas.”

You guessed right.

 

h1

Feith In The Office Of Special Plans

February 9, 2007

When I first heard of the Office of Special Plans (OSP), I assumed that it was something from a James Bond movie.  I mean, there wouldn’t actually be a government agency somewhere that really sounded that mysterious would there?  Well, I might was well put my $.02 since it’s come up in the headlines: Prewar Intelligence Unit at Pentagon Is Criticized.

A flashback and little background:  Video:  Democratic Committee hearing on pre-war intelligence (transcript).  You’ll notice that a  common phrase in the video was “Feith‘s office “(The OSP). Feith was part of Cheney’s “network”; but has since retired from public service:

Douglas Feith
Under Secretary of Defense for Policy (2001-2005)

feith.jpg As top policy advisor to Rumsfeld and his deputy, Paul Wolfowitz, Feith helped build the administration’s case for war. At the Pentagon, Feith created two units: the Office of Special Plans (OSP) and the Policy Counterterrorism Evaluation Group (PCTEG). The former was quietly planning for post-war Iraq while the Bush administration was publicly trying to engage Iraq through diplomacy. The latter group served as an alternative to the CIA for intelligence analysis and uncovered a supposed pre-9/11 Al Qaeda-Iraq connection and alleged evidence of WMDs. When Feith left the Pentagon in 2005, he was replaced by Eric Edelman, Vice President Cheney’s former national security advisor.

OK, I should probably just come out and say that this war was a sales pitch from the very beginning.  The main backers were Cheney and the rest of the neocons entrenched in the administration that had been pushing for an invasion of Iraq since the ’90’s. So, this Pentagon report that has come out recently was no surprise to me.  It would seem logical that someone who was predisposed to invade would have presented the Iraqi threat in worst-case-scenario terms.  It’s hard to sell a war telling tales of relatively harmless mustard pellets scattered around, after all.  

The story is making a lot of noise on the blogs (just a few):

VIDEO: Feith Stands By False Claim That Iraq Had Links To Al Qaeda

Pentagon IG: White House Refused To Cooperate With Investigation Into Manipulated Iraq Intel

They Were For Dissent And Alternative Analysis Before They Were Against It

Captain Ed there seems to think all this is “political payback” for “alternative analysis”. He completely omits the fact that Feith was one of the PNAC boys in the Pentagon. The ‘analysis’ presented by Feith had an agenda attached to it, plain and simple: Make Saddam look as bad as possible to sell the war. No wonder 90% of it was way off.

WaPo quasi-retracts page-one story about Feith Iraq/AQ intel

DoD Inspector General Report Destroys Claims of Pentagon Intel Manipulation

These bloggers really can’t accept the fact that the war was a foregone conclusion, and all this OSP did was find something, anything, to bolster the case.   Have they read the Downing Street Memo?

Report says Pentagon manipulated intel

The Memory Hole: DOD Backed Away From Feith’s “Inappropriate” Intel in 2003

Yes, a memory hole indeed.  Did anyone else notice that the OSP was created only two months after the DSM talk of “facts being fixed around the policy“?  I wonder if the two are related?