Report? What Report?

In case you wanted to fact check Petraeus’s report to Bush, compare it to his testimony before Congress, or do a comparison between what Petraeus tells Bush and what the White House writes, forget about it:

A senior military officer said there will be no written presentation to the president on security and stability in Iraq. “There is no report. It is an assessment provided by them by testimony,” the officer said.

The only hard copy will be Gen. Petraeus’ opening statement to Congress, scheduled for Monday, along with any charts he will use in explaining the results of the troop surge in Baghdad over the past several months.

Meanwhile, at the Weekly Standard, Michael Goldfarb writes:

The Dems are already in full retreat over the war in Iraq, having failed completely to peel off enough Republicans to pass a date-certain for withdrawal and having already voted to fund the war. As news of progress mounted this summer, there were numerous attempts to puncture Petraeus’s credibility–but if the Democratic leadership has now decided they must separate the man from the report, then they clearly view those efforts as a failure.

But that still leaves one question unanswered: Do the Democrats believe that Petraeus will be saying whatever the administration wants him to say–that he will essentially be lying to the U.S. Congress? If that’s what they believe, why dance around it? They ought to just come out and call the general a liar–or another of the countless victims of the BushCheney war machine.

Got it? The guy who spent hundreds of hours crawling up Scott Beauchamp’s ass to find out whether or not he actually saw someone run over a dog in a Bradley thinks it is silly for you to be able to fact check the General leading our war efforts in Iraq.

Oh, and for the record, here is my prediction for how the Congressional testimony will go:

1.) Petraeus will enter the room, and Joe Lieberman and several other moderate Democrats will faint when they see him in Class A’s with lots of ribbons and medals.

2.) Petraeus will offer a mixed report, citing temporary tactical advantage and listing points of progress. Lots of cheese charts with arrows pointing in the right direction, but little to no sourcing, will be on display.

3.) Lieberman, freshly revived from his initial fainting, hears Petraeus utter the words “our brave men and women in uniform,” and promptly passes out again.

4.) Petraeus mentions, in passing, that we are facing difficulties. Democrats fail to press him. The difficulties are not mentioned specifically, but in vague generalities.

5.) Petraeus states the situation is too tenuous to drawdown troops before fall of 2008.

6.) Lieberman is revived yet again, only to hear the phrase “Al Qaeda in Iraq,” and promptly falls to the ground in shock and horror. Ron Paul gives him the finger.

7.) Afterwards, numerous Blue Dog Democrats state to the media that the General was impressive, and has assured them that we are making progress, and, as such, they are reluctant to do anything.

8.) Republicans, when speaking to the press, state that this is clear proof we are winning, and evidence that we do not need to cut and run like some of the Democrats want.

9.) Lindsey Graham, John McCain, and John Warner all state how impressed they are, but note that they have some unspecfied concerns and that we need to proceed cautiously.

10.) Some cranky Democrat notes that there was no real information presented, and wants to have some hard data to compare to the numerous negative reports we have received from independent organizations. Michelle Malkin, Hugh Hewitt, NRO, and the Weekly Standard promptly call him a traitor. Malkin breaks out a cheerleader outfit. Michael O’Hanlon goes on Hardball and claims the GAO is the most corrupt organization in Washington.

11.) The rest of the media cover the story until about 7:45 EST, at which point it is learned that Lindsey Lohan may have smoked pot while in rehab. The Petraeus story dies.

12.) Seven more members of the military die.

We will see how it actually turns out.

*** Update ***

Apparently I am “lost in space” because I am a little chagrined that we have no way to document what Petraeus is telling the White House. I am well aware that the WH is actually writing the report- I want to know what Petraeus tells the WH, what the WH writes in their report, and what Petraeus tells Congress. You know- that whole accuracy thing, because never in the history of the Bush administration have they been told one thing privately and said something completely different publicly. Apparently to our authoritarian ‘libertarian’ friends, that makes me crazy. Or something. I have decided that “neo-libertarian” means taking whatever the President says at face value- provided he cuts taxes.

Why don’t our libertarian friends understand that this is my money we are spending in Iraq? These are my fellow citizens dying in Iraq. This is my military, our military. Not Bush’s. I not only have every right to know what is going on, I demand it. Since when did government accountability and transparency become anathema to libertarian principles?

*** Update ***

Apparently I am now in a tizzy.

Spin this, McQ:

All of this is just so odd, I wonder if the Washington Times, which isn’t exactly known for high journliastic standards, somehow got this wrong. A month ago, Tony Snow told reporters, “Now, let us keep in mind that the full burden of this report does not fall on his shoulders. A lot of the key judgments, especially about politics, will fall on Ambassador Crocker. So this is — although I know a lot of people talk about ‘the Petraeus report,’ in fact, you have a report that is a joint report by General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker.”

In three sentences, Snow referenced a “report” (the noun) four times. And now there isn’t going to be any such document?

Or this:

Two things are worth noting in advance. First, according to Petraeus’ spokesman, there will be no report per se. The word is being taken as a verb, not a noun; that is, the general and the ambassador will report to Congress, testifying before the House on Monday, the Senate on Tuesday, and, as a follow-up, the National Press Club on Wednesday.

It is cute watching grown men hinge their credibility on whether or not the word “report” was used as a verb or a noun. The WH pretends for months there will be a report from Petraeus, then days before the expected report, we are told that the report is actually just a private talk between Petraeus and Bush. We are now down to Clintonian parsings from these guys, and McQ is lapping it up. I guess it depends on what the meaning of report is, ehh?

I also like the notion that we are supposed to fact check Petraeus’s oral testimony. Here is how that will work:

1.) Petraeus will make a claim, offer no data to back it up (BUT HE HAS CHARTS!!!!!!!).
2.) Numerous independent sources will sift through available data and their own data, disprove it, or prove (as was done here), that Petraeus is misrepresenting things.
3.) McQ will call them liars and question their patriotism.

The only excuse for no written report is that it provides no paper trail. Petraeus’s command has time to reserach, print up, and distribute dossiers on VIP’s visiting Baghdad, but they can’t be bothered to put their accumulated knowledge about progress (or lack thereof) in Iraq on paper?

And as an aside, McQ, does your back ever get sore from carrying these guy’s baggage? Is there ever anything they say or do that you don’t just look at it and say to yourself- ‘Screw it. Even I can’t spin this shit.’






89 replies
  1. 1
    sal says:

    You da man, John. Why aren’t you a billionaire in the stock market? That is too eerily prescient.

  2. 2
    timb says:

    Okay, I’ve only been reading regularly for a few months, but I would say the combination of prescience and humor of this post mean it’s the “Best Post Ever.”

    Two things will happen: not just the Blue Dogs, but almost all the Democrats will praise Patraeus and declare the need for more time. Blue Dogs will say it, because they are afraid the Republicans will laugh at the size of their weenies if they do not, and the rest will praise him, because they will make a cynical calculation the US presence in Iraq means victory fro them in ’08. The fact that they are right doesn’t make any less disgusted with their stance.

    Secondly, Malkin, Goldstein, Sadly No, Confederate Yankee, and Ace will need that Democratic fall-guy/gal so badly, they will go to any lengths to find him/her (a councilman from Tri-City? A dog catcher from Buffalo? Charles Schumer?) Most of them needs to call him/her a traitor so they can continue their real war, i.e. the one against the scary Left! Sadly No needs it so they can make fun of the idiots above and those idiots’ desperate need to abuse opponents who no longer even listen to them.

  3. 3
    cleek says:

    clap clap clappity clap

  4. 4
    Geoduck says:

    You da man, John. Why aren’t you a billionaire in the stock market? That is too eerily prescient.

    Nah. He’s being far too starry-eyed and optimistic.

  5. 5
    Dennis-SGMM says:

    The only suspense here is which Congressional Democrats will be cautiously optimistic and which will be skeptical but willing to give the General the benefit of the doubt.

  6. 6
    guyermo says:

    I think rather than collapse in shock, Lieberman will secretly shit his depends, thereby relieving the constipation he’s had the last 30 years.

  7. 7
    Shinobi says:

    Hey John, Since you’re so good at predicting the future? When will I meet the man of my dreams? Oh, and what numbers should I pick for the mega millions? Also, do you think my friend should marry her fiance? He’s kindof a douche.

    But seriously, I hate this administration + congress. Can’t we just… all stand on the whitehouse lawn until they leave or something? I hate them so much that I have trouble finding words to express fully the depths of their stupidity carelessness and arrogance. I should have moved to Canada.

  8. 8
    Grumpy Code Monkey says:

    6.) Lieberman is revived yet again, only to hear the phrase “Al Qaeda in Iraq,” and promptly falls to the ground in shock and horror. Ron Paul gives him the finger.

    I so desperately want to see this happen.

  9. 9
    Mark says:

    Okay, I’ve only been reading regularly for a few months, but I would say the combination of prescience and humor of this post mean it’s the “Best Post Ever.”

    Amen. First I laughed hysterically at the snark, then I wanted to throw up because it’s all true.

  10. 10
    Wilfred says:

    Take a look at the link and read about the great success in Anbar here

    The moronic propaganda of people like Goldfarb doesn’t hold to even the smallest stab at critical thinking, let alone a photo that never made it into the American press, let alone what is actually happening in Anbar. if someone doesn’t hole Petraeus to the fire, the fix is in.

  11. 11

    Brilliant. Next lifetime I want to able to snark like you.

  12. 12
    Tlaloc says:

    ” Lieberman is revived yet again, only to hear the phrase “Al Qaeda in Iraq,” and promptly falls to the ground in shock and horror. Ron Paul gives him the finger.”

    That made me LOL at the Ron Paul visual.

  13. 13
    whippoorwill says:

    First rate post, John. I can’t add much, but I hope the families of the thousands of dead GI’s and Iraqi citizens have a better day tomorrow. They deserve it!

  14. 14
    PSoTD says:

    Lieberman Gets the Vapors

    Really, he will, right on cue.

  15. 15
    ET says:

    Shouldn’t there be a 13 about Lieberman’s fawning while thanking the General for his brave service to the country and the cause of freedom-loving people everywhere – or words to that affect?

  16. 16
    Punchy says:

    Lots of cheese charts with arrows pointing in the right direction, but little to no sourcing, will be on display.

    Fixed. Unless the source accurately says “Petraeus’ ass”…

  17. 17
    jenniebee says:

    Could you send this post back to John Cole circa 2000? It’s very good.

  18. 18
    Jimmmmm says:

    Just like the WH’s offer to have Gonzo, “Justice” Miers, and Rove testify, but with no transcript and not under oath.

    What the fuck is it with these guys?

  19. 19
    Gus says:

    It’s like you went ahead in time and came back to report. Brilliant.

  20. 20
    Zifnab says:

    Just like the WH’s offer to have Gonzo, “Justice” Miers, and Rove testify, but with no transcript and not under oath.

    What the fuck is it with these guys?

    Just be grateful the peasants are allowed to even view Grand Moff Petreaus at all. And now you want to ask him questions? The nerve.

  21. 21
    Punchy says:

    OT:

    Our Brave Leader at work (per his meeting with S.Korea):

    “I might be wrong. I think I did not hear President Bush mention a declaration to end the Korean War just now,” Roh said through an interpreter. “Did you say so, President Bush?”

    “It’s up to Kim Jong Il,” Bush said.

    Roh pressed on. “If you could be a little bit clearer,” he said, prompting nervous laughter from the U.S. delegation and a look of annoyance from Bush.

    Somebody questioned him. He literally didn’t know what to do. He couldn’t fire him. He couldn’t blame the Democrats. He couldn’t ignore it. So he got annoyed.

    I just wish one day another leader, fed up with his smirks, his jabs, his criticisms, and his ignorance just grabs him and gives him The Mother of All Dutch Rubs.

  22. 22
    Tsulagi says:

    LOL. What, did you get an advance script?

    I think the only thing you left out is what happens when the credits start rolling at the end of the testimony. The Pubs joined by Lieberman take the floor and in their best Village People/YMCA impersonation start singing I-R-A-Q complete with forming the letters above their heads. Those too infirm to join in tap their feet to the tune.

  23. 23
    Jimmmmm says:

    “…Libertarian “principles” …

    There, fixed.

  24. 24
    cleek says:

    Since when did government accountability and transparency become anathema to libertarian principles?

    irrational fear extinguishes all those libertarian* impulses.

    which is just typically just a label confused conservatives use to pretend they’re cooler than Republicans.

  25. 25
    Pb says:

    Since when did government accountability and transparency become anathema to libertarian principles?

    a) 1/20/2001
    b) Since noted Glibertarian Instahack started calling himself a ‘libertarian’.

  26. 26
    Ugh says:

    I have decided that “neo-libertarian” means taking whatever the President says at face value- provided he cuts taxes.

    Ding ding ding ding.

    And what cleek said at 2:59.

  27. 27
    Tom says:

    Petraeus will enter the room, and Joe Lieberman and several other moderate Democrats will start tapping their feet when they see him in Class A’s with lots of ribbons and medals.

    Fixed.

  28. 28
    whippoorwill says:

    “It is as useless to argue with those who have renounced the use of reason, as to administer medication to the dead”

    Thomas Jefferson

  29. 29
    Davebo says:

    John,

    Dennis Kucinich is more of a Libertarian than McQ.

  30. 30
    ThymeZone says:

    8.) Republicans, when speaking to the press, state that this is clear proof we are winning, and evidence that we do not need to cut and run like some of the Democrats and Osama Bin Laden want

  31. 31
    Pb says:

    Ok, so let me get this straight…

    First: The White House says, wait for the Petraeus report.
    Then: Wait for the Petraeus report [now written by the White House].
    Finally: Wait for the White House [to whom Petraeus reports].

    The bait and switch is complete!

    P.S. 9/11 terror nucular Iraq Osama war extremists cut-and-run 9/11 traitors Iran Islamofascism 9/11 WMDs terrorist Democrat 9/11

  32. 32
    David says:

    ThymeZone Says:

    8.) Republicans, when speaking to the press, state that this is clear proof we are winning, and evidence that we do not need to cut and run like some of the Democrats and Osama Bin Laden want

    Yeah. Pushing buttons trying to find something to listen to on the car radio while doing deliveries early this afternoon and caught about 60 seconds of the Drug-addled Gas Bag. That phrase ‘the Democrats and Osama bin Laden” was uttered no less than 3 time in that single minute of total lunacy. No wonder the DaGB has lost 40% of his audience over the last 6+ years.

  33. 33
    John Cole says:

    It is becoming clear what the problem is. mcQ and company think that if Petraeus just says ‘We are making progress, but not as much as we want,’ that is a balanced and honest assessment, and all that is needed.

    Here on planet fucking earth, we want the numbers. Prove there is progress. How are you defining it? An increase in services? A decrease in violence?

    And so on.

  34. 34
    David says:

    BTW, speaking of ol’ OBL… strange timing for him to issue a tape on the eve of Petraeus? And his talking points sound more like a Republican parody of an OBL tape than an actual OBL tape. You don’ think… nah, even the Repubs wouldn’t stoop that low.

  35. 35

    I have decided that “neo-libertarian” means taking whatever the President says at face value- provided he cuts taxes.

    If we had sigs at Balloon Juice this would be my new sig.

  36. 36
    Pb says:

    BTW, speaking of ol’ OBL… strange timing for him to issue a tape on the eve of Petraeus? And his talking points sound more like a Republican parody of an OBL tape than an actual OBL tape. You don’ think…

    Yeah, what else is new… And don’t forget this:

    Intelligence response
    […]
    Ron Suskind noted that the CIA analysis of the video led them to the consensus view that the tape was designed strategically to help President Bush win reelection in 2004. Deputy CIA director John E. McLaughlin noted at one meeting, “Bin Laden certainly did a nice favor today for the President.” Suskind quoted Jami Miscik, CIA deputy associate director for intelligence and Alan Premel former DCI Task Force supervisor, as saying “Certainly, he would want Bush to keep doing what he’s doing for a few more years.”[2]

    Public response
    The 2004 tape boosted the popularity of American President George W. Bush. President Bush opened up a six-point lead over his opponent Senator John Kerry in the first opinion poll to include sampling taken after the videotape was broadcast.[3]

  37. 37
    t. jasper parnell says:

    Hey, the defeatocrats act to limit our safety ahead of King God P’s non-reportable report:

    Homeland Security Committee Chairman Bennie G. Thompson, Subcommittee on Intelligence, Information Sharing, and Terrorism Risk Assessment Chair Jane Harman, and Subcommittee on Management, Investigations, and Oversight Chairman Christopher P. Carney sent the following letter to Michael Chertoff, Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, and Charles Allen, Assistant Secretary for Intelligence & Analysis, Department of Homeland Security regarding the Department’s new spy satellite program:

  38. 38
    t. jasper parnell says:

    Making matters worse they are already disputing King God General P’s report. Why, in King God General P’s name, do they hate so are troops.

  39. 39
    Pb says:

    Without this legal framework, the Department runs the risk of creating a program that – while well-intended

    Heh. You Democrats must be new here.

  40. 40
    t. jasper parnell says:

    Hey, it just gets better with age:

    UPDATE: In a recent hearing, Sen. Norm Coleman (R-MN) said he recently met with Gen. Petraeus and was shown “the data.” Coleman said the data is “very clear about a reduction in violence. General Petraeus has those charts,” Coleman explained. Apparently, those charts will not be for public consumption.

  41. 41
    t. jasper parnell says:

    Another non-problem problem:

    CHARLES GIBSON: If we go through some sort of a reduction strategy, are we opening things up for some kind of genocide, ethnic cleansing, that will go on, and we’ll simply have 50, 60, 70,000 troops standing by and watching this?

    FAREED ZAKARIA, NEWSWEEK INTERNATIONAL: No, because one of the dirty little secrets about Iraq is that Iraq has increasingly been ethnically cleansed. It’s sad to say, but the American Army has presided over the largest ethnic cleansing in the world since the Balkans. When people say bad things are going to happen if we leave, bad things have already happened. Where were you for the last four years?

    RICHARD HAASS, COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS: But we should be realistic. Iraq is likely to be a messy and slightly dysfunctional country for the foreseeable future.

    GEN. JACK KEANE, RETIRED: Both of you are really not describing what’s happening in Iraq. I mean, you’re in the past, to be quite frank about it. The Sunni insurgency has gone through a conversion. They have thrown the towel in. They have now saddled up along side of us, and they want to protect their communities, but they don’t want separate militia to do it. They’re going to do it as members of the Iraqi security forces, which is very, very encouraging

    .

  42. 42
    t. jasper parnell says:

    And, finally, even King God General P doesn’t think Iraq goes as planned:

    It has not worked out as we had hoped.’In anticipation of the White House’s report next week, Gen. David Petraeus sent a letter to U.S. troops today. Brandon Friedman, who served in Iraq and is now a senior adviser to Vote Vets, obtained a copy of the letter and notes that most of it “essentially says what everyone expects him to say.” On the second page, however, Petraeus admits that “tangible political progress” on the ground “has not worked out as we had hoped”:

    So King God General P must also hate the troops?

  43. 43
    t. jasper parnell says:

    And, of course, the just and serious architechs get their just desserts.

  44. 44
    Doug H. says:

    BTW, speaking of ol’ OBL… strange timing for him to issue a tape on the eve of Petraeus? And his talking points sound more like a Republican parody of an OBL tape than an actual OBL tape. You don’ think… nah, even the Repubs wouldn’t stoop that low.

    Why would they? Bush’s Presidency has been the best gift a terrorist recruiter could ask for. The least Bin Laden can do is to prop up GOP talking points.

  45. 45
    Ugh says:

    RE: McQ, Uhh, why are you reading him still?

  46. 46
    JWW says:

    John,

    First of all I find the post “stupid and bigoted” beyond that I will comment. Trying to sell that a written report does not exist is foolish. It is there, who gets what portion is determined by security. “He” may have spent 2 minutes on Beauchamp, “commander, see what this all about, you have 96 hours to report”. Nuff said, you do act a fool sometimes.

    No, you do not have the right too whats going on. You may think you do, but you have know such right. You have the right to the information published. Nobody has ever had the right to know what a Military Commander tells a Commander and Chief. When the Military Commander addresses congress, they only get what is allowed by law. Don’t think you or I will or have the right to know it all.

    Your cute numerical list of comments only points to the failure of your heart. Although comment # 12 is most likely and sickeningly true. Comment # 13 is just a jab at you trying to make a point at the cost of a soldiers life.

    I don’t like the loss of any soldier any more or less than you or any other American. I hate it, I hate when a cop gets shot responding to a call, when a fireman dies in a fire. When you choose a profession, hopefully you feel it’s the right thing to do, you have measured the risk, your heart and mind are in the right place and you do it. It will never make the loss of anyone’s life any easier to the family, town, state or nation. But they will understand that you were doing what you “believed in”, that in itself will justify and comfort those morning the loss.

  47. 47
    whippoorwill says:

    What a day. First we here that the Petreaus Report won’t really be his report if it is a report at all. This after weeks of hearing from about every republican gas bag on the planet that we all should get a grip until we get the Petreaus report that has now become the Bush report, if there is a report at all.

    After that Osama Bin Laden parachutes in with a video and a fake beard babbling on about the finer points of the American political scene as well as any pundit in the business, with the wingnuts promptly shrieking on how OBL has really been a Democrat all along.

  48. 48
    Tsulagi says:

    Whoa, so you’ve gone from “lost in space” to “tizzy.” Better not do another update, you just might advance to “breathlessly delirious” flung no doubt from a ferocious wide stance.

    Just curious given the way this is going, is anyone sure or have they confirmed the president will issue a written report? With actual stuff in it? Could just see the WH pick a Monica Goodling clone to submit the president’s ‘report’ verbally. Would be another cherry on top of this complete farce.

  49. 49
    tBone says:

    Phrases like “Nobody has ever had the right to know what a Military Commander tells a Commander and Chief.”

    So, in addition to being the Decider, Bush is also a Commander and a Chief? Wow. I guess I should believe whatever he tells me.

    Have a couple more, JWW. I think you can achieve Birdzilla levels of incoherence if you really put your mind to it.

  50. 50
    Tom Hilton says:

    Your cute numerical list of comments only points to the failure of your heart.

    I wish someone had said that about me. I would display it forever at the top of my blog.

    I wonder if JWW could pass a Turing test?

  51. 51
    grumpy realist says:

    John, you forgot the last phase:
    .
    .
    .
    100) The Very Serious Pundits comment about how the President has Held A Hand Out In Reconciliation to the Other Side, and state that The American Public Is Now In The Hands Of Wise Leadership and We Must Have Patience For Everything To Work Out.

    (Broder will add a column deploring the incivility of the nasty bloggers asking questions about The Reported Facts.)

    Sheesh, I do so wish I didn’t feel I was living in a book by George Orwell.

  52. 52
    rachel says:

    I wonder if JWW could pass a Turing test?

    No. SATSQ

  53. 53
    JWW says:

    Well TBone,
    Some may actually know what the statement means, you on the other hand may just be ignorant, I would give you a pass on that but I see that you post here often, you will recieve no gift here, you are “stupid”. Every commander from the top down, is given the “need to know” information to enable them to accomplish the mission. That generally, starts at Corp’s level then division, brigade, battalion, company. Besides the BS comment you posted, yes the Commander and Chief does make those decisions, at this point the Congress and Senate have yet too? Go back to the bird cage and peck at your mirror.

    Tom Hilton,
    I don’t get your point. I am a little slow when it comes to reading brail, but I am willing to learn.

  54. 54
    whippoorwill says:

    I think JWW is republican robot programmed for trolling.
    Sure sounds like it, anyway.

  55. 55
    tBone says:

    Some may actually know what the statement means, you on the other hand may just be ignorant
    [snip]
    Besides the BS comment you posted, yes the Commander and Chief does make those decisions, at this point the Congress and Senate have yet too?

    Priceless.

    I’d ask what tribe Bush is the Chief of, but I still don’t think JWW would get it.

  56. 56
    JWW says:

    No whippoorwill,
    I’m just a guy like you that has a different point of view.

    I like you, sometimes get frustrated, PO’d and decide to rant. If you were my brother, neighbor, coworker I would never make a point of it. I would have my say, you would have yours then we would go have a beer. No harm done, I would think no less of you, “might have my doubts” but we, if we were friends, we would always be friends. We are after all Americans, we have the right to speak our minds.
    My entire family, “Father WWII and Korean War Vet, Mother, Sisters, all my Aunts and Uncles” vote democratic tickets. I think no less or no more of either party, but when you move way beyond what the party represents, I change my mind and err on the side of defending this nation.

  57. 57
    rachel says:


    I change my mind and err on the side of defending this nation.

    Defending the nation erroneously is what’s gotten us into this mess. Your ravings don’t help either.

  58. 58
    whippoorwill says:

    I’m going back to the birdcage and peck at my mirror. Makes as much sense as anything else today.

  59. 59
    JWW says:

    Well Rachel,
    You are trash, will never climb beyond it. You do not know what it took to build our country, maintain, defend or make her better. This is, like every war, ugly, like every war. I’ve said this before, when in written history has a conflict “war” not existed. You can go buy youself another “Time Out Doll”. I don’t think anyone should control all and everything. There is however, a difference between right and wrong. Go eat your LA diet meal and watch your favorite “REALITY” TV show.

  60. 60

    I wish someone had said that about me. I would display it forever at the top of my blog.

    I’ve not visited your blog for a while. Consider me back to visiting (for better or worse).

  61. 61
    rachel says:

    Re JWW’s ranting: I guess I’m supposed to go cry now, but it’s hard to tell.

  62. 62

    Sorry, I think JWW is a Ron Paul bird.

    I could be wrong.

  63. 63
    JWW says:

    To those who feel offened,

    I really did try to put my thoughts in simplified terms and with normal common sense. If you feel offeneded, you should, if you can’t make sense of it, “you have none”.
    Make all the excuses you want to, blame anyone but yourself, or the country you live in, the constitution you live by, the thought of freedom. It is and never will be, free, bloodless, kind, but it is on TV. Amused to Death

  64. 64
    rachel says:

    Sorry, I think JWW is a Ron Paul bird.

    How do you mean?

  65. 65
    rachel says:

    I really did try to put my thoughts in simplified terms…

    …not being able to do it any other way…

  66. 66
    tBone says:

    Re JWW’s ranting: I guess I’m supposed to go cry now, but it’s hard to tell.

    If I were you, I’d consult my “Deciphering Incomprehensible Gibberish Doll.”

    Unless, of course, you’re too busy stuffing your piehole with dirty hippy Hollyweird diet food and watching “Who Wants the Terrorists to Win?” on the Islamocommie Network.

  67. 67
    catatonia says:

    I want one o’ them thar “Time Out Dolls.” Gets lonely here in Wiccan Central, eatin’ up Caucasian blastocysts and Chocolate Jee-zuzs and whatnot, whilst rubbin’ my member to pictures of Mullah Omar and Rosie O’Donnell doing the two-step over at Sean Penn’s place.

  68. 68

    new found libertarian voice — little ‘l’ and all that — they are raging across the internets.

    If I cared, I’d go see if Mona was among them.

  69. 69
  70. 70

    JWW: your written words are so poorly put together as to make you seem to be a fifth-grader who accidentally has been given his mother’s computer to play with for the day. If you really are an adult, at least be a grown-up about it and ask your kids for some help in writing your post.

    Don’t reinforce the well-warranted opinion that many of the supporters of the President’s war in Iraq are mindless without the talking points supplied to them by Rush Limbaugh.

  71. 71
    Pb says:

    It appears to me that JWW drinks straight up unadulterated Bush cultist follower juice — the Ron Paul mix would involve opposing the war and opposing spending, i.e., opposing two of the core pillars of the Bush administration.

  72. 72
    Jon H says:

    Hm. Didn’t the wingers think something was fishy about Joe Wilson giving only a verbal report about his trip to Niger?

    I guess it’s okay as long as the words are provided by Dick Cheney.

  73. 73

    I’m still thinking JWW is a Ron Paul type.

    Could be wrong.

  74. 74
    JWW says:

    SO SORRY,

    I do forget, I am dealing with those that can not interpret or comprehend common speak. I do not feel offended. I do however feel sorry for you. I thought maybe, just maybe you could think for yourselves while reading instead of looking for hate. I was wrong, try to parse, give your mind a break. Though I see that you can’t do that, I will still attempt to try. I have no outright intention to be rude or vile, I can be. In making things short, I had once again thought you could read between the lines. You are exactly!!!! Do my comments make you that ill. To embrace your stupidity, I only have 30 seconds of Michelle Malkin experience, don’t known who and have never seen Ron Paul. I have a mind of my own, not to be owned. Just an American with a different point of view. Though I see you mouth, chew, and swallow all the poison you are fed

  75. 75
    rachel says:

    JWW: “If you all were smarter, you could understand gooder Engrish like what I do.”

  76. 76
    TenguPhule says:

    Make all the excuses you want to, blame anyone but yourself, or the country you live in, the constitution you live by, the thought of freedom.

    JWW, explaining the New Republican Philosophy in a nutshell.

  77. 77
    Perry Como says:

    JWW is right. We should trust the government in what it says. After all, we elected it. The government always acts in our own best interests, so asking for any kind of “accountability” is absurd. The idea that a military commander would let Congress know how our blood and treasure is being spent is also absurd.

    The Commander in Chief has the ultimate authority — with no limitations, Constitutional or otherwise — on how our military operates. Article 1 Section 8 is anachronistic considering the current Islamocommienazi threat.

  78. 78
    Wilfred says:

    The Petraeus-Crocker testimony is the kind of short-lived event on which the Administration has relied to shore up support for the war: the “Mission Accomplished” declaration, the deaths of Uday and Qusay Hussein, Saddam’s capture, the transfer of sovereignty, the three rounds of voting, the Plan for Victory, the death of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. Every new milestone, however illusory, allows the Administration to avoid thinking ahead, to the years when the mistakes of Iraq will continue to haunt the U.S.

    Yup. From George Packer’s latest essay Planning for Defeat

  79. 79
    Barry says:

    sal Says:

    “You da man, John. Why aren’t you a billionaire in the stock market? That is too eerily prescient.”

    Because this is simply information available to anybody who doesn’t have amnesia and is capable of reading. If it were information relevant to the stock market, I’m sure that it’d have been priced in long ago. No matter that the talking heads on TV were still hyping it as new information, which could make you rich!

  80. 80
    chopper says:

    No, you do not have the right too whats going on. You may think you do, but you have know such right.

    I do forget, I am dealing with those that can not interpret or comprehend common speak.

    it’s almost comedy! wait, know it isn’t.

    i’m sorry to those authoritarians who inherently trust the government in times like this, but i, like john, am skeptical. this whole war has been mismanaged and mis-run from the very start, so i have no real reason to trust anything that’s coming out of the WH at a time like this.

    adding some troops late in the game like this is not going to magically make iraq turn into the land of flowers and blowjobs no matter how hard people at home squint and wish, and anyone who says it’s going to work or it’s working, given the information on the ground (high levels of violence etc) has to offer some proof for such extraordinary claims.

    this war is costing over half a trillion dollars and the lives and well-being of tens of thousands of soldiers. excuse us for asking for actual evidence of the existence of whatever fairy dust the administration is trying to sell us.

  81. 81
    grumpy realist says:

    Wait, when did the Republicans turn into people who *trusted* the government without any controls and balances?

    And JWW is simply loopy. Trying to wade through his trash has produced for me not a simple coherent line. We’re simply getting the usual dittohead brain dump. (Pile of fascistic garbage. Mix in “patriotism”, “support for the country” the usual attacks on everyone else, and enjoy.)

    I really wish people like JWW could simply move to North Korea, where they could worship the Dear Leader to their heart’s content, never have to deal with reality, and we wouldn’t have to deal with them.

  82. 82
    chopper says:

    Wait, when did the Republicans turn into people who trusted the government without any controls and balances?

    the moment a gooper took over the white house. the moment a dem takes over, they’ll shake it off and be back to demanding accountability.

  83. 83
    benr242 says:

    I’m confused… this post from the carpetbagger (McQ? I don’t see an author mentioned) that you are ridiculing, seems to me to be saying essentially the same thing as you. There’s no “carrying these guy’s baggage” in his post. He, like you, is rejecting this idea that Petraeus can’t be bothered with submitting a written report. Whether the word “report” is a verb or a noun, I think, actually is an important distinction. Judging from the rest of your comments (e.g. ‘The only excuse for no written report is that it provides no paper trail’), I think you also agree.

    Am I reading something wrong here, or are you ‘arguing’ with someone who agrees with you completely?

  84. 84
    Aaron says:

    John Cole,
    I dont know why you think we are only at the Clintonian level now, but we passed that point before Bush even took office.
    And of course the reason we invaded Iraq in the first place depends on the definition of the words “incontovertibel” “evidence” “has” and “WMD’s”

  85. 85

    […] Verb versus Noun By Doug Interesting post over at Balloon-Juice about the Petraeus “report.” Apparently the word “report” is being used as a verb rather than as a noun. There will apparently be no document, rather Gen. Petraeus will simply have a little chat with Mr. Bush. Gotta keep the paper trails to a minimum. This entry is filed under General. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site. Leave a Reply […]

  86. 86
    Tim F. says:

    The verb is ‘present.’ Wingnuttia is populated by idiots.

  87. 87

    […] Last week, I posted my predictions as to what would happen with the Petraeus testimony: […]

  88. 88
    old dog says:

    I’m in my 60’s and as I remember my school days, there were times I had to get up in front of the class and give a report.—ORAL—, not written. so what’s the big dustup for?

  89. 89

    […] Here is John Cole’s take on it. Oh, and for the record, here is my prediction for how the Congressional testimony will go: […]

Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. […] Here is John Cole’s take on it. Oh, and for the record, here is my prediction for how the Congressional testimony will go: […]

  2. […] Last week, I posted my predictions as to what would happen with the Petraeus testimony: […]

  3. […] Verb versus Noun By Doug Interesting post over at Balloon-Juice about the Petraeus “report.” Apparently the word “report” is being used as a verb rather than as a noun. There will apparently be no document, rather Gen. Petraeus will simply have a little chat with Mr. Bush. Gotta keep the paper trails to a minimum. This entry is filed under General. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site. Leave a Reply […]

  4. PSoTD says:

    Lieberman Gets the Vapors

    Really, he will, right on cue.

Comments are closed.