I made a comment several threads back that speaking of "winning" or "losing" in Iraq was misguided and counerproductive..

Leave it to someone much smarter to explain in detail why...

TPM:

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/013856.php

With Harry Reid's controversial 'war is lost' quote and with various other pols weighing in on whether we can 'win' or whether it's 'lost', it's a good time to consider what the hell we're actually talking about. Frankly, the whole question is stupid. Or at least it's a very stilted way of understanding what's happening, geared to guarantee President Bush's goal of staying in Iraq forever.

Was that I always thought that FDL represented that notorious peacnick "base" that all the "sensible" people keep going on about. To read a sentence like: Democratic activists in various corners privately questioned the wisdom of the Clinton campaign in choosing to write for a blog associated with Hamsher. simply boggles the mind.

That would be sort of like "Noted peace activists questioned the wisdom of the President's signing of the recenctly passed war-funding resolution mandating a firm withdrawal schedule".

It's like a twilight zone episode only creepier!

This is a screenshot of the original offending image....

http://acepilots.com/mt/wp-content/uploads/2006/08/huffpographic002.jpg

This of course did create a stir at the time. I do beleive it has been apologized for. And FDL remains the #1 place to go for Plamegate coverage and for live-blogging of other important hearings.

http://www.firedoglake.com/2006/08/02/about-that-graphic/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jane-hamsher/on-the-ground-with-lamont_b_26316.html

Imagine my concern.....

The offending graphic:

http://acepilots.com/mt/wp-content/uploads/2006/08/huffpographic002.jpg

The posty with the graphic removed:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jane-hamsher/on-the-ground-with-lamont_b_26316.html

The apology:

http://www.firedoglake.com/2006/08/02/about-that-graphic/

Now that we have established there are indeed some Democrats who are offended by the image that appeared at HuffPo, lets examine the rest of the question. What percentage of the people who find it offensive, were aware of it when it happened and as a result now think less of Jane Hamsher? Of that percentage, how many think sufficiently little of Jane Hamsher to think that Hillary is making a tactical mistake by participating in a discussion at FDL (a group blog on which Jane is a contributer)? Of that percentage, how many deserve to have attention drawn to them by the WaPo. Let me know when I've reached zero, I think I'm getting close!

you can only be lied to for so long before you start to respond. One of the easiest ways to respond is with humor and ridicule. All the effort to portray the Democrats as the objects of ridicule is being outflanked by A: reality and B: Comedy Central (not to neglect C: Glenn Greenwald, Atrios, Kos, Josh Marshall, Sadly No, Media Matters etc....

The Senators, unlike the media folks, spend a lot of time communicating directly with their constituents. They're getting the message.

does the American public now disapprove of the Iraq war because it was corrupt and illegal, or simply because (in all likelihood) it's been lost?

the correct answer is of course...both.

But to paraphrase Donald Rumsfeld: Sometimes you have to end a war with the opposition you have, not with the opposition you wish you had.

This is, of course why the failure of the press as an institution remains a vital issue even as their ability to mold events wanes. Without a generation of practitioners aware and proud of the press's role as watchdog, we will always be vulnerable to misinformation and misadventures. Every step in the right direction nevertheless deserves to be celebrated.

When I saw this headline, I was getting ready to post a comment on how the pushback against Tenet by Bush defenders was already beginning.

Officers: Ex-CIA chief Tenet a 'failed' leader

Then I read the story and realized that this was in fact a 1`-2 punch being thrown AGAINST the administration and the continuation of the war.

The letter, signed by Phil Giraldi, Ray McGovern, Larry Johnson, Jim Marcinkowski, Vince Cannistraro and David MacMichael, said Tenet should have resigned in protest rather than take part in the administration's buildup to the war.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/04/29/tenet.letter/

Larry Johnson has been an outspoken critic all along, but I can't help but think that CNN piling-on behind the 60 Minutes segment does indeed represent a sea-change. History is being made as we speak.

And rational conservatives who view "conservatism" as a set of political beliefs -- rather than a cult of reality-denying Loyalty to the Leader -- recognize those facts already.

I have often harped on the fact here that ending the war will require alliances that might not then survive after success of the endeavor. This is to be expected. Someone in the last thread, differentiated between those who oppose the war because it was immoral and illegal and those who oppose it because they don't like losing. If ending the war means embracing some of the latter then so be it. Job 1 should be to stop the killing. We can save debating health insurance and social security for MUCH later.

Its really quite simple. Anyone who is caught in an "instance of corruption" automatically and immediately ceases to have ever been associated with the administration. George Orwell wrote the handbook. Hindsighteraker is merely putting it into practice. For further reading see: "memory hole", "doublethink" and "rewriting history".

The worrisome fact about these people is that they form the core around which, if and/or when the economic shit hits the fan and the terrorists get in another crack here at home, another 30%+ of the population will rally

This assumes that the 30% have really learned nothing in the last three years and that the current backlash is just a case of going with the flow. It could be true, but I have trouble believing it. It's too late for the Emporer's nakedness to be undone.