Secrets and lies and Iraq and lies and enemies lists etc., etc,.

For quite awhile the Democrats have been unable to master one of the techniques of the vile opposition during campaigns,scandals or hot button issues. That is:

Find a simple phrase, link it to another phrase,truthful or not,and hammer away. 9/11 and Saddam anyone? Bush is still using that one.

If this isn't the perfect opportunity to nail these guys using this technique, and truthfully I might add, there never has been one. No Democrat should speak about this investigation without linking it to the war and the dreadful lies told to lead us into war, as well as the lack of character this administration has exibited in ignoring good intelligence,which was also available to them, and using their energy not to defend Americans, but to destroy their political enemies. And then repeat. Getting a little rough on these guys just might save our republic.

There's sort of a tabloid quality to the things that are supposedly going to be revealed when Scooter rolls into the defendants chair. What is left to know that is worth knowing? It's the need to personalize it, at this point. You done me wrong, Scooter, now Scoot along, maybe to prison.

Because, in fact, we know what went wrong. We didn't understand that Islam matters to the Islamic people. They don't want Western institutions, even if they want some form of popular will or democracy. Bush felt we would make them like us, or something, and this reveals his lack of understanding of the world. Don't ignore Pakistan or Indonesia or what is happening anywhere in the Islamic world. But to appreciate the change, you have to have a deeper understanding of Islam, not the cartoonish version of the Bushies.

People should look at the philosophies that drove the people to the actions they took. Look at who educated Wolfowitz and the swirl of ideas that infected all these men, to varying degrees. Their sense of American power, the power of American ideas, seems a little overdone, at best. They made so much of the Cold War. Most Poles don't think Reagan liberated them. They think THEY liberated themselves.

I used to email Seib at the Wall Street Journal, height of all this Iraqi engagement, asking if he thought the US would still be a Super Power in five years. I clearly felt Iraq was 'it'. America would go 'all in' and walk away from the table.

Why go to war, to solve terrorism? How else can we engage with the world, and sell it to an anesthetised electorate? Guns and abortions and gays, they done took their toll on the psyche. This is the dumbed down America that thinks everything is on its side, able to engage with Islam only in a military sense. Hegemony? That's pretty much over. The world knows we have a limited number of troops.

In the end, Bush has smashed the illusion of American power. After Vietnam, that was what drove these guys, recreating American power. The Left folded under McGovern, and the Right emerged to begin some vague, arrogant Restoration.

How stunningly, shockingly ironic that they are the ones who have now lost American Power. Again. And perhaps forever.

I am very heartened to see that Mr. Fitzgerald might be getting close to exposing some of the nefarious machinations of this Administration. However, I am surprised by the general tone of the media and the public on the matter. Everybody seems to be acting like this is NEWS- that the Bush Administration MIGHT have cooked intelligence to support its desire to conquer Iraq. Haven't we known this all along?

It was pretty apparent to anyone who knew anything about the Neocons and the Bushies well prior to 9/11 that the invasion of Iraq was Agenda Item #1 for the administration's foreign policy. I'm surprised that there has been such minimal coverage of a quote I noticed first in 2000, which was some pretty solid foreshadowing of events to come. The Charlie Rose Interview in August 2000:

"Rose: OK. What if you thought Saddam Hussein, using the absence of inspectors, was close to acquiring a nuclear weapon?

Bush: He'd pay a price.

Rose: What's the price?

Bush: The price is force, the full force and fury of a reaction.

Rose: Bombs away?

Bush: You can just figure that out after it happens."

"You can just figure that out after it happens." There is no "if" or "maybe in that sentence. Shouldn't he have said: "You'll find out IF it happens?" Perhaps Bush doesn't know how to use the subjunctive tense, which I don't doubt. But, those words seem to me to be a pretty direct acknowledgement that he was already planning something in 2000 (if not well before that).

If anyone has been following the news since we went to war on Iraq, they should not be surprised by any of the revelations.

It was quickly clear that there were lies--or at least significant exaggerations--used to justify our actions. Lies beget more lies to cover up the first lies.

When will the American public wake up, look around them and demand that their leaders be held accountable for their actions? And I include in this all the fools in Congress who should have known better but voted for going into Iraq so they wouldn't look "weak on terrorism."

Actually, when will the American public stop being led around by their noses by sound bites and blatant propoganda? You can love your country but disagree with decisions made by its government. We used to pride ourselves on being "rebels," now we want to be "sheep." Sheep end up on a table with little paper pantaloons on their chops.