I remember when conservatives denied how badly thing were going despite what was obvious to everyone. It's why things kept going so badly for so long. Now that things are going well it's the liberals turn to deny what is obvious. You have so invested yourself in your hatred of George Bush that you refuse to recognize reality. I spent a year over there, I know how shitty things were. Wake fucking up man!

If things are so great in Iraq, Hatchett, why not head back there for another year? We'll await your next report in Summer 2009, when American-style democracy has surely taken hold.

I have been wondering for some time why conventional wisdom has John McCain as an "expert" on foreign policy? What has he ever really done on foreign policy, except for having been a decorated soldier in Vietnam some 45 or so years ago. To the best of my knowledge he has never served on the Senate foreign relations committee. On the other hand, Obama was appointed to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee as soon as he was elected to the Senate and has served on it ever since. I have got to believe that Obama's knowledge of foreign affairs after having served on that committee for the last three years far exceeds the knowledge McCain has every had on matters of foreign policy.

Dear American Citizens and the Press

As a concerned citizen, I consider it is my duty to bring following message to you all.

"We the citizens of the United States of America have the ultimate responsibility to elect the " Right Candidate" to lead our nation, out of our huge present and future internal and external challenges as well as opportunities. This is to prevent depression and isolation in-spite of being the only superpower in the world morally, democratically, economically, and militarily.

We need to consider the "critical qualities and characteristics" of our presumptive presidential nominees at the time we vote.

In my personal and professional opinion the critical considerations are as under:

1. Calm, cool, and collected " temper " [ Presidential Temperament ].

2. Sound and sustained "Judgment and Caliber".

3. "Thought-fullness and togetherness" of purpose and positions.

4. Minimum "ex-poser and exploitation" around "Washington and Washington insiders".

5. Renewed " Vigor and Vision " for our Greatgrand Nation.

6. Foreign policy based on " American Values, Virtuous, Vastness".

Stay informed, stay involved, and stay engaged. Do not allow some partisan media, pundits, pollsters, and perpetual political opinion makers effect your vote in the wrong direction.

Don't be effected and duped by "Psychological Terrorism" that is directed at common American people without their full consent and awareness.

Long live U.S.A and its diverse but democratic people.

Col. A.M. Khajawall [Ret] MD., ABFM., ABDA.

Chief Consultant: World Wide Porfessional Consultants[WWPC]

Colonel, USAR/MC Combat Stress Control[Ret], Disabled American Veteran and Freedom team.

Consultant Psychiatrist: CA State, Medical Board of California, and Los Angeles Mental Health Department

Address: 7642 Eaglehelm Court Las Vegas NV 89123

PS: We should realize and accept that Hon. senator Mccain has severve problems with temper and congnative challenges [senior oments]. How we can afford him to be our future president.

One thing that the Bush Administration has continually exploited is the "Goldfish memory" of both our news reporting media and, apparently, the American voting public.

By continually comparing what they are promising today to what they selectively pick from only the recent past, Loyal Bushies have managed to ignore conditions prior to the invasion or shortly thereafter.

John McCain is, of course, counting on the continuation of that tradition on the part of his Base. Given the vapid nature of most of our reporting journalists, as best exemplified by that Paris Hilton of pundits, Chris Matthews, it may be a smart move.

It's astonishing the foolishness that John McCain gets away with. The MSM doesn't even blink as he tells canard after canard.

McCain's surge idiocy is a prime example. The New York Times portrayed it as, "Candidates Spar Over Troop Surge and Iraq Chronology," as if there were really two sides to the story. There was only one. And that was that John McCain was either lying or bereft of even a clue about the surge he touts so often. That the Times chose the angle of Obama vs. McCain as a matter of differing opinions on a subject -- as opposed to the FACT that McCain was dead wrong or a liar -- is just another glaring example of a media, including Katie Couric and CBS, that is beyond derelict in its duty.

But thanks to you, Joe, for writing about this subject. I knew some background on the payoffs to the sheikhs and the real reasons behind the reductions in violence, but this piece cleans it up nicely.

However, I won't hold my breath waiting for the MSM to pick it up.

Not on your life! When McCain tells a lie it becomes the truth by virtue of his heroism. It's kind of like the rule of law, if the president does it, it cannot be against the law. When McCain says something it can never be false. Anyway, regardless of anything, the U.S. will NEVER leave Iraq. Not under Obama, not under McCain. It's just too big a cash cow for their corporate masters to give up.

I find the posturing from both sides on this thing to be disgusting. It is not a static situation over there where it can be said one and only one thing drives changes in the condition. It's a confluence of factors.

1) Increased troop levels a/k/a the surge.

2) Shifts in strategy as to how to work with the tribal leaders that took place upon Rumsfeld's departure.

3) Granting amnesty to past Military Guard personnel so there were fewer unemployed young male Iraqis running around with time on their hands.

4) General malaise among the Iraqis. Conason has followed the America Worster talking points memo and argued it is to get the US out of there as if the presence there is the REAL over arching negative. I would submit a more balance viewpoint would be to suggest that, yes, the Iraqis are rightfully tired of the carnage and they have decided that it is in their best interests to support the occupying force, drive out al Qaeda in Iraq and whatever the hell else is running around inside their borders to bring stability to their country. With that stability will come the US troop withdrawal or draw down.

No one has been advocating a permanent occupying force in Iraq. Yes. No one. (Hence the snark of taking McCain's comments about a 100 year war can simply be stowed.) The issue was whether or not there would sufficient stability in the region to enable us to draw forces down without simply insuring the country collapsed under its own weight once we left.

The way we prosecuted the war pre-surge was a huge part of the problem. (McCain and Obama would seemingly agree on this.) The surge helped. (Note I said HELPED, not that it was the SOLE reason for improvement.)

The single biggest success factor happens to be Iraqi public opinion. The UK understands this by virtue of their having pulled back from being an occupying force for over a century as their empire has shrunk. In short, they are real good at this, and hence why they did such a great job in the south. Part of that was understanding the need for decentralized economic development. Bremer went in and centralized it all, leaving the brits dumbfounded.

The locals have to come to acknowledge that supporting the occupying force better serves their interests than supporting the insurgents. We have not been raping the women and beheading the informants, while admittedly water boarding some and putting underwear on the heads of others for which we have conducted internal investigations.

Iraq has tired of the whole mess. They see greater value in participating in the government (hence more Sunni representation) and working with us on ways to transition power back to their government infrastructure.

We've won over the hearts and minds. For this we should be grateful. Instead the MoveOn talking points memo spins that to a negative to feed America Worster self loathing by saying the only reason it is going so well is that they want us out of there.

Of course they want us out of there. The issue is to do so in a morally prudent fashion that hopefully prepares the country to wind up better off than when we entered.