Sorry if I got your name right?

The madam hums today so loud I need ask yoo to ask Genial Betrayusa, and of golf-course, ask the Middle East troops vacationing in the cool red-dessert sand-traps, if they have a 9- wedge goon-club?

I got a rotten-onion golf ball fer militant bloody houndogs and furry gofers.

Do I need a mouse trap if my mouse vibrates and shocks my poor little pinkie?

Please go ask Piraeus, Allen, and Hewitt if they need a caddy or want to borrow a mule-arse with a prudential zebra looking bumper-butt-sticker.

O, Yank you kskills is a miss/mr-?-hooker.

O, What a way to kiss you my dear grey whiskered fox news lover?

O, Moses loves you?

Let's be nice to each other.

I asked if your clone supported private ownership of the press

-- bucky1

I am nobody's clone, but it's amusing to be called one by a John Birch Society clown. You can shove Ben Franklin's printing press, along with your other straw-man "challenges," up your deceitful, delusional, self-righteous ass.

On the other hand, we still have the Iraq war going on. The next phase, after the security situation improves, will be to determine whether or not the country can get it's political house in order.

I doubt that you'll find anyone who would disagree with you that if there isn't a political reconciliation by next year, we should accept our losses and go home.

With as much respect as I can muster, you are either malevolently dissembling or a useful idiot. Those of us who support bringing the troops home sooner rather than later are supposed to take on faith that: (a) a relatively small infusion ("surge") of troops and a willingness to put security control in the hands of sectarian militias will result in a significant mollification of violence among a population in civil war, which by our commanders' own assessments would require hundreds of thousands more troops to put down; (b) the only thing preventing Iraq from getting its "political house in order" is that this violence in the streets, apparently coming from nothing connected to the vacationing politicians themselves, is keeping them from doing what's right; (c) although we have heard innumerable times before that this time, finally, we are starting to see things turn around and all we need is to be patient for just a while longer, this time will be different, despite the daily horrors that go unabated in that country; and (d) all of this in no way resembles Vietnam, except for the cynical start of a campaign to pin the inevitable failure to stop the civil war on the voices that were against this misadventure from the start.

For just one moment, try to accept the possibility that no, the American military cannot fix everything, and that clapping louder for Tinkerbell may make you feel good about yourself and your "resolve," but doesn't make a damn bit of difference in reality.

This is brilliance:

The madam hums today so loud I need ask yoo to ask Genial Betrayusa, and of golf-course, ask the Middle East troops vacationing in the cool red-dessert sand-traps, if they have a 9- wedge goon-club?

On the other hand, we still have the Iraq war going on. The next phase, after the security situation improves, will be to determine whether or not the country can get it's political house in order.

The actual war in Iraq ended back in April 2003 when the Hussein regime fell. Whats going on right now is an extended occupation and half-hearted reconstruction effort, all being undertaken while the political state that was Iraq reverts to its culturally normal state of sectarian and tribal divisions.

To suggest the Surge will stabilize the 'security situation' where current garrisons are being reinforced is accurate so far as it goes and addresses just 40% or so of the country. The overall 'security situation', constituting the remaining 60%, is as bad as ever.

Additionally its not a matter of 'the country' getting it's 'political house in order' after the Surge is finished. That should have been the priority all along! Unfortunately the history of the country has always advised such a result.

I doubt that you'll find anyone who would disagree with you that if there isn't a political reconciliation by next year, we should accept our losses and go home.

Fair enough.

Nobody actually wishes for such a thing, shooter242 and his ilk's claims to the contrary. But only a fool lets optimism blind them to the facts on the ground.

You doing anything on August 9th. You licenced to practice law in the state of Maryland and the commonwealth of Pennsylvania?

I have been making people furious and I have seen hells doors spread wide open. I tell you, believe you me, that some experiences can's be told in the pubic places on-line or Glenn will get a soiled reputation? It (Fury, not that which is cute and cuddling furry) burn the eyebrows off the top of the skull-topic!

P.S. okay. I apologize.

Two honest law persons.

Jebbie, Glenn's posts have always been somewhat narrowly constructed, and rightly so, I think. Case-building is his particular genius, and it has genuine benefits. If anyone doubted that the President had engaged in illegal activity, with potentially devastating consequences to the country, Glenn's posts from the last couple of years have dispelled that doubt completely. If anyone found it difficult to trace the machinery of propaganda erected by the Republicans, or to understand how Karl Rove, et al. were attempting to engineer the vote in national elections, Glenn's research and his documentation this past year have made it plain for all to see.

Often there's no need to comment on his work at all. In its chosen context, it says all that needs to be said. In my view, what the comments section provides is a broader context -- the historical and political elements necessary to understand how and why we've come to the sorry pass which Glenn has so amply documented. To accomplish that end, there are various tactics which may be employed, from sysprog's insightful and systematic amalgamation of disparate bits of research, to bebop-o's poetic reflections on his personal experience.

Given the diversity of political views and life histories among the commenters here, not to mention their psychological profiles, this will inevitably result in disagreements, not all of which will be entirely rational, nor kept within the bounds of what other commenters consider to be decency. They'll inevitably be too capricious or too personal for some, or too long, or too repetetive, or constructed too much out of animus than a genuine attempt to share the offending commenter's views with the rest of us.

For myself, I find all of this, even the unpleasant bits, to be part of a very interesting -- and yes, enlightening -- discourse. I would very much hate to see a magisterial sense of what's appropriate cut it off, and I find it significant that Glenn hasn't done so. Whatever your idea is of propriety, Jebbie, there'll be others who don't share it.

For the record, I'm one of them.