This way you are required to move outside of your comfort zones make the candidates clarify who they are character wise, and last night showed Obama not doing well outside the carefully scripted response.

Ah, the every popular Dan Rather defense! “It was false but accurate”!

How odd that he seems to think that this is a defense. No one, of course, has suggested that he was lying. The problem is not that he misspoke and told a falsehood. The problem is that he misspoke and told the truth. . . or at least, what he believes to be the truth. Self-destruction by self-revelation. If he were better at misspeaking by telling lies, he’d be in much less trouble.

I read the “Annie Oakley” remarks, and they seemed pretty deadly in print, but then I saw the video of Obama delivering them and it was really pathetic. He delivered the line, paused for the laugh, and seemed shaken when it didn’t come. So he repeated the line, almost like he was cueing the audience - - HUGE mistake, you don’t continue to beat a dead horse - - and of course, another embarrassing silence. And then at the point where the applause and cheering (had there been any) would have been starting to die down, he interjects a “huh” or “hunh” just like any good black preacher would - - only it really sounded WRONG when there was no background noise for the “huh” to ride on, no affirmative audience response for the “huh” to endorse and validate.

He’s really gotta turn this around. He is just NOT on the right track. He’s lost his way.

It’s over.

No wonder he comes across as a, um, shining wit.

Then “they become racists”, the Pastor becomes rich, and the Politician hopes to get elected.

‘Sounds more like a description of how BLT works on those susceptible to this sort of victim-blame schema - also including Progressives - which I think is especially not the case among rural Americans, and not the case among Classical Liberals - those seeing, trusting, and valuing above all their inherent capacities as the key to facing life.

I think some of the irrational aspects of modern politics results from a culture of media and and political pundits/advisors having a visal media/literary background. etc..

Great hypothesis, then description of what we observe happening! It goes well with the working Progressive mantra and its political and completely controllist m.o., “Perception is Reality.”

Marx actually fingered mostly himself when he originated his “false consciousness” meme and his generally inapplicable and self-contradictory derivitive ideas.

My guess is that the convention is going to be filled with strife. Oh, won’t that be fun to watch?

Yes, immensely - it is even fun to watch *now*.

It is so on several levels, this is one of the few times a liberal/leftist has been pretty much saying what they believe. It is highly amusing watching the “middle” or Dems in name only be shocked, shocked I say, that the Democrats are still supporting this person! I mean, who knew this is what they party stands for, certainly not me. Ted Kennedy would *never* have supported this in the past (and if he did he would not be a party leader).

Obama is a train wreck and there are only two questions. First is when - before the convention, before the election, or (as a bitter rural person who literally just got back from the range helping teach a hunters education program and a junior archery program - God forbid) after the election. The next question (and really the one with the greatest amusement factor) is what will be the fallout? None of this has done much to stop most of his supporters as he is “The Real Deal” and is close to a messiah. How will they react when the train wrecks?

Sadly, all it will do is allow the Republicans to do even worse as they are still the “better” choice. So as a long time Conservative Republican I like to see the Dems finally getting what I see them as deserving. However I can’t say I am happy about where the Republicans have gone and see them as going the way of the current Dems in a few years too.

But hey, I’m a conservative first so maybe some party will eventually come out and be that instead of playing “Who Can Be the Least Worst”. It’s happened before in our history (see any Whig candidates out there?) and there is a certain amount of similarity in the unrest then to now.

Obama didn’t missspeak, he missmatured. Just like most of his supporters.

So all the negative campaigning by Hillary resulted in a net loss - - her bullets were aimed at Obama but they hit her own foot. Looks like the voters don’t CARE if Obama wears a flag pin or places his hand over his heart during the national anthem. Some of them might actually like it that he was one of the few who saw through Bush’s lying bullshit and stood up to it, while Hillary and the rest joined the stampede to war like the little lemmings they actually are.

Radical concept, huh? That some American voters are actually intelligent information processors? Not distracted by bullshit issues of what candidates’ pastors preach? Because I will bet that for 99% of the voting public, whatever their pastors say on Sunday mornings goes in one ear and out the other. Though it may be impolitic to say so, religion itself is a bullshit waste of everyone’s time and NOBODY gives a rat’s ass what the pastor says, whether it’s “Love thine enemies” or “Turn the other cheek” or “Thou shalt not kill.” Because they KNOW it is pure BS.

I think by treating all this trivia seriously, Hillary has just revealed herself as an opportunistic, unethical, insincere, say-anything candidate willing to trash the better candidate (and with him, the hopes of his Party) and halleluja!!! it all backfired on her.

And Obama’s biggest gaffe to date - - describing the Rust Belters as angry and bitter people clinging to religion and guns for comfort - - nobody really gives a shit because everyone knows it’s true, even if they won’t say it themselves.

Obama’s gonna win the nomination and the Presidency - - and people, that is a GOOD thing. We are going to see a new direction in American politics.

Your main conclusion is debatable. To say the least…

Um.. we know Obama is going to be the nominee. In fact I want Obama as the candidate

Obama is going to be a disaster for the Democrats.

Bush has taken America to the edge of the abyss - - two disastrous and unwinnable wars, a drain on the Treasury that can’t be sustained indefinitely (therefore another humiliating defeat a la Viet Nam or fiscal ruin, already clearly visible in the fate of the dollar) all at a time when rival economic power-houses are emerging all over the world, unburdened by any of America’s craziness.

At this point, a man like McCain can be trusted to continue the disastrous course of arrogance, unbridled stupidity, disdain for the welfare of his fellow citizens, bringing on the disaster bigger and faster than any of the other candidates possibly could and also preparing the American public emotionally and rationally to accept - - in fact, to DEMAND - - really radical change. Strangely enough, I see McCain much more than Obama as the real agent of change here. I’m just afraid that his age may be a turn-off for a great many Americans.

Because he feels armed with knoweldge he learned once in sunday school, its his obligation to point out all the errors those of us who have studied islam for years have made.

I came across the site by accident but it looked intriguing. I saw right away that here were a lot of people desperately in need of enlightenment or at the very least another point of view.

I can’t claim to have studied Islam but I do have a lot of business contacts with Muslims from all over the Middle East and Pakistan, a few of whom have become my friends over the years. And I have some practical working knowledge of Saddam-era Iraq, in addition to what I learned as a member of AI and other organizations.

I don’t claim to know everything about the subject, and I’m certainly no Juan Cole in the knowledge department, but then again neither are any of you.

And now let me ask you a question: Why does it seem to bother you so much that I post here? Can’t stand the truth? Can’t stand another point of view?

At this point, a man like McCain can be trusted to continue the disastrous course of arrogance, unbridled stupidity, disdain for the welfare of his fellow citizens, bringing on the disaster bigger and faster than any of the other candidates possibly could and also preparing the American public emotionally and rationally to accept - - in fact, to DEMAND - - really radical change.

Besides being resolutely ignorant of history and absolutely nescient of economics, the commentor seems to be not so much stupid as schizoid on Presidential politics. He refers to Obama as “well-intentioned” but because “one man” cannot possibly correct what he wrongly perceives as America’s faults(an “entrenched” tendency toward “war and militarism”) he wants McCain to win in order to force the American public to demand the “radical change” that America seems unwilling to require at this point in time.

The commentor reminds me of his counterparts on the Right, Ann Coulter, Laura Ingraham and the beloved and revered(esp. by the Far Right) Rush Limbaugh, who all, upon realizing that McCain was going to get the Republican nomination got into such a funk that they urged their followers to vote for the Democratic nominee, whoever that might be - the better to bring on catastrophe and a resulting swing of political sentiment toward the extreme Right. Both stances are total bunk. Moderate candidates tend to win because most voters have a moderate frame of mind, irregardless of wrong-headed exhortations from the extremes.

In the long run, only disasters and outside forces can force change on America.

Here the hatred of America is almost naked in its openness. The commentor and those who think like him(Obama supporters for the most part) actually applaud events like 9/11. When innocent Americans die at the hands of terrorists they are at their happiest. Although they might deny it they WANT the terrorists and the Islamist to win and for the West to be subjugated.

Of course a victory in Iraq would send them into deep depression so they are frantic that it should not happen. What sick folks they are.

I would go ahead and say he just exactly that: the predicted Manchurian Candidate.

Is there a more pure example of projection than what MT posted above? He even highlighted it - NOBODY. All it takes is one in order to falsify that belief.

BZZZZTT! You lose.

His classic line is “Of course a victory in Iraq would send them into deep depression so they are frantic that it should not happen. What sick folks they are.”

That’s priceless. An unprovoked war of aggression against an oil-rich Third World nation, founded on lies and deception, pursued with atrocities, terror and still more lies - - but you gotta be “sick” to want it to fail. Beautiful. I could almost hear the same kind of rhetoric from the “good Germans,” the “moderates” of Nazi Germany - - - “there are some Germany-haters amongst us, treasonous swine, who want our effort to save Europe from Bolshevism to fail, who want Germany defeated, blah blah blah.”

OF COURSE I want the effort in Iraq to fail. What sane and normal human being would pray for the VICTORY of an unprovoked act of aggression that violates every basic norm of international law? Just as Nazi Germany could only be stopped by a coalition of nations of every stripe of the political spectrum, united by the need to stop the predator before it attacks again, that is the fate that awaits America should it continue on the sick and criminal path it has started out on. Ultimately it will wind up butting heads with China, Russia and India, who have no intention of seeing the energy resources of the world, Kuwait, Iraq, Iran, Venezuela, gobbled up one by one by an out-of-control U.S.A. egged on by its Zionist protege, and some serious repercussions will follow.

Obama, hopefully, represents a determined effort to get off that track, to leave war and militarism aside as the first resort of policy. Obama may not bring it off. He may be insincere, he may be a weak leader, he may make some foolish mistakes that destroy his effectiveness. But we know the others won’t even try. Thus at this point, Obama is what he says he is - - the voice of hope. We can all HOPE that Obama is the man who will change the disastrous path America is now on.

“- the better to bring on catastrophe and a resulting swing of political sentiment toward the extreme Right.

Explain the “extreme” right grackle. Is “clinging” to the 2ns Amendment, the religion of you choice, and a demand of an adherence to immigration laws among the “extreme” tenets?

heck he wants to up the ethanol production and cause more poor people to starve aroudn the world!!!

they are already rioting to it… and they are now hating us becvause no one appreciated how the US kept the food prices down, and so allowed the world to eat on the americans tax dollar.

well, now the prices are skyrocketting…

as you can see… socialism helps the poor..

thats why they starve… in chavez land the cost of milk is so high, but champagne is cheap on the shelves, so i guess “let em eat cake” is the way to go.

both candidates want to up this food fuel connection…

that way they can say… we took your 840 billion, but we need more to feed the poor of the world who we just screwed!!!

in fact, more people have died of starvatoin due to socialism than any other cause in history!!!

Obama pushes for increased ethanol production
http://obama.senate.gov/news/050315-obama_pushes_for_increased_eth/

note the date… march 15..

care to look up when the food riots started?

U.S. Sen. Barack Obama urged Congress Monday to end a two-year stalemate that has stifled production of ethanol, a corn-based fuel additive that he says could create more than 200,000 new jobs and ease the nation’s dependance on foreign oil.

nope… aint going to happen… food is too expensice, so you aint going to get any jobs..

and now that eeryone is shifting from weat to corn… and meat is going through the roof, i suspect that people will shift for a while to ocean food, and tank those supplies now too (after all they are non renewable like cows).

Now is the opportunity to get this done– not only for the future of our farmers, the future of our economy and the future of our environment, but to make our country a place that is independent and innovative enough to control its own energy future,” Obama said in a statement after touring an ethanol plant in Pekin.

this is why they now have clear cut more land… are purchasing more fertilizer… corporations are going to buy up more small farms to make super farms to make super ethanol plants…

how is this going to save the environement?

nuclear energy is our only REAL option… all this is going to cause world wide crisis…

which is what he wants…

The nation’s ethanol production is expected to top 4 billion gallons this year, and some supporters have advocated doubling that by 2012. They say raising production could ultimately boost corn prices by 25 cents a bushel, which would pump an extra $375 million a year into the Illinois farm economy.

heck… starving the poor will help the green party meet its quota of less humans and less damage

Today, if you pull into a gas station and want to fill up your tank, you’re paying some of the highest prices of all time,” Obama said. “And if you turn on the news, you can see that our dependence on foreign oil is keeping us tied to one of the most dangerous and unstable places in the world.”

thats a lie… now our prices are on par with europe.. and we dont get most of our oil from where he is implying we do…

unless he is considering canada to be one of the most dangerous and unstable places in the world?

Fatal food riots in Haiti. Violent food-price protests in Egypt and Ivory Coast. Rice so valuable it is transported in armoured convoys. Soldiers guarding fields and warehouses. Export bans to keep local populations from starving.

hey MT… i bet your happy!!!!!

The cost of green tinkering is in famine and starvation
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/apr/16/biofuels.alternativeenergy

CHANGE CHANGE CHANGE!!!

we used to eat, but that has changed…

By the way mt… it takes 2 gallons of gas to make 1 gallon of alcohol…

transport secretary, Ruth Kelly, said this week: “The government has consistently stressed that biofuels are only worth supporting if they deliver genuine environmental benefits.” Yet she must know that, at present, the opposite is the case.

I have rarely encountered so much fanaticism and blind faith. Did those demanding fuel subsidies not realise that palm oil would wipe out rainforests and that ethanol from corn would use as much carbon as it saved? Did those pleading for wind farms really think they could ever substitute for nuclear power; or those wanting eco-towns not realise they would just add to car emissions? Did they not understand that, once the tap of public money is turned on, lobbyists will ensure it is never turned off - however harmful?

no.. they didnt see it beasue people like MT are usefuil idiots, not fellow travellers

and the green party USED to be the nazi party…

got that lefty? go check it out.. the nazi party became the green party…

and through their SOFT methods they are murdering and killing off the races and the poor…

you see their HARD program failed. so now the left has dozens of soft programs…

they sell them saying AAA, but they accomplish BBB..

so the negro project became planned parenthood.
which puts many more offices in certain neighborhood than others (and just got stung in a study in which they asked them if they would accept donations to be used only in aborting black children… they said yes… and many of them did)

lets see… put off marraige… that does it too.

then there is fuel and food tied togerther… save us from those bad other socialists… but it will cause the starvation of millions.

even if we stop today, reverse, it will still take more than a couple of years to recover.

lets all applaud MT, for his clearheaded socialist perpective.

http://www.newstatesman.com/200804170026

The World Food Programme has seized up and the World Bank on 13 April forecast that 100 million people face starvation. It should not have come as a surprise.

I would call extreme anyone, professing to be conservative, who asked Republicans to vote for a Democrat or to “sit it out” and not vote at all because a moderate was about to become ascendant. Limbaugh did both.

I never heard McCain say immigration laws should not be enforced, speak against the 2nd Amendment or religion yet McCain’s impending nomination sent Limbaugh, Coulter and Ingraham into hysterics. Many have died to preserve the right to vote; to exhort someone not to vote is shameful.

Do moderates whine and urge folks not to vote when the far Right wins Party posts or nominations? If so, I have not observed it; it seems to be a behavior confined to the extremes.

When there is an unbending insistence on absolute adherence to the extremes on issues it makes even the smallest legislative compromises impossible. Take for example immigration: There were some things about the defeated Immigration bill sponsored by McCain that were not to my liking - one being that it would have the effect of only allowing the elite into the US - the educated professional class.

The problem is that south of the border(and in other regions of the world) the elite IS the problem. They are what is wrong with the Southern Hemisphere, the reason many Latin American nations are inept and corrupt. The US doesn’t need to be giving these dolts the lions share of immigration slots - they will do nothing for our society except perhaps contribute to its decadence.

On the other hand, the lower classes are the salt of the earth. They are humble and appreciate a gift when it is given. Their sons and daughters become our entrepreneurs and leaders in all fields - and they tend to be grateful for opportunity. They provide a rich infusion of vital and highly oxygenated blood to our body politic - for both Republicans and Democrats I might add.

For this and other reasons I was not totally satisfied with the Bill in question but was willing to live with it. But the extremes won the day and the Bill was defeated.

The extremes make too much of essentially inconsequential issues. Take for instance this insistence that immigrants must speak English or be put in schools to learn it before becoming ‘legal.’ It’s an unnecessary, fuss-budget type of requirement. The first generation speaks Spanish in the home and broken English outside. The second generation speaks Spanish in the home and good English outside. The third generation is probably no longer fluent in Spanish at all and uses English exclusively. Language takes care of itself, has done so for hundreds of years. Yet the far Right froths and blows if the requirement isn’t in any proposed immigration bill. Such rigidity is counterproductive and makes for legislative constipation.

I have no problem with alternative points of view. But your posts here seem to be nothing but partisan braggadocio, trash talk, and (polite) flame-baiting. I don’t see where you are trying to have any kind of discussion, or seeking any common ground. Instead you’re doing nothing but waving your team’s pennant and insulting the opposing team’s manager.

Cairo: the military is being put to work baking bread as rising food prices threaten to become the spark that ignites wider anger at a repressive government.

In reasonably prosperous Malaysia, the ruling coalition was nearly ousted by voters who cited food and fuel price increases as their main concerns.

“It’s the worst crisis of its kind in more than 30 years,” said Jeffrey Sachs, the economist and special adviser to the United Nations secretary general, Ban Ki-moon. “It’s a big deal and it’s obviously threatening a lot of governments. There are a number of governments on the ropes, and I think there’s more political fallout to come.”

so the socialists here did the right move to cause collapse and replacement of more miserialists…

Burkina Faso
sub-Saharan Africa
Malaysia
Indonesia
Senegal

Even in Thailand, which produces 10 million more tons of rice than it consumes and is the world’s largest rice exporter, supermarkets have placed signs limiting the amount of rice shoppers are allowed to purchase.

“This is a perfect storm,” President Elías Antonio Saca of El Salvador said Wednesday at the World Economic Forum on Latin America in Cancún, Mexico. “How long can we withstand the situation? We have to feed our people, and commodities are becoming scarce. This scandalous storm might become a hurricane that could upset not only our economies but also the stability of our countries.”

Maninder Chand, an auto-rickshaw driver in New Delhi, said his family had given up eating meat altogether for the last several weeks.

Ravinder Kumar Gupta, said his wife had stopped seasoning their daily lentils, their chief source of protein, with the usual onion and spices because the price of cooking oil was now out of reach. These days, they eat bowls of watery, tasteless dal, seasoned only with salt.

“If all the people rise, then the government will resolve this,” said Raisa Fikry, 50, whose husband receives a pension equal to about $83 a month, as she shopped for vegetables. “But everyone has to rise together. People get scared. But we will all have to rise together.”

as if rising up grows food…

no.. conservatives warned that this would happen.. but socialists like MT have all the answers.. as he does here.

well bright fish… what now?

In Haiti, where three-quarters of the population earns less than $2 a day and one in five children is chronically malnourished, the one business booming amid all the gloom is the selling of patties made of mud, oil and sugar, typically consumed only by the most destitute.

“It’s salty and it has butter and you don’t know you’re eating dirt,” said Olwich Louis Jeune, 24, who has taken to eating them more often in recent months. “It makes your stomach quiet down.”

of course americans have so much of a tax burden… the middle class that would have mobilized to help has been destroyed by the socialists..

obama wants more of this kind of change.

because change causes crisis, and crisis causes the replacement of the state by a comunist state.

then we can lower our life expectancy to 58, as it is now there..

we can live in barracks… and gulag work camps.

working for subsistence food…

not like it hasnt happened before… shall we list the states?

Meanwhile, most of the poorest of the poor suffer silently, too weak for activism or too busy raising the next generation of hungry. In the sprawling slum of Haiti’s Cité Soleil, Placide Simone, 29, offered one of her five offspring to a stranger. “Take one,” she said, cradling a listless baby and motioning toward four rail-thin toddlers, none of whom had eaten that day. “You pick. Just feed them.”

kind of the same thing the starving in russia did, and china, and elswehere.

care to read the diary stories of women throwing their babies onto trains in hopes that a stranger would save them.

this is the world that those like MT create

big talkers… but if they really were all they thouht they were, they would go out and EARN the money, and then put it where they want.. as carnegie did creating all the libraries… and as i could literally list out thousands that did.. never asking the poor to have their taxes higher.

back then though, the poor didnt pay any taxes.

to create a progressive tax is a point of the commnuist manifesto..

meanwhile an apportioned tax would have done more to help them all than any elite program that gives them everythign would ever do.

but then they couldnt give out pork, take credit.

by this time next year… the left will have millions of dead on their hands again.

but heck… they dont have a concionce.

after all, they didnt care that their actions led to more than a million families to drown onthe ocean after veietnam.. the nagain after cambodia. and the genocide AFTER we left.

but hey… he sits there warm.. not worried if he is going to eat.. prosyletixing to those that his kind would make it better.

all the while, ignoring that his kind has been respnosibel for more killing, torture, terror, and mayhem than all others combined throughout history!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Thats you willfully ignoring reality as it presents itself to you. There is far less of an incentive today to speak the language of you adopted country or abide by any other real laws of a sovereign country. Far from being a “fuss-budget” concern, I consider it essential.

I know, Im bitter and clinging.

You havent keep your self informed on the issues considering our reluctant support of McCain. Rush Limbaugh has pledged his reluctant support of “the Maverick” just as I have, yet both of us are still being labeled as extremes by you and others who cant identify what it is that makes you conservatives.

You might be right. What he’s mainly tried to do for years, is to change the laws to benefit the illegals. Why worry about enforcing them when you can ensure the mass importation of a serf class through simply changing the laws? Just for starters:

Supporting mass amnesty. The May 29, 2003, Tucson Citizen quoted Mr. McCain as stating that “Amnesty has to be an important part of” any immigration solution. He was part of the bipartisan coalition that tried to pass amnesty legislation in 2006 and 2007. In 2006 he voted in favor of S. 2611, legislation that would reward between 10 and 11 million illegals with amnesty if they apply for legal status and pay a $2,000 fine.

Supporting in-state tuition for illegal aliens. Mr. McCain was a cosponsor of S. 774, the Dream Act, providing in-state tuition for illegal aliens. The legislation would have enabled illegal aliens who entered the United States before age 16 to obtain a green card and then use their newly acquired status to obtain green cards for the millions of parents who illegally brought their children with them into the United States. Mr. McCain missed a Senate vote on the issue in October. He said that he would have opposed it on the Senate floor had he been there to vote.

Voted to kill border fence. In 2006, Mr. McCain voted for an amendment to S. 2611 offered by Sen. Arlen Specter to require consultation with the Mexican government concerning the construction of fencing along the U.S.-Mexican border. According to Numbers USA, an organization that lobbies against illegal immigration, this amendment would have effectively guaranteed that the border fence was never built.

Voted against permanently barring gang members and terrorists from the United States. Last year, Mr. McCain voted against an amendment (Senate Amendment 1184) introduced by Sen. John Cornyn, Texas Republican, that would have permanently barred gang members, terrorists, sex offenders, alien absconders, aliens convicted of domestic violence and aliens convicted of at least three DUIs from the United States. The Cornyn Amendment was rejected on a 51-46 vote.

Voted in favor of Social Security benefits to illegal aliens who commit identity fraud. In 2006. Mr. McCain joined with Mr. Kennedy in working to defeat an amendment by Sen. John Ensign, Nevada Republican, that would have barred Social Security credits for work being done prior to their receiving amnesty — in other words, while working under a false Social Security number. The Ensign Amendment, (Senate Amendment 3985) was defeated on a 50-49 vote.

McCain: liberal enough for all illegals!

Well, actually, “everyone” doesn’t know this, except in the Pauline Kael sense. In fact, the small group of people who believe such nonsense are narrow-minded ignoramuses who may think that they are liberals, but don’t actually understand the meaning of the word.

As for whether it’s good news that Obama will likely be the Democratic nominee, many Republicans certainly think so.

yup… he would love the same end… half of europe was put into chains by russia… china later became mao’s plaec with russias help.

but the best is that he would love the same kind of wast of life… 23 million on the field, and 100 million tortured isnt enough.

he is a socialist, and he loves death…

his religion is HATE and ENVY…

well this just out of bagdad..

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080418/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_basra_s_revival;_ylt=Avs6r1KT9RTCZyumExOvbOms0

Basra’s `dark ages’ lifting as hard-line grip weakens

BAGHDAD - CD shops sell love songs again. Some women emerge from their homes without veils, and alcohol sellers are coming out of hiding in the southern city of Basra — where religious vigilantes have long enforced strict Islamic codes.

The changes in recent weeks mark a surprising show of government sway — at least for now — after an Iraqi-led military crackdown that was plagued by desertions, ragged planning and ended in a virtual stalemate with Shiite militias in Iraq’s second-largest city.

But it’s unclear whether the new tone in parts of Basra represents a permanent tilt toward the Iraqi government or just a temporary retreat of Shiite hard-liners challenging the current Baghdad leadership.

During five days of heavy fighting last month, Iraqi troops struggled against militiamen, particularly the Mahdi Army loyal to anti-U.S. cleric Muqtada al-Sadr. The military was plagued by desertions and poor organization — and, in the end, the offensive was inconclusive with Iran helping mediate a truce.

Still, the crackdown appears to have succeeded in giving some sense of government control in Basra.

Two Associated Press employees in Basra interviewed several shopkeepers and other residents on the lifting of some lifestyle restrictions imposed by Shiite hard-liners. The AP also toured four districts around the city to observe the recent changes.

For years, militiamen and vigilantes have had nearly a free hand in Basra. They intimidated, attacked and sometimes killed residents who broke the strict social rules in the city — once known for its liberal lifestyles and nightlife.

Walid Khalid had to stop selling alcohol in 2005 after gunmen snatched his brother from their home and dumped him hours later in the street with gunshots to both legs.

But the two brothers resumed their business in the past days, feeling safer after the crackdown launched March 25.

“Now, I have resumed my business and I am selling alcohol in a street in central Basra near an army checkpoint,” Khalid told the AP.

Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki ordered the offensive in Basra in a bid to confront what he called Shiite gangs and criminals. Basra is also critical for the government as the commercial hub of the nation’s southern oil fields.

The assault stalled as Mahdi Army fighters put up unexpected resistance, and at least 1,000 soldiers and many police refused to fight — either because they were intimidated by the militias or were loyal to al-Sadr.

The military had to rush in reinforcements from other parts of Iraq and call for help from the British and the Americans. U.S. and British aircraft launched airstrikes and ferried wounded Iraqi soldiers to hospital.

Since the truce, government forces have continued raids and arrests, but in a more low key way. More than 400 militiamen and criminals have been arrested since the sweep began, the Interior Ministry said.

It is unclear whether the decreased presence of militiamen in the streets is because they were dealt a real blow or just a tactic to lie low for the time being. The Mahdi Army in Basra remains in control of its stronghold district of Hayaniyah and other small areas — and it and other militias, all with political backers, retain enormous influence in the city.

Security forces are pushing hard to convince Basra residents they have broken the militias’ hold. Checkpoints have been set up on main streets and intersections, with increased patrols in other areas.

State TV showed police cars decorated with streamers and flowers circulating the streets broadcasting music through loudspeakers, and top commanders walking around, chatting with pedestrians and shopowners, telling them not to be afraid of gangs.

Interior Ministry spokesman Maj. Gen. Abdul-Karim Khalaf told the AP the crackdown will continue till “Basra is back to its glorious joyful days.”

The people in Basra “will forget the dark ages they lived during the past years. Basra will not be a sad city anymore,” Khalaf said, speaking from the city.

Muhanad Jawad, owner of a CD shop, said that before the crackdown, bearded men wearing black clothes frequently raided his shop to look for banned love songs or romantic Western or Egyptian movies. Gunmen would order him to sell only CDs with songs or video mourning Imam al-Hussein, a revered Shiite martyr in the 7th century.

“Now, the situation is better. The fanatic gunmen have vanished and a lot of young people are visiting my shop to buy songs, pop music and romantic movies,” he said.

In the city’s main street, Al-Jazir, several CD shops have been opened and music is played loudly outside the stores while unveiled young women pass by. Although not fully covered by a traditional veil, most women nonetheless wear head scarves over their hair.

Mohammed Abdul-Amir, a government employee, dared to hire a singer and a band for his wedding four days ago.

“I am happy to have a real wedding party,” he said. “A few weeks ago, doing such a thing would have meant death.”

and like a true useless idiot…

he wants that to be taken away from them. he liked it better when the place was destablizied and he could get more out of the state by using them as a ’cause’.

he wants them in burkas.
he likes when the state cuts off body parts
when they back up a truck and pour a few tons of rocks on someone in a sack

he is a socialist… and like the socialists said

you have to break a few eggs to make an omlette.

he is a socialist.. he likes death squads, and people who come in an order peopel how to live, and confiscate property for themselves..

thats what sociaism is all about….

though he dosnt get taht…
he never actually lived in that.

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZThlNzgzNzhlOTRiZGYxZmI4MGZjYmYxYTgwNmZjODU=

oh no… MT doesnt like it.. they are teaching women science… better to have them not learn..

thats what he likes..
he wants us out of iraq…

so that the same thing that happend in vietnam can happen… the socialists come in and kill millions.

he doesnt like the americans… they let them learn, they let them drive, they let tehm have freedom

now what respectabel socialist wants freedom?

NONE of them since socialism is incompatible with that.

Y’know? I’d enjoy that massacre so much I think I’d vote for the puny little weakling if I get the chance.

If the commentor would provide some links to some lies about the Iraq war as said by anyone currently in power(Bush, Cheney, Rice … Gabby Hayes? Why ARE they always so vague with their accusations?) perhaps we could all become as upset as the commentor.

No quotes allowed unless they can be checked – For instance there’s probably transcripts of ALL of Bush’s speeches and pronouncements on the internet. Bush’s UN speech is definitely on the internet. You would probably find all of these at the Whitehouse site. Scan a few, find the lies and link to them here. Ditto Cheney or whoever else you have in mind.

I’m afraid I have to eliminate hearsay, you know, the tactic of quoting those who SAY they overheard someone say something. This eliminates any quotes from columnists who allegedly quote television programs. I must insist that a transcript of the actual utterances be linked to since I have found the MSM to be notoriously inaccurate about what they claim to have been said on TV shows they claim to have viewed. More than once I’ve gone to a Meet The Press or some other show’s transcript and found that some columnist’s version of what was said as reported in an article or op-ed was complete bunk.

OK? Got it straight? To reiterate: Original sources, linked to the transcripts which have the ACTUAL words from the original speaker(Bush?) so we can all check for ourselves whether the quote is valid. If there are half as many lies as you seem to think there are it should be easy.

OF COURSE I want the effort in Iraq to fail.

Here the commentor is open about what many of his ilk can only imply, hope for and explicitly verbalize about when gathered amongst their fellow America-haters. Obama has to be oblique about it and profess concern about military casualties, cost to the treasury, etc., but it’s the same basic meme: America is bad, the enemy is good. I must say that I prefer the commentor’s misguided, ignorant rants to Obama’s mealy-mouthed, cowardly language. At least he’s honest.

What sane and normal human being would pray for the VICTORY of an unprovoked act of aggression that violates every basic norm of international law? Just as Nazi Germany could only be stopped by a coalition of nations of every stripe of the political spectrum, united by the need to stop the predator before it attacks again, that is the fate that awaits America should it continue on the sick and criminal path it has started out on. Ultimately it will wind up butting heads with China, Russia and India, who have no intention of seeing the energy resources of the world, Kuwait, Iraq, Iran, Venezuela, gobbled up one by one by an out-of-control U.S.A. egged on by its Zionist protege, and some serious repercussions will follow.

The commentor continues to jabber on about “international law,” something that for all practical purposes doesn’t exist - not that he would know anything about it if it did. As soon as I see the words “international law” I know an America-hater is commenting - it’s one their favorite phrases - right up there with “war crimes.” But they never hold the enemy, who routinely commits every atrocity imaginable, to ANY of these vague standards.

All the US has ever attempted to do is purchase oil on the open market and pay the going rate. We want to trade in peace, not make war. If Saddam had complied with the agreements and standards after his first defeat, if he had never invaded Kuwait in the first place, he would no doubt be living in his palaces and happily torturing hapless Iraqis to this day.

Yet the ignorant perpetuate the myth of the US ‘gobbling up’ oil-rich nations. And one can always expect A “Zionist” remark or two. It’s the politically correct way of expressing Jew-hatred. Not anti-Semitism, mind you, just disagreement over policy - eh what? As far as India, Russia and China, and “butting heads” is concerned I’m sure the US will be content to compete peacefully with them as long as they behave decently and eschew violence against us or our allies. If any of them have skullduggery in mind weakness and lack of resolve will only encourage it.

Obama, hopefully, represents a determined effort to get off that track, to leave war and militarism aside as the first resort of policy.

It’s ironic that the commentor chooses to compare the US to Nazi Germany, the Nazis being universally described by even lefty revisionist historians as one of the chief beneficiaries of a policy of appeasement. A policy of appeasement and apology, no matter how well intentioned, guarantees war or subjugation - sometimes both. In ‘79, when Carter failed to act with vigor and purpose against the Iranians after they took our embassy hostage he gave example for many shrewd eyes to observe, not just in Iran but in many other places.

They all must first have marveled at the spectacle of the handing over of South Vietnam to the Communists in that debacle a few years earlier. Then when we turned tail after Lebanon and acted weakly in Mogadishu it must have hardened their conviction that the US had lost the will to strike back.

It’s a passive, appeasement type of foreign policy that bought on 9/11 and has necessitated wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. It’s clear now that Saddam and his Ba’athists thought they were free from accountability and never expected the US to act and that the Taliban believed it safe to harbor Osama bin Laden. They know better now or at least they WILL know better unless Obama and the rest of the anti-war crowd have their way.