If like me, you love politics and you love chocolate, than you don’t want to miss NARAL Pro-Choice Washington’s annual fundraiser, Chocolate for Choice:
Chocolate as far as the eye can see—and all for the right to choose! While our guests eat chocolate to their hearts’ content, our panel of celebrity judges determines the winning dessert entries in various categories. The evening also features a silent auction of fun chocolate-themed items and a live auction of exquisite chocolate creations.
Celebrity judges include such political luminaries as Darcy Burner, Ron Sims, Greg Nickels, Sally Clark and, um… me! Cathy Sorbo is the Master of Ceremonies.
Tickets are still available! Thursday, March 8, 6-8PM at Safeco Field’s Ellis Pavilion.
If you want an abortion, get one. If you don’t, fine.
Either way, just don’t ask the rest of us to pick up the tab for your choice.
NARAL= anti-life organization
Now for some good news from Iraq. The 1st of 5 divisions sent in the surge is having a positive effect. 4 more to go!
http://www.reuters.com/article.....geNumber=1
I’d come if it was steak and beer tasting.
re 2: Describe the “positive effect”. Then when it all goes south, I can rub your nose in it.
These troop increases have a short effect.
You needed half a million troops there at the start of this debacle — like the Democrats told you retarded Wingnuts — back in 2003.
Lucy,
The media in Iraq (which resides mostly in Baghdad) have been reporting for months how the sectarian violence and bloodshed had reached “civil war” proportions. Especially leading up to the Nov elections. There is little reporting of the postive results in the north and south. The south is doing well enough to further turn over the security to the Iraqi forces there, allowing some coalition forces to return home. The North is thriving. Anbar and Baghdad have been the hotspots. Therefore in terms of the propoganda war, as goes Baghdad, so goes the Iraq war.
20% of the forces allocated for the surge have been deployed. the effect is what it is. Far less sectarian violence, less bloodshed, better security.
Let’s hope that as the forces increase, these positive effects increase as well.
I don’t expect you to like this news as it flys in the face of your hate bush political bent. But it is what it is. Good news. Which is good news for everyone.
Lucy,
You see, as the Iraqi people see their own security forces ability to provide security for them, it ligitimizes the Iraqi govt. The people begin to trust in the civilian leadership to provide security. The dependence on militia is diminished as the security forces assert themselves.
As this happens, we go home……
Good for everyone.
So, “Right Stuff”, let’s put on our thinking caps: If you increase the troop levels in Baghdad and decrease them in the sticks, where will the insurgents go? They’ll go where the troop levels are lower.
And when that happens, Condi Rice will be saying: “Who could have forseen this?”
If these guys were real allies, they would be sending their troops to Bagdhad. But they are skipping out on us.
Why?
re 7: Yes, of course! The Sunnis will have all kinds of respect for a SHIITE government.
Did you know that we are funding the Sunni insurgents?
@8 we will see.
But I understand that the Iraqi forces have been essentially in charge in the south for quite some time now.
And our allies do support us. They are sending additional troops to support NATO in Afganistan. If you are not invested in defeat, then you might see this as good news.
@9 The govt is represented by Sunni, Shiia, and Kurd.
As for funding Sunni insurgents. I don’t know that.
I do know that Iran is funding insurgents to attack US forces….that is proven.
re 10: Cite your sources for all this good news.
re 10: You make a chilling, but nonetheless vapid, excuse for attacking Iran.
I want to see your sources.
re 10: “But I understand” Give me a break!”If you are not invested in defeat, then you might see this as good news.”
Why would I see it as a defeat that neocons are adopting the tactics we Democrats suggested years ago?
The only defeat is that you are taking credit for them.
http://www.dailykos.com/storyo.....121344/500
Bush demands more NATO troops because Afghanistan such a success
Afghanistan is a success!
In a speech this morning, Bush touted the success of a “free Afghanistan” more than five years after a U.S.-led invasion […]
And it’s such a success that we’re in danger of failure.
“We face a thinking enemy and we face a tough enemy,” Bush said, noting that 2006 was the most violent year in Afghanistan since the 2001 invasion.
Bush screws up Afghanistan by turning his attention to Iraq when we had the Taliban, Osama Bin Laden, and Al Qaida on the run. Now, five years later, having screwed up not just Iraq, but also a war we should’ve won relatively easily years ago, Bush is demanding that other NATO countries bail him out.
Speaking at the American Enterprise Institute, a think-tank, he said: “When our commanders on the ground say to our respective countries ’We need additional help,’ our Nato countries must provide it. ”As well, allies must lift restrictions on the forces they do provide so Nato commanders have the flexibility they need to defeat the enemy wherever the enemy may make its stand.“
They “must” provide it? That’ll go over well… Fact is, even Bush’s staunches allies in Europe have given up on the failed Bush presidency. NATO nations Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain and Hungary have already ditched him in Iraq, with Poland and the UK eager to get out this year. Bush is toxic in those countries, and more than one government has fallen in part because of having too close a relationship with Bush.
And he’s going to demand troops from them?
re 10- “The govt is represented by Sunni, Shiia, and Kurd.( Yeah, right…. Like Lieberman is a Democratic Senator.)
As for funding Sunni insurgents. I don’t know that.(Well, here’s something for you to read
then:
http://www.newyorker.com/fact/.....fact_hersh
I do know that Iran is funding insurgents to attack US forces….that is proven.(Where is that proven? It’s also proven that the Saudi Royal family is funding al Qaida and the Sunni insurgents)
You can’t have it your simplistic way anymore. Everyone knows you guys are just warmongers.
Great for NAARL to have such a health friendly event – who are these dorks?
Fat women needing a sugar fix?
Yuk, and I am pro choice.
@12
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITI.....index.html
http://www.latimes.com/news/na.....ines-world
Two stories of Iranian involvement. You certainly would respect the LA Times and CNN right?
Daily KOS?
Now that is objective sourcing….
That confirms for me your investment in defeat.
You and your comrades are now in the unenviable position of hoping for the same news that our enemies hope for. Bad news for the US is good news for you and our enemies…
WOW.
“Why would I see it as a defeat that neocons are adopting the tactics we Democrats suggested years ago?”
If you say so… But what I see is the US forces SUPORTING the Iraqi forces. Letting them take the lead. Letting them assert themselves. I don’t recall any of your extreme liberal comrades advocating this approach.
As for Afghanistan. The problem here is Pakistan. I think a greater concern for the USA is our imminent action into Pakistan rather than Iran. If Pakistan continues to harbor and aid the Taliban and Al Qaeda, they do so at their own peril. And ours as well.
“Bush screws up Afghanistan by turning his attention to Iraq when we had the Taliban, Osama Bin Laden, and Al Qaida on the run. Now, five years later, having screwed up not just Iraq, but also a war we should’ve won relatively easily years ago, Bush is demanding that other NATO countries bail him out.”
Well you can’t have it both ways…..either we are isolated and unable to count on our allies or we aren’t. The fact that NATO has taken over security for Afghanistan is proof that the international community is helping the US in the war on terror. It is conceivable to me that something similar will happen in Iraq as well. International troops put in to assist the Iraqi security forces as we withdraw our army and marines. This is exactly what you extreme lefty’s have been barking about. Again a good situation for us all…..
@15
Your source is crap.
It is not news but opinion.
But for fun…
“In Lebanon, the Administration has coöperated with Saudi Arabia’s government, which is Sunni, in clandestine operations that are intended to weaken Hezbollah, the Shiite organization that is backed by Iran.”
I support that everyday 24/7 365……. Kill the terrorists where ever they are…
Invested in defeat
ANOTHER EXCELLENT RIGHT-WING MEME. SO OK THE SURGE GOES AS PLANNED AND TAMPS DOWN THE SECTARIAN VIOLENCE A BIT. SO WHAT? YOU STILL HAVE A SHIITE GOVERNMENT AND A RESENTFUL SUNNI POPULATION. YOU STILL HAVE A POWDERKEG. AND YOU STILL HAVE A SINKHOLE OF MONEY IN THAT COUNTRY.
BUDGETS ARE BEING CUT LEFT AND RIGHT HERE IN THE GOOD OLE USA FOR EVERYTHING FROM KIDS HEALTH CARE TO MEDICARE AND TAXES FOR BILLIONAIRES ARE BEING LOWERED AS WELL FOR WHAT?
NATION-BUILDING FOR A COUNTRY THAT WASN’T A THREAT TO BEGIN WITH.
FUCK THAT.
Right Stuff says:
@8 we will see.
But I understand that the Iraqi forces have been essentially in charge in the south for quite some time now.
And our allies do support us. They are sending additional troops to support NATO in Afganistan. If you are not invested in defeat, then you might see this as good news.
@9 The govt is represented by Sunni, Shiia, and Kurd.
As for funding Sunni insurgents. I don’t know that.
I do know that Iran is funding insurgents to attack US forces….that is proven.
————————
And most of the violence in the South is Shiite militias shooting it out in a power grab. The Shia are shooting the Shia, and it is neither calm, or peaceful.
There are so many factions in Iraq shooting at each other, and us it is amazing that anyone could be stupid / blind enough to think that this 2 trillion dollar trainwreck in Iraq, that is getting worse every day is anything other than a disaster.
Oh by the way, we don’t plan on ever leaving 100%. Just ask anyone.
Hopefully you have reupped, or convinced your children to enlist to go fight for Bush’s political future!!!
I love it. Harry Reid fully funded the troops (to the dismay of some Democrats), and now Bush can’t say the Iraq trainwreck was caused by the Democrats withdrawing funding, rather than the 1,000 wrong decisions, and calculations in a row he made.
#18 I support that everyday 24/7 365……. Kill the terrorists where ever they are…
—————-
The problem is more people on the planet consider us terrorists than Bin Laden.
You may not have noticed…..
Just remember that right after 9-11 they held a march, and candle light vigil in mourning or our loss.
In Tehran.
Iran was not openly our enemy, even after we gave them the Shah, and Saddam Chemical Weapons, and targeting information to use on them, and then Bush calls “them” the axis of evil.
There is more evil in our White House than in the entire country of Iran.
By the way, why was Hezbollah formed? After the christian militia killed 180 Palestinians while the Israeli soldiers watched the gate, they figured “someone” needed to defend the helpless Palestinians from being slaughtered. Who could blame them?
So, is anyone that doesn’t want America’s corporations running their government a “terrist” these days?
That’s about what it amounts to right?
re 17: Only a Wingnut would consider those thin allegations “evidence”.
You’re just a YELLOWCAKE WINGNUT with aluminum tubes on top.
Do you take pride in being duped?
If you think about it, or, if you think about what someone told you to think about it (which is the more likely scenerio, says I), you may realize that Halliburton and the U.S. Military have been spectacularly successful at two things in the Middle East: 1) Building permanent military bases in Iraq and; 2) Creating chaos in the Middle East by turning it into what’s shaping up to be a huge civil war between Sunni and Shia.
That’s what they are doing. You are just told what to believe and you dutifully perform that task.
IT’S SO SIMPLE WHEN YOU REALLY THINK ABOUT IT. AMERICAN CONSUMERS SHOVEL LOADS OF DOLLARS TO OPEC COUNTRIES FOR OIL AND TO JAPAN AND CHINA FOR CHEAP CONSUMER GOODS. WE HAVE VERY LITTLE THEY WANT TO BUY. BUSH/CHENEY AND THEIR FRIENDS LIKE HALLIBURTON, ETC WANT SOME OF THAT LOOT.
SO START UP A TRUMPED UP WAR USING THE BEST EXCUSE THE LAZY AMERICAN WILL BUY – EXTREME FEAR OF SWARTHY GUYS. SO BORROW BILLIONS OF DOLLARS FROM CHINA AND JAPAN THAT THEY HAVE NO BETTER USE FOR TO FUND THE WAR.
THE LAZY CONFUSED AMERICAN GETS FURTHER INTO DEBT AND THE RICH CORPORATISTS GET EVEN RICHER!!
Sally Clark?
Right Stuff:
Are the Iranians helping the Iraqi Shiite militias? Almost certainly. Probably some official support (non-lethal supplies) and some unofficial (weapons) that is being “overlooked” by the Iranian government.
Very similar things can be said for the Pakistanis with regards to groups in Afghanistan.
Does any of this justify attacking Iran (or Pakistan, for that matter)? No.
We’ve been supporting anti-government forces in Iran on and off for many years. It was an open secret that we were supporting the insurgents in Afghanistan against the Soviets.
Would Russia have been justified in attacking us for supporting the Afghan rebels? Would Iran be justified in attacking us for supplying their rebels?
And on a purely practical point, our military is stretched to the limit. For us to take on another large military would require calling up our last reserves, and even with that, it would be a war of destruction, as we don’t have the troops to actually take the territory.
Bottom line. We could probably bomb Iran back to the stone age, but we couldn’t hold the country, and in five years they’d be as strong as ever, and would have the support of the entire Muslim world. We would kill a lot of innocent people and accomplish nothing except to further unite a billion Muslims against us.
Luminaries?
wow, with Darcy “not an executive’, you must have had a real rip snorting good time