“We learn from history that we learn nothing from history.”
- George Bernard Shaw

The night of March 19, 2003, U.S. forces received reports that Iraqi despot Saddam Hussein was visiting his sons, Uday and Qusay Hussein, at Dora Farms, within the al-Dora farming community on the outskirts of Baghdad.

Four satellite-guided, 2,000-pound “Bunker Busters” and 40 missiles were dropped on the compound. Saddam was not present, nor were any Iraqi leadership or Hussein family members. The attack resulted in the deaths of 15 civilians.

That evening marked the beginning of a military invasion of Iraq which President George W. Bush said was “to disarm Iraq of weapons of mass destruction, to end Saddam Hussein’s support for terrorism, and to free the Iraqi people.”

Five years later, there is no doubt that the Iraq misadventure was the work of contemptible and clueless men, and that the end is nowhere in sight.

Seemingly willful ignorance of Iraqi and Islamic realities on the part of Bush, Dick Cheney, and Donald Rumsfeld were aided by Congress, which did not heed the undeniable fact that presidents can lie (up to 935 times, in fact).

Of course, all of us bear some measure of complicity.

An overwhelming number of voters dislike preemptive wars, and now want the troops out of Iraq, but don’t know what the best exit strategy would be.

The result is apathy, which is a critical step in allowing a nation to have the wool pulled over its collective eyes, year after year, by manipulative hacks.

How many more deaths and trillions of dollars wasted in Iraq will it take for the public to say enough? With such opposition, how does this go on?

Most Iraq-Vietnam comparisons are too sweeping and broad, but here in 2008, the state of political discourse has devolved to early 1970s levels.

Upon suspending his White House bid, Mitt Romney made an unbelievable statement that he was dropping out GOP race to benefit us all:

“In this time of war, I simply cannot let my campaign be a part of aiding a surrender to terror,” the former Massachusetts Governor said.

This crap is what we’ve boiled down to. Keep fighting a meaningless war waged on hubris and false pretenses or else … you’re a terrorist!

Putting a stop to such bastardized attitudes will be an uphill climb, but unless we wish to resign ourselves to 100 years more of the same, it is our duty.

We can start by electing Barack Obama President of the United States, but we must also do more to express our dissatisfaction with the war on local levels.

Elected officials in all capacities need to know, in no uncertain terms, that we want this unmitigated disaster over with. The sooner the occupation ends, the sooner we can move forward and repair this country, both domestically and abroad.

When George W. Bush chose his running mate in 2000, he got exactly the kind of partner he wanted.

But nowadays, Time notes, he faces the very problem he tried to avoid.

Bush stumped just about everyone with the selection of Dick Cheney, safe and solid a pick as it was.

W didn’t want any trouble. He didn’t want a V.P. who hogged the spotlight, a sparring partner on policy, or a candidate who’d check out after five years and run for President himself.

Just the same, Cheney has become the Bush Administration’s enemy within.

This is a man whose single-minded pursuit of ideological goals, dwindling political instincts and penchant for secrecy produced an independent operation inside the White House that has done irreparable harm.

On a hypothetical political balance sheet, Dick Cheney might very well be Democrats’ most valuable asset - and reversing that trend is next to impossible.

Cheney recently made his weekly pilgrimage to the U.S. Senate, where he had lunch on March 6 with Republicans. He took his usual seat on one side of the stately Mike Mansfield Room and watched the proceedings quietly.

Various Senators asked about his health, following a blood-clot scare the day before. Others quietly lent support in the wake of the Scooter Libby verdict earlier that day (he was found guilty on four counts).

But for all the shows of support, more Republicans have acknowledged each week privately a sentiment building across Washington when it comes to the Vice President: his time has passed.

But what a time it was for the Dick.

Back in the days of George Bush’s first term, Cheney aides loved to regale journalists with tidbits about the scope of the Vice President’s influence and the intensity of his commitment to protecting the U.S. from terrorism.

He was so driven and hands-on, aides say, that he and Libby would routinely ask to see raw intelligence rather than the processed analysis put together by the CIA, FBI and other agencies.

He may have come across as deferential in public, but friends and advisers in the fall of 2002 described Cheney as nothing less than the engine of the Administration. No question who the sole decider really was.

“There’s no way in which he is not driving the train on this,” said one, referring to Cheney’s role in pushing George Bush and the Administration inexorably toward a war in Iraq.

Continue reading this article in Time …

Vice President Dick Cheney dismissed suggestions that blunders may have hurt the Bush administration’s credibility on Iraq.

In an interview with CNN’s Wolf Blitzer, conducted a day after the State of the Union address, Cheney was asked to respond to some Republicans who “are now seriously questioning your credibility, because of the blunders and the failures.”

To that, the V.P. answered:

“Wolf, Wolf, I simply don’t accept the premise of your question. I just think it’s hogwash.”

Cheney said the Bush administration is committed to moving ahead with its plan to send additional troops to Baghdad, even if Congress passes its non-binding resolution in opposition.

“It won’t stop us,” he said, echoing Bush’s remarks that the approval of Congress is not needed. “And it would be, I think, detrimental from the standpoint of the troops.”

If the U.S. were to pull out of Iraq, Cheney believes the U.S. would simply validate the terrorists’ strategy. He says Americans will stay to complete the task, and show we have the stomach for the fight. Not doing that would be the biggest threat, he says.

“The notion that somehow the effort hasn’t been worth it, or that we shouldn’t go ahead and complete the task, is just dead wrong,” he added.

Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) said Thursday that Cheney’s Iraq war policy is out of touch with reality.

“To have Vice President Cheney suggest we have had a series of enormous successes in Iraq is delusional. I don’t understand how he can continue to say those things when the president calls them a slow failure,” Durbin said.

Cheney said the ouster of Saddam Hussein was the right move.

“The world is much safer today because of it,” he said. “There have been three national elections in Iraq. There’s a democracy established there, a constitution, a new democratically elected government. Saddam has been brought to justice and executed, his sons are dead, his government is gone. And the world is better off for it.”

Continue reading this article …

December is usually a quiet time for politics.

Congress adjourns, the President is forced to eat crow (in the case of this year, at least), and very little of consequence happens. But this year is ending with a blast of news, starting with the health of Sen. Tim Johnson and the impending trial of I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby.

There’s also the withdrawals of would-be Presidential Candidates Bill Frist and Evan Bayh before the calendar even hits 2007, and rampant speculation that Barack Obama might be ready to run. John McCain and Hillary Clinton (pictured) are expected to officially launch their candidacies next week… as are many, many others.

That said, let’s take a look back at five defining moments of 2006, a year marked by a disastrous Iraq war… not to mention pages, hunting accidents, racial slurs and the (im)potency of blogging. It’s no surprise, considering this year’s mid-term election results, that most of these events did not end well for Republicans.

5. Paging Mark Foley!
First, Tom DeLay had to step down. That scandal was bad enough for the GOP, but even they couldn’t have foreseen a member of Congress getting caught seducing young male assistants, or “pages” via lewd text messages.

Florida Congressman Mark Foley immediately resigned, blamed his drinking problem and - what else - a predatory priest who molested him when he was younger. That didn’t the GOP from having to explain why they missed the warning signs about the six-term congressman’s odd behavior.

Foley lost the GOP another safe seat in Florida and was probably the straw that broke the camel’s back as far as the public’s discontent with the GOP leadership. What began with the destruction of Jack Abramoff’s vile empire ended with raunchy text messages to underage boys. Democrats picked up more than 30 seats in the House of Representatives.

4. Welcome to America, Macaca
Outgoing U.S. Senator George Allen of Virginia (below) was a favorite among right-wingers who praised his party-line stances and easy-going charm. He was a lock for re-election and a rumored contender for the presidency.

It all unraveled when a young Indian- American man, working for his opponent, Democrat Jim Webb, heckled him during a campaign appearance.

Calling him by the name “macaca,” Allen welcomed him to America. On tape.

If anything was more embarrassing than his use of antiquated racial slurs, it was the puzzling, seemingly insincere denials Allen made about his remarks - claiming, among other things, that he was only referring to the young man’s hair - as well as his past use of racial slurs.

Things went from bad to worse, as he tumbled in the court of public opinion and lost a squeaker to Webb in November. Stunning.

3. The Rise and Fall of the Blog; The Fall and Rise of Joe Lieberman
Here today, gone tomorrow. Just three months after claiming their biggest victory, the left wing blogosphere suffered its biggest defeat - to the same candidate.

Bloggers heralded political newcomer Ned Lamont, who edged out three-term incumbent Sen. Joe Lieberman in the Connecticut Democratic Senate primary. Painting Lieberman as a GOP lackey and trumpeting the race as a referendum on the Iraq war, which the senator so steadfastly defends to this day, Lamont backers propelled their guy to narrow victory.

But then the summer ended.

Almost immediately after left-wing pundits and bloggers demonstrated (and flaunted) their great effectiveness in the primary, they were proving their limitations in the general election, where Lieberman ran under the banner of the Connecticut For Lieberman party after getting the requisite number of signatures.

Even the most adamant Lamont supporters who had torn Lieberman to shreds for months could not offer a good reason for voting for their candidate beyond his anti-war stance. When they tried to explain why people should vote for Lamont and not just against Lieberman, it sounded forced.

Appealing broadly to independents and Republicans, Lieberman stuck to his guns, overcame his challenger and finished the year with a 10-point win, emerging as a more powerful political force than he was before losing the primary. Under the current Senate configuration, in which Democrats hold the slimmest of majorities, his power has never been greater.

2. Cheney’s Got a Gun (Sung to the Tune of the Classic Aerosmith Hit)
The sitting vice president has always done things his way. He’s not one for playing by the rules, or for explaining or justifying his positions to the media. But 2006 showed us that when you shoot another human being, you’ve got to speak up about it.

In February, Dick Cheney accidentally shot hunting pal Harry Whittington. What’s worse is that he didn’t get the word out for nearly a day. When he did, it was to the tiny Texas paper serving the town where the pair were hunting. Initially, the owner of the hunting ranch tried to downplay the mishap. Some Cheney backers tried to blame the victim, until the hunters came forward and confessed that it was indeed Cheney’s fault.

In an unprecedented move, White House spokesman Scott McClellan implicitly criticized Cheney’s handling of the incident, a symbol of Dick’s disdain for the obligations of his public role.

Never explain. Never apologize. That is how one senior White House official described Cheney’s PR policy. Even when shooting a man.

1. Rums Felled
Kudos to the newspaper(s) who thought up that one in the aftermath of the long overdue firing of Donald Rumsfeld as Secretary of Defense. George W. Bush spent so much time defending the embattled secretary that it almost came as a surprise when the president announced that he was ousting him because the Iraq War needed a new set of eyes.

It was a decisive move that could have signaled a course correction from Bush had he not sworn a week earlier, before the mid-term elections, that Rumsfeld was safe in his job. After the firing, a memo leaked, written by Rumsfeld just days before, that showed he was evaluating a wide range of alternative policies, including some that Democrats put forth.

The memo bears the secretary’s personal hallmarks of bureaucratic vengeance and ass-covering. Rumsfeld or someone serving his interests may have leaked it in an effort to show that he wasn’t blind to the reality in 2006 Iraq. But even George W. Bush may have been wise to this one.