If you didn’t get it, the title is a play on the word troop, because the War in Iraq may be the defining factor for the Democrats in 2006.
I just read a the Democrats Push for Cuts Within Months article at NYTimes.com. The basics say that the Democrats, as I have predicted, are planning to decrease the number of troops in Iraq over the next 4 to 6 months. Why? You say. Especially considering the current civil war situation that has erupted into a full mess in the country? Well, as many have said, the Democrats believe that it sends a message to the Iraqi people. That message being: “We want to help, but we’re not God. We don’t plan on babysitting you for the rest of your duration while you have petty, disgusting, disturbing arguments over things that should not matter.”
What? Oh, alright, that was my take on it. Here’s an actual statement:
The point of this is to signal to the Iraqis that the open-ended commitment is over and that they are going to have to solve their own problems.
- Senator Carl Levin in Democrats Push for Cuts Within Months
Basically, what I said, with a bit more sugar-coating.
What does this mean for us, the American people who are blindly–it seems because many people do not seem current with the numbers–financing a war that costs over a billion dollars a day to fight? Well, taxes of course: for the extra-rich. I think that’s a good trade off, considering it was their interests, in my opinion, that led to Bush being stupid enough to take us into the war without getting UN approval.
Surprisingly, I’ve veered off the topic that I wanted to discuss….
The first point from the article that I had decided to discuss is the President and his “people” saying that they are willing to discuss “‘fresh ideas’ and a ‘fresh look.’” My first thoughts: Oh, is that so Mr. President. What’s so different though from 3 weeks ago? What is so different from the television interview you gave where you said that you were confident in your strategy, and confident in your ability, with the help of your advisers, to make the right decisions concerning Iraq.
Is it, perhaps, because the Republicans lost so soundly during last weeks elections? Is it because they lost control of both the House and the Senate, lost control of many state seats, and lost control of their power in the political system. Is it because your Defense Secretary (Donald Rumsfeld) finally got a clue, that he couldn’t modernize the Army (which may not be a bad thing), that he couldn’t get out of Iraq effectively, that he could fight with the Generals, the American people, and the Democrats without getting singed pretty badly? Or maybe, you’ve had a change of heart because the American people have shown you their frustrations?
Who knows? However, if I were to be honest, and I try to be as honest as possible, this doesn’t make me the happiest person on Earth. The issue that I have with this extends to the new role of the Democrats. If Iraq gets worse, the Republicans have a free pass to blame it on the Democratic leadership, despite the fact that they were the initial impetus towards the disaster in Iraq. The strong.
There is also the fact that what the President says, and what actually happens are not usually congruent. As it states in the article, there’s just no way he would sign on to pulling out a large number of troops any time soon. He is still under the–false notion–that bigger = best. More troops = win, even if it takes 10 years, we shall win. :rolleyes:
I don’t even want to comment on Senator McCain’s claim. All I will say is, there has to be a limit. Throwing our troops into the middle of a civil war is clearly not working. There has to be something better. And, I’ll wait for the end of the current talks before I try to say what it is.
On another issue
I have been “fighting” with the owner of the lemon-drop directory over what a fanlisting is. It shocks me that they claim that a fanlisting is only a fanlisting if it is approved by thefanlistings.org.
However, even thefanlistings.org disagrees with their decision:
A fanlisting is simply an online listing of fans of a subject, such as a TV show, actor, or musician, that is created by an individual and open for fans from around the world to join. There are no costs, and the only requirements to join a fanlisting are your name and country. Fanlistings do not have to be large sites (although some are) – they are just a place where you can have your name listed along with other fans of the same subject. TheFanlistings.org is the original (but not only) web directory for fanlistings, dedicated to uniting the fans.
As it plainly states on it’s main page, it is simply a–very large–directory of fanlistings.
As I have plainly stated in my correspondence with the admins at lemon-drop (edited to keep some things private):
- I can claim my listing is “official” if it was approved by the subject of the listing. TheFanlistings.org official “stamp” really doesn’t mean anything other than it’s been approved by TheFanlistings.org.
- Even if I am waiting for approval by TheFanlistings.org , it is illegitimate to base decisions on a website that does not have legal rights to offer a seal of approval, whilst ignoring the actual seal of approval by the website owner.
- The approval or disapproval of a listing from TheFanlistings.org does not a fanlisting make because, once again, it is “simply an online listing of fans of a subject.”
I have actually spoken with some “stars” who are on television. If I asked them to make a fanlisting for them, but never consulted with TheFanlistings.org–because even I never heard of the site before last year–would that mean that my listing/website is illegitimate?
Edit: Legalities and Formalities @ TheFanlistings.org.
Who do I think is an amazing web designer? Becca @ Dasbecca. I love bright and bold, and she certainly has it.