MSNBC's Hubris - About the LIES that got us into Iraq

Lawrence O'Donnell's interview with Dr. Condi Rice...make your own judgements

hat tip-3CHICSPOLITICO:

Things got a little testy in the interview. Judge for yourself.



The Last Word with Rachel Maddow Reacting to the Rice interview

Former Secretary of State Condi Rice and Aretha Franklin teamed up for charity.

Former Secretary of State Condi Rice and Aretha Franklin teamed up for charity.

Condoleezza Rice is no stranger to the whims of royalty. So when the Queen of Soul herself, Aretha Franklin, decided the two should get together to play a song or two for charity, it was decreed.

The former U.S. secretary of state and Franklin took the stage Tuesday evening at Philadelphia’s Mann Music Center in a rare duet for Rice, the classically trained pianist, and Franklin, the divalicious voice of a generation. Their aim was to raise money for inner-city youth of Philadelphia and Detroit and awareness for music and the arts.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Deal would have U.S. troops out of Iraq by 2012

From CNN.com:

Deal would have U.S. troops out of Iraq by 2012

BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- U.S. and Iraqi negotiators have reached agreement on a proposal calling for a complete U.S. military withdrawal from Iraq by 2012, the head Iraqi negotiator said Friday.


The deal still must be approved by both sides, said Mohammed al-Haj Hamoud, deputy foreign minister and head of the Iraqi negotiating team.

Hamoud said Thursday's meeting between U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki was helpful in reaching the tentative agreement.

Hamoud said the proposal also says the last date for the presence of U.S. troops in cities and towns will be June 30, 2009.

There are clear caveats, however. Watch for details on the plan »

If the Iraqi government sees the necessity of keeping the American forces in cities and towns or in Iraq past December 31, 2011, it would ask that the Americans stay. A joint Iraqi-U.S. committee would help define the duration and number of forces that would be needed and regularly assess the security situation on the ground.

Regarding the issue of troop immunity from Iraqi law and American authority over military operations, American authorities would have jurisdiction over their troops. Hamoud also said that in case of a major crime such as murder, the case would be reviewed by a U.S.-Iraqi joint committee.

Rest of article at link above.

------------------------------------------------
Now, here are some questions:

1. Wasn't this the crux of BARACK OBAMA'S argument about Iraq?
2. Why isn't this leading every other news story for the day?
3. Does this mean that John McCain is the last person who wants to keep up the Iraq War?

All Senator Straight Talk has is ' Foreign Policy'. What can be said when his own President undercuts the only poll strength he has?

That's why you need to keep your eye on this mess with Russia, which is nothing but another scam on Dubya's part to help McCain. They know Iraq is played out, so here comes another ' crisis'.

Run, Condi, Run?

Eugene Robinson writes in his latest column:

Oh, please; oh, please; oh, please. I know it's undignified to beg, but please let John McCain pick Condoleezza Rice as his running mate.

I know that this campaign has already bestowed an embarrassment of riches upon those of us who are paid to watch and listen. With its vivid, compelling characters, its abrupt reversals of fortune and its ever-rising stakes, the presidential contest has been the best reality show on television. It seems almost greedy to hope for yet another infusion of star power so late in the season.

And, yes, I'm aware that it probably won't happen. Then again, this campaign season hasn't shown much regard for probability. A couple of years ago, what sort of odds could you have gotten from Vegas bookmakers on the scenario that Barack Obama, the first viable black presidential contender, would be leading Hillary Clinton, the first viable female candidate, for the chance to run against McCain, long considered a pariah by his party's activist base?

Rice's name was tossed into the mix by Dan Senor, a Republican "strategist" who is best known for his "What, me worry?" performances a few years ago as spokesman for the U.S. civilian authority in Iraq. On ABC's "This Week," Senor noted that Rice recently appeared at one of right-wing activist Grover Norquist's regular meetings for the conservative "chattering class" -- an unusual foray into domestic politics for a sitting secretary of state -- and claimed that Rice "has been actively, actually in recent weeks, campaigning" for a spot on the ticket with McCain.

The notion drew laughter from Sean McCormack, Rice's spokesman, who told reporters that if Rice is indeed campaigning for the vice presidential nomination, "she's the last one to know about it." Then he dusted off the formulation that Rice always uses to deflect questions about her possible political ambitions, which is to ask "how many ways" she can say no.

The thing is, though, that -- understandably -- Rice doesn't go all the way and make an airtight, Shermanlike statement. Why should she foreclose her options? Given the craziness of this political year, who knows what might happen? And looking down the road, the quiet groves of academe -- where she vows to retire, like a latter-day Cincinnatus -- may prove less than stimulating after the heady experience of running the world. I've always thought it more likely that she would eventually be tempted to run for the Senate from California, rather than jump right into presidential politics.
................................................

She would, however, provide three things that McCain could really use: relative youth, undeniable pizzazz and photogenic diversity. The Republican Party is in danger of presenting a ticket that looks like a tintype portrait of yesterday -- while the Democratic Party shows the nation a YouTube video of tomorrow.

........................................................................

So I won't hold my breath. But I can't help but imagine having another controversial, larger-than-life character wade into the fray, one who not only raises McCain's big wager on Iraq but also takes us further into terra incognita on issues of race and gender. Whatever you think of Condoleezza Rice, she's a formidable woman with more qualifications than almost any other vice presidential choice I can think of. We'd get to watch another brilliant political novice try to take the country by storm. And, as a bonus, there would be the piano recitals, the early-morning workouts, the skybox appearances at football games, the impromptu lectures on Russian history (in Russian), the daily fashion show. . . . Pleeeeeease?

Dr. Rice as McCain's running mate? I just can't see it for many reasons. If this is a 'change' election, the last person you want as your running mate is someone chained to both 9/11 and The Iraq War. Plus, I can't see the 'bases' going for it: not the evangelicals, not the money people, not the tough-on-defense crowd. Plus, a single woman as Vice-President? Don't think so. But, it is interesting throwing this around with my fellow political junkies.

So, tell me Mirror On America readers...

Thoughts on Condi Rice's Prospects as McCain's running mate?

Condoleeza Rice - Conflicting and Confusing for me

I had read this article because of a link I found somewhere. A reader brought it up again, and though I've read it a couple of times, it just brings up the confusing feelings Condi Rice brings up in me.

Here's the article in the Washington Times:

Rice hits U.S. 'birth defect'
By Nicholas Kralev
March 28, 2008

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said yesterday that the United States still has trouble dealing with race because of a national "birth defect" that denied black Americans the opportunities given to whites at the country's very founding.



"Black Americans were a founding population," she said. "Africans and Europeans came here and founded this country together — Europeans by choice and Africans in chains. That's not a very pretty reality of our founding."



As a result, Miss Rice told editors and reporters at The Washington Times, "descendants of slaves did not get much of a head start, and I think you continue to see some of the effects of that."



"That particular birth defect makes it hard for us to confront it, hard for us to talk about it, and hard for us to realize that it has continuing relevance for who we are today," she said.

Rest of the article is at the link above.

There's something accurate and almost elegant in calling Black folk ' A Founding Population'. It's very true. For all the talk about the ' Founding Fathers', we did found this country as much as anyone.

Dr. Rice confuses me, because, every once in awhile, she lets stuff 'slip' to let folks know she's not clueless in the least. She's just one big shade of gray.

Bush & Co. Pushing For War With Iran

Bush Administration Is Determined to Launch a War With Iran Before Term Ends.

The Effort Appears to Be Led By Neo-Con Dick Cheney. A Man Who Ironically Never Served (avoided service) his Country in Battle is Itching to Send Americas Sons and Daughters To War.


From the Guardian

The balance in the internal White House debate over Iran has shifted back in favour of military action before President George Bush leaves office in 18 months, the Guardian has learned.

The shift follows an internal review involving the White House, the Pentagon and the state department over the last month. Although the Bush administration is in deep trouble over Iraq, it remains focused on Iran. A well-placed source in Washington said: "Bush is not going to leave office with Iran still in limbo."

The White House claims that Iran, whose influence in the Middle East has increased significantly over the last six years, is intent on building a nuclear weapon and is arming insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The recent PR blitz by Bush & Co. to blame Iran for the disaster in Iraq has been part of a campaign to prepare the American Public for a new war. This report appears to confirm that this is the policy of the Bush administration, even amid signs that negotiations are having some positive impact.

More from the report….

The Washington source said Mr Bush and Mr Cheney did not trust any potential successors in the White House, Republican or Democratic, to deal with Iran decisively. They are also reluctant for Israel to carry out any strikes because the US would get the blame in the region anyway.

"The red line is not in Iran. The red line is in Israel. If Israel is adamant it will attack, the US will have to take decisive action," Mr Cronin said. "The choices are: tell Israel no, let Israel do the job, or do the job yourself."

Once again, the White House is putting the interests of Israel above the interests of the American people. One of the driving forces behind the foolish U.S. approach towards Iran appears to be the security of Israel. But are Americans willing to create a disaster with a magnitude several times worse than Iraq just to calm the nerves of Israelis? I don’t think the American public would vote for this if they actually lived in a Democracy and had a choice.

No decision on military action is expected until next year. In the meantime, the state department will continue to pursue the diplomatic route.

I am not so sure that I would buy into the idea that Bush & Co. would start another war in 2008. I have always thought that if we reached 2008 without anything happening that a war with Iran would be less likely during Bush’s term. Unless Iran does something dramatic to provoke a U.S. attack, then I don’t see this changing. It would do more harm than good for the Republicans. Although Bush and Cheney no longer have anything to work for in terms of a legacy and are not running for re-election, I can’t imagine that they would be willing to do such extreme harm to their Party in an election year.

Unless Americans see an imminent threat from Iran, I don’t believe that they would support another war. But then again, Bush & Co. are experts at fooling the American people to support just about anything. If the neo-cons used their influence over Americas corporate media, they would not have much trouble selling a new war, even in the aftermath of the war in Iraq. Telling the American public that Iran is responsible for the disaster in Iraq is a good place for the brainwashing to start…. It remains to be seen if the American public will swallow this PR campaign hook, line and sinker like they did leading up to the war in Iraq.

(Source)

_____________________________

Democracy Now has more on this story.

______________________________

Recent Postings on This Issue

Lieberman Calls For Attack On Iran

Mirror On America Iran Page