Quote of Day

"Just an early, failing attempt to smear Hillary for 2016. Because the GOP has no relevant policies for our times, just politics."

Andrew Sullivan, on Republicans releasing the bogus Benghazi emails to the media.

Andrew Sullivan Joins the Daily Beast

Bringing Andrew Sullivan onto The Daily Beast is a brilliant move for Tina Brown. KenInNY at Down With Tyranny thinks Sullivan is a horrible move. From a business perspective: Sullivan will bring in a huge online readership. KenInNY is in the camp of progressives still pissed at Sullivan's neocon blogging. Sullivan has admitted on several occasions that he was wrong. Below is a video of Sullivan telling Robert Wright he is wrong.



Very few bloggers and media figures admit they are wrong. Sullivan owns up big time to his mistakes on Iraq.

Quote of the Day

"And if the GOP block the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell, despite the careful Pentagon study, a slow roll-out of its provisions, and support from the Joint Chiefs chairman and the defense secretary, then we will find out something else. The contempt the GOP has for gay lives, gay citizens and those who wear the uniform of the United States is as deep and as vile as we ever thought it was. Yes, I'm angry at this general nihilist partisanship, and wounded once more by these people's profound, obsessive homophobia. But I cannot, alas, say I am surprised. The degeneracy has been building for a long time. It is just the stench of it right now that overwhelms the nostrils."

Andrew Sullivan, on the Republican Party's homophobia.

Separated at Birth

PourMeCoffee notices Andrew Sullivan's uncanny resemblance to a famous celebrity.

Power Line Tea Bagging Comedy

I wrote previously how the tea bagging protests received underwhelming numbers. The astroturf movement was created by Fox News, Newt Gingrich, Dick Armey and corporate friends of the GOP. An April 2 Fox News poll found only 32 percent willing to attend tea parties. Conservatives should have learned from the Harriet Miers nomination. All credibility is gone once a cause becomes a national punchline.

Power Line blogger Scott Johnson vents his anger by unleashing a comedy masterpiece. Money quote.

The star hosts of CNN and MSNBC news shows have notoriously derided the tea party demonstrations around the country with reference to the practice of teabagging (which I had never heard of before they brought it up).

It gets even better. Johnson accuses Rachel Maddow of sexually practicing tea bagging. Johnson doesn't explain how Maddow would perform the deed with her lesbian partner. Has Johnson heard about lesbians? Seriously.

There is something funny going on here, if not exactly where Cooper, Maddow and Sullivan find it. Cooper is widely reputed to be homosexual. Maddow and Sullivan are of course public homosexuals. It is funny in an ironic sort of way that these folks choose to disparage the tea party protesters from somewhere inside the homosexual subculture. Why not just call the protesters girly boys and let everyone in on the joke? Or would that spoil the fun?

Johnson thinks only homosexuals engage in tea bagging. That is silly. I like to see Johnson's reaction when he finds out what ass to mouth means. His parents obviously never had that talk with him about sex. Poor boy.

I find it interested the Power Line bloggers don't know what tea bagging means. These bloggers used to have the online names Hind Rocket and Big Trunk. This is the last conservative blog that should be defending the Right against the Left's use of the words tea bagging.

Vermont!

Vermont is official the fourth state to make gay marriage legal. The Vermont legislature overrode Republican Governor Jim Douglas' veto. The Vermont House of Representatives voted 100-49 in favor of legalizing gay marriage. The State Senate voted 23-5.

Democrats will finally grow a pair, as gay marriage becomes politically more mainstream Democrats will finally grow a pair.

The outcome in the House of Representatives, 100 to 49, was not clear until the final moments of a long roll call, when Rep. Jeff Young, a Democrat who voted against the bill last week, reversed his position. After the final tally, cheers erupted in both legislative chambers of the State House and in the hallways outside, and several lawmakers on both sides of the debate looked stunned.

Conservative reaction has been either silence or anger.

Silence: Conservative blogger Glenn Reynolds has repeatly stated he supports gay marriage. Gay blogger Andrew Sullivan has accused Reynolds of catering to his conservative readership. Reynolds has not blogged one post about the Vermont story on this slow news day. Since the story broke Reynolds has posted about a driveable airplane and a photo taken by Michael Yon. Stop the presses!

Anger: Pam Spaulding has documented the Freeper response to Vermont making gay marriage legal. This was written by the charming Manc:

for the record to you homo's I ma not old nor am I religious, I just think you are mentally perverted and sick and guess what so does most folk so stop trying to say it is only religious types against you

Another post by Manc:

notice now one state has voted FOR homo’s to be married.

that is because the majority of folk do not think it is normal for a man to poke another man up the arse or a woman wear a strap on pretending to be a woman.

not normal and not natural, so for those homo’s reading this.

you are certainly not accepted nor are you normal, you can pretend you are married but you are far from the truth.

If what you do is your business then stop the freak parades, stop telling us that you like to poke men up the arse or wear a strap on, stop telling us how you have special rights when you clearly do not according to the constitution

A woman needs a strap-on penis to pretend she is woman? That is insane logic.

This question by Kabumpo answers itself.

Vermont....what happened to the farmers and generations of poor rural people? Are they ultra liberal now? I don’t get it

Yep. People getting fucked over for generations by trickle down economics became more progressive. These Vermont residents are less obsessed with gay marriage and conservative message boards. (Thank God.) They want to get out of poverty. The GOP hasn't done anything to help them. I get it. Kabumpo doesn't and never will.

Update: The gay bashing Michelle Malkin has no posts on the Vermont story.

Quote of the Day

"The Bible is now the first requirement for a Republican leader? And where, pray, are Jesus' words on RU-486 or gay couples?"

Andrew Sullivan, in response to Kenneth Blackwell's attack on Michael Steele.

Collins-Nelson Cloture Vote

The Senate voted 61-36 for cloture on the Susan Collins-Ben Nelson compromise. Collins and Arlen Specter were the only Republicans to break ranks. The revamped stimulus bill will go for a floor vote.

Policy wise: Obama is going to have to ask for another stimulus package. The House version was too small. It is simply too small to make a significant impact. The added tax cuts and stimulus spending will add to the deficit.

Politically: Obama has never shown an inclination to get in the mud. The Republicans got their tax cuts. Obama got a stimulus plan that will failed. Republicans are positioning themselves for the midterms. Republicans were never serious about returning Obama's efforts at bipartisanship.

Obama should had the bill sent back to the House. Strip the tax cuts and put in the infrastucture spending. Let House and Senate Republicans vote against it. Newt Gingrich tried to force Bill Clinton's hand by shutting down the government. Clinton refused further Medicare, Medicaid and education cuts. Gingrich lost. Badly. The next year, Clinton was elected for his second term.

Maybe Obama wants the Republicans to attack him. The latest CNN poll show with a 76 percent approval rating. A key number is 39 percent say Republicans are cooperating with Obama.

Update: Andrew Sullivan calls the political battle in Obama's favor.

Should Obama become a partisan attack-dog in response? Check out the Gallup poll here. If Krugman, Yglesias and Brown are right, these polls are very wrong. Obama is winning the stimulus fight - because he seems more connected to the actual crisis people are confronting than his rivals in both parties, and more reasonable in finding a way forward.

Quote of the Day

"They really should just go pull a Cheney. This is governance as talk radio."

Andrew Sullivan, on Minority Whip Jon Kyl's criticism of the stimulus package.

The End of Hillary Mania

Hillary Clinton releases her delegates. Her Barack Obama endorsement, to her delegates, is less than inspiring.

"I have spoken to many of you and you have questions about what to do. You want to vote according to what is in your heart. I am not going to tell you what to do. You have come from different places and made a long journey.

"I cast my vote for Senator Obama this morning."

Andrew Sullivan says Hillary "did the minimum." That isn't enough. Ezra Klein laid out the case for what is wrong with the convention.

Say what you will about the 2004 Convention, it had a theme. Conversely, the first night of the 2008 Democratic Convention had Michelle Obama bring the warm and fuzzies, Ted Kennedy calling forth tears and hankies, and Jim Leach speaking quietly and pedantically without any serious promotion from the Obama campaign. The second night of the 2004 Convention saw Barack Obama tearing apart the arena. In 2008, we had Mark Warner with a well-crafted speech that fell flat because it was an attack structure that refused to name the politician it was attacking. You had Hillary Cinton giving a powerful address, but it was an address that was broadly aimed at problems in the Democratic Party, not the problems with the Republican Party.

Barack Obama has an allergic reaction to negative campaigning. That is the worst thing to do against a McCain campaign run by Karl Rove accolades. The Democratic National Convention was a chance for Obama to come out with a bounce. Now the Obama campaign will play defense from attacks from the Republican National Convention. Obama learned nothing from the Clinton impeachment and Swift Boat attacks. David Kurtz explains that the Obama change campaign is resistant to change.

But I think its ambivalence about doing so is less a result of the Democrats' historical tendency to fritter away opportunities because of fear and trepidation, and more because the Obama campaign spent tens of millions over a year and a half to build Obama's sterling reputation and they are afraid of breaking it. It's different from what hobbled Dukakis and Kerry, but the outcome could be the same.

Lofty rhetoric and feel good messages don't win elections. Especially, when one's opponent is beating him to death with a sledgehammer.

Alan Keyes Speak: A Language No One Understands

Like eeveryone else: Andrew Sullivan wonders how the hell did Alan Keyes got in the recent Iowa debate? Sullivan points out this bizarre exchanfe Keyes had with the moderator.

“Ambassador, I’m going to ask you one more time. Have you personally been doing campaign events here in Iowa in the last few months?”

“I have had several campaign events here in Iowa, but I will not define those events as you do,” he said.

“In the last few months?”

“I don’t define those events as you do."

Keyes response reminds me of Bill Clinton asking for the definition of the word is.

Tas wondered if Keyes is even on the ballot in any state.

If Keyes wants to play, he's got a right to run, but to be elevated on the same stage with candidates who -- like'em or not -- have put actual effort into their campaigns is a travesty. Before Keyes debate, somebody should have asked "Where's his organization? Supporters? Donaters? Hell, does he have a campaign office?"

The fact that the American Enterprise Institute let Keyes and John Bolton through the door says much about the think tank.

Update: I confused Barack Obama with Alan Keyes in a sentence. I will make sure that never happens again.

To answer Tas's question: Keyes and Bolton both have been members of AEI. I doubt AEI got Keyes into the debate.

Quote of the Day

"What Christian values are involved in judging the constitution, one wonders? I had no idea that the Gospels actually had guidance on judicial philosophy."

Andrew Sullivan, on an Iowa voter questioning if Rudy Giuliani or Mitt Romney would appoint judges with "Christian values."

The Torture Presidency

Andrew Sullivan has a must read post on Charlie Savage's book "Takeover: The Return of the Imperial Presidency." The Bush administration approved the torture of Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libbi. He confessed information that Al Qaeda was attempting to acquire weapons of mass destruction.

"Al Qaeda continues to have a deep interest in acquiring weapons of mass destruction," Colin Powell told the Untied Nations. "I can trace the story of a sernior terrorist operative telling how Iraq provided training in these weapons to al Qaeda. Fortunately, this operative is now detained and he has told his story."

The information was tortured out of Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libbi was bogus. He was tortured by means of waterboarding and hypothermia. He told his interrogators what they wanted to hear for one simple reason. So they would stop. Former Vietnam POW and Senator John McCain wrote, "I gave them the names of the Green Bay Packers' offensive line, knowing that providing them false information was sufficient to suspend the abuse."

The intelligence used to make the case for the Iraq war was gained through methods of torture. We know now that the WMD intelligence was fraudulent. The question is how much intelligence was achieved through torture? This is a question that will haunt America for a long time.

Sullivan is right. Not only is torture barbaric - it is is threat to America's national security. How many intelligence resources are sent chasing phony leads? How many lives could have been spared if Bush wasn't given the authorization to declare war on Iraq? Would Osama bin Laden be captured or killed if we didn't divert troops from Afhanistan. We may never know the answers to these questions. We do know that torture doesn't work.

No Prison Time For Libby

George W. Bush has commutted Lewis "Scooter" Libby's prison sentence. This is not a pardon. Libby will not serve his jail term. He still has a criminal record and will have to pay a $250,000 fine. Personally, I was starting to think that Bush would let Libby rot.

President Bush explains why he commutted Libby's sentence.

This case has generated significant commentary and debate. Critics of the investigation have argued that a special counsel should not have been appointed, nor should the investigation have been pursued after the Justice Department learned who leaked Ms. Plame’s name to columnist Robert Novak. Furthermore, the critics point out that neither Mr. Libby nor anyone else has been charged with violating the Intelligence Identities Protection Act or the Espionage Act, which were the original subjects of the investigation. Finally, critics say the punishment does not fit the crime: Mr. Libby was a first-time offender with years of exceptional public service and was handed a harsh sentence based in part on allegations never presented to the jury.

Others point out that a jury of citizens weighed all the evidence and listened to all the testimony and found Mr. Libby guilty of perjury and obstructing justice. They argue, correctly, that our entire system of justice relies on people telling the truth. And if a person does not tell the truth, particularly if he serves in government and holds the public trust, he must be held accountable. They say that had Mr. Libby only told the truth, he would have never been indicted in the first place.

Both critics and defenders of this investigation have made important points. I have made my own evaluation. In preparing for the decision I am announcing today, I have carefully weighed these arguments and the circumstances surrounding this case.
Mr. Libby was sentenced to thirty months of prison, two years of probation, and a $250,000 fine. In making the sentencing decision, the district court rejected the advice of the probation office, which recommended a lesser sentence and the consideration of factors that could have led to a sentence of home confinement or probation.

I respect the jury’s verdict. But I have concluded that the prison sentence given to Mr. Libby is excessive. Therefore, I am commuting the portion of Mr. Libby’s sentence that required him to spend thirty months in prison.

Short answer: Cheney bugged Bush to help Libby.

Power Line's John Hindraker calls Bush's decision "excellent." This is the same man who wrote this hysterical post in praise of Bush.

It must be very strange to be President Bush. A man of extraordinary vision and brilliance approaching to genius, he can't get anyone to notice. He is like a great painter or musician who is ahead of his time, and who unveils one masterpiece after another to a reception that, when not bored, is hostile.

Yes, Bush's plan to go to the Moon was something no previous POTUS ever thought of. Very visionary stuff.

Back on the planet Earth, Josh Marshall is amazed by Bush's rationale.

This is being treated in the press as splitting the difference, an elegant compromise. But it is the least justifiable approach. The President has decided that the sentencing guidelines and the opinion of the judge don't cut it.

The only basis for this decision is that Libby is the vice president's friend, the vice president rules the president and this was the minimum necessary to keep the man silent.

Andrew Sullivan comes down harder.

Perjury in defense of wartime deception is now okay, as far as the president is concerned. I'm surprised by Bush's chutzpah. I retained some minimal respect. No longer. We now know full well what his beliefs are: the law is for other people, not himself, his friends or his apparatchiks.

Isn't this the 874 time that Sullivan has finally lost all respect for Bush?

The saddest thing is we are bound to hear, in the next few weeks, Bush say he will punish anyone who broke the law in the attorney purge scandal. The President has poor approval ratings because he never does what he promises he will do. Be it Iraq or how he would maintain the surplus. He is like a ball player that talks a good game in the locker room, but plays like shit come game time.

Update: Bshort made a fantastic comment at Metafilter.

So Bush is aiming for a 1% approval rating, right?

A 1 percent approval rating is impossible. No matter what inexcusable deed Bush does; there will always be people who will support him because he keeps them safe from gay-loving Mexican terrorists.

Attorney Giuliani Would Suspend Habeas Corpus

Rudy Giuliani believes that the President of the United States has the authority to imprison Americans. without charge.

Crane says he was disappointed with Romney's answer to his question the other night. Crane asked if Romney believed the president should have the authority to arrest U.S. citizens with no review. Romney said he would want to hear the pros and cons from smart lawyers before he made up his mind. Crane said that he had asked Giuliani the same question a few weeks ago. The mayor said that he would want to use this authority infrequently.

Giuliani was a former U.S. Attorney. He knows fill well the Constitution does not grant the President that kind of power.

Article 1 Section 9

The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.

There is no war within the borders of the United States. The fact that Giuliani would consider suspended Habeas Corpus shows him the be a national security lightweight.

Andrew Sullivan points out Giuliani is advocating the kind of tyranny the Founding Fathers feared.

I never thought I'd read a post like this in America in my lifetime. Isn't this power of a sovereign to detain any citizen without charge at any time part of the reason this country was founded? And now it is simply assumed that this kind of monarchical power is fine. A country that grants its executive the power to do this is definitionally not a free country. It really is as simple as that.

The conservative pundits and bloggers this proves that Giuliani is a tough guy. Imagine is more important than effectively fighting terrorism. Which is why I love popping the Rudy tough guy myth.

Enhanced Interrogation Techniques Are Torture

Andrew Sullivan explains to Brit Hume and Mitt Romney that enhanced interrogation techniques is torture. Sullivan cites 18 U.S. Code § 2340.

"As used in this chapter— (1) 'torture' means an act committed by a person acting under the color of law specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering (other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions) upon another person within his custody or physical control;

(2) 'severe mental pain or suffering' means the prolonged mental harm caused by or resulting from— (A) the intentional infliction or threatened infliction of severe physical pain or suffering; (B) the administration or application, or threatened administration or application, of mind-altering substances or other procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or the personality; (C) the threat of imminent death; or (D) the threat that another person will imminently be subjected to death, severe physical pain or suffering, or the administration or application of mind-altering substances or other procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or personality; and

(3) 'United States' means the several States of the United States, the District of Columbia, and the commonwealths, territories, and possessions of the United States."

The bullshit wording by conservatives has changed. Rush Limbaugh described torture as a "fraternity prank." What Romney and Hume don't have the courage to discuss are the murders committed under the Bush administration's policy.

This is the body of Manadel al-Jamadi. He was tortured by the CIA.



Here we see Charles Graner gleefully posing over the body of al-Jamadi.



These are the enhanced interrogation techniques used on al-Jamadi.

Manadel Jamadi was an Iraqi prisoner who died in United States custody during interrogation at Abu Ghraib prison in November 2003. His name became known in 2004 when the Abu Ghraib scandal made news; his corpse, packed in ice, was the background for widely-reprinted pictures of grinning United States Army Specialists Sabrina Harman and Charles Graner, each offering a "thumbs-up" gesture. But the cause of his death was not generally known until February 17, 2005, when it was revealed that he had died after a fruitless half-hour interrogation, during which he was suspended from a barred window by his wrists, which were bound behind his back. News reports introduced the term "Palestinian hanging," a coinage attributed to the alleged frequent use of this technique by Israeli troops on Palestinian prisoners. Since at least the sixteenth century, this torture has been known as strappado.

Associated Press correspondent Seth Hettena reported that 30 minutes after beginning his questioning of the prisoner, the interrogator called for guards to reposition al-Jamadi, who he believed was "playing possum" as he slouched with his arms stretched behind him. But the guards found otherwise.

"After we found out he was dead, they were nervous," Specialist Dennis Stevanus said of the CIA interrogator and translator. "They didn't know what the hell to do." [1]

"They didn't know what the hell to do."

That sums up our interrogation policy.

General Petraeus's Letter Against Torture

General Petraeus is the highest serving military leader to come out against torture. His letter is the kind of common sense the Bush administration refuses to listen to.

HEADQUARTERS
Multi-National Force—Iraq
Baghdad, Iraq
APO AE 09342-1400

10 May 2007

Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines, and Coast Guardsmen serving in Multi-National Force—Iraq:

Our values and the laws governing warfare teach us to respect human dignity, maintain our integrity, and do what is right. Adherence to our values distinguishes us from our enemy. This fight depends on securing the population, which must understand that we—not our enemies—occupy the moral high ground. This strategy has shown results in recent months. Al Qaeda’s indiscriminate attacks, for example, have finally started to turn a substantial portion of the Iraqi population against it.

In view of this, I was concerned by the results of a recently released survey conducted last fall in Iraq that revealed an apparent unwillingness on the part of some US personnel to report illegal actions taken by fellow members of their units. The study also indicated that a small percentage of those surveyed may have mistreated noncombatants. This survey should spur reflection on our conduct in combat.

I fully appreciate the emotions that one experiences in Iraq. I also know firsthand the bonds between members of the “brotherhood of the close fight.” Seeing a fellow trooper killed by a barbaric enemy can spark frustration, anger, and a desire for immediate revenge. As hard as it might be, however, we must not let these emotions lead us—or our comrades in arms—to commit hasty, illegal actions. In the event that we witness or hear of such actions, we must not let our bonds prevent us from speaking up.

Some may argue that we would be more effective if we sanctioned torture or other expedient methods to obtain information from the enemy. They would be wrong. Beyond the basic fact that such actions are illegal, history shows that they also are frequently neither useful nor necessary. Certainly, extreme physical action can make someone “talk”; however, what the individual says may be of questionable value. In fact our experience in applying the interrogation standards laid out in the Army Field Manual (2-22.3) on Human Intelligence Collector Operations that was published last year shows that the techniques in the manual work effectively and humanely in eliciting information from detainees.

We are, indeed, warriors. We train to kill our enemies. We are engaged in combat, we must pursue the enemy relentlessly, and we must be violent at times. What sets us apart from our enemies in this fight, however, is how we behave. In everything we do, we must observe the standards and values that dictate that we treat noncombatants and detainees with dignity and respect. While we are warriors, we are also all human beings. Stress caused by lengthy deployments and combat is not a sign of weakness; it is a sign that we are human. If you feel such stress, do not hesitate to talk to your chain of command, your chaplain, or a medical expert.

We should use the survey results to renew our commitment to the values and standards that make us who we are and to spur re-examination of these issues. Leaders, in particular, need to discuss these issues with their troopers—and, as always, they need to set the right example and strive to ensure proper conduct. We should never underestimate the importance of good leadership and the difference it can make.

Thanks for what you continue to do. It is an honor to serve with each of you.

David H. Petraeus
General, United States Army
Commanding

Andrew Sullivan asks an excellent question. Where is the outrage from conservatives that Petraeus is anti-torture?

He obviously doesn't have the stomach to do what's necessary against our enemies. I await calls for his firing from those who argue that we cannot protect the U.S. without torturing and abusing prisoners in wartime. Dr Krauthammer, where's the outrage? Mr Levin, demand a change at the top. Mr Limbaugh, clear your throat. The general is putting the country in grave danger, isn't he? Or so you have argued.

Sullivan is correctly implying is that the (un)righteous indignation extends only for partisan points scoring. The Limbaughs and Krauthammers call the Left soft and appeasers to defend Bush and Cheney's human rights violations. They understand that Petraeus's letter points out the White House's pro-torture policy for the sham it is. It also flies in the face of everything these pundits have said in defense of Bush. They are going to shut the fuck up and wait for this to blow over in the news cycle.

Malkin Endangers Another Person's Life

Andrew Sullivan points out the latest stupidity on Michelle Malkin's part.

Last week, a U.S. military official contacted Michelle Malkin to ask her to remove a photograph from her blog that clearly identified an Afghan loyal to Karzai and the U.S. military who had been wounded in an attack at Bagram. By publishing the photo, Malkin unwittingly exposed the man to serious danger. It was an innocent error. But several days after replying to the military official, Malkin still hasn't either doctored the photo or removed it. It's too late now, apparently. And so an Afghan who backed the U.S. now risks losing his life because of Malkin's blog. I'm not linking to the post to save the man more danger. But, please, Michelle. Take the photo down.

This is not the first time Malkin has made this kind of error. She published the phone numbers of the UCSC Students Against War. This led to many of her readers sending SAW death threats. Malkin refused to take the phone numbers off her blog post. The woman is irresposible beyond words.

No Phase 4, No Surprise

Military experts have wondered why there was no phase 4 plan for rebuilding and getting out of Iraq. General George Casey endlessly badgered Tommy Franks about phase 4. We now know that Donald Rumsfeld refused to allow military strategists to do so. This is insane beyond comprehension.

Even if the troops didn't stay, "at least we have to plan for it," Scheid said.

"I remember the secretary of defense saying that he would fire the next person that said that," Scheid said. "We would not do planning for Phase 4 operations, which would require all those additional troops that people talk about today.

Brig. Gen. Mark Scheid worked in Central Command and was part of the planning of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.

Kevin Drum writes, "The bulk of the evidence continues to suggest that democracy and rebuilding were simply not on Bush's radar."

Andrew Sullivan: "It's becoming clearer and clearer that Donald Rumsfeld is a worse defense secretary than Robert McNamara."

I wholeheartedly agree with both those comments. If Sullivan is hoping for sane Republicans to force Bush to fire Rumsfeld then that's wishful thinking. Chuck Hagel and John McCain said they have no confidence in Rumsfeld and they won't ask Bush to make him resign. Short answer: Bitch about the state of Iraq, but do nothing to solve the problem.