Bush Shoe Diaries

President Bush staged an unannounced farwewll visit to Iraq. The President was holding press conference with Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki. Muthathar al Zaidi, an Iraqi journalist threw two shoes at President Bush. In Ababic culture, the bottom of the shoe is considered an insult. Both shoes missed Bush. "This is a farewell kiss, dog," al Zaidi told Bush.

The Secret Service subdued al Zaidi. White House Press Sec. Dana Perino
was hit with a microphone during the melee. Perino has a minor black eye.



Bush told Helen Thomas, "I didn't feel the least threatened by it." The incident does make me wonder about the Secret Service's response. al Zaidi was 12 feet away and had time to throw both shoes. He could have fired several rounds at Bush. The Secret Service have an extremely difficult job. However, the response time (in a war-torn country) demands a reassessment of security.

Sean Hannity's Top 10 Items of Conservatism

I read Sean Hannity's hysterical Top 10 Items of Conservatism. Nation building, torture and warrantless wire tapping aren't conservative ideals. Which is why the Republican Party lost. The GOP doesn't have ideas. It has talking points of smaller government, anti-earmarks, and victory in Iraq.

Hannity's foreign policy is pure neoconservatism.

1) To be the Candidate of National security:
a) Victory in Iraq
b) Fully support NSA, Patriot act, tough interrogations, keeping Gitmo open
c) A Candidate that pledges to NOT demean our military while they are fighting for their Country. eg Harry Reid: "the surge has failed", "the war is lost"
d) Candidate that promises to ensure that our veterans can live out their lives in dignity.

2) The Candidate who pledges to oppose Appeasement:
a) The Candidate will oppose any and all efforts to negotiate with dictators of the world in places like Iran, Syria, N.Korea, Cuba, and Venezuela without "pre-conditions"

Being pro-torture is a disgusting political position to take. Hannity can't argue he is for freedom and American values. The Constitution forbids "cruel and unusual punishment." Waterboarding and attack dogs are not the actions of people that respect freedom. The fact that Hannity thinks otherwise should give people pause.

Below are two pictures of an Abu Ghraib detainee. His injuries came from a dog bite. Do these pictures make you think of freedom? "Tough interrogations" is Hannity not having the courage to use the proper word: torture.





Hannity harping of Reid's statement about the surge. We are still in Iraq and the country's future is uncertain. I don't believe the current government will respect fair elections and Israel's right to exist. In 2006, Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki condemmed Israel's military actions Lebanon. al-Maliki played into his fellow countrymen's support of Hezbollah. In 2007, the Iraqi government enforced a boycott on Israel.

Hannity's opposition to peace negotiations is irresponsible and anti-conservative. Richard Nixon talked with the Soviets. Nixon and Leonid Brezhnev signed the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty. Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev meetings helped end the Cold War. Hannity alternative is to fight wars with troops we don't have. The U.S. mititary is strained and neither party will support a draft. How does Hannity plan on getting tough with foreign leaders?

This rhetoric works for Hannity on talk radio. Bush and Cheney tried this national security policy. The United States international standing suffered and Republican approval ratings tanked. Osama bin Laden is still free. Sadly, Republican foreign policy think tankers think much like Hannity.

Bush: Stay In Iraq Forever

President Bush wants to maintain an "enduring" relationship with Iraq. The short version is a continued U.S. military presence.

Security: To support the Iraqi government in training, equipping, and arming the Iraqi Security Forces so they can provide security and stability to all Iraqis; support the Iraqi government in contributing to the international fight against terrorism by confronting terrorists such as Al-Qaeda, its affiliates, other terrorist groups, as well as all other outlaw groups, such as criminal remnants of the former regime; and to provide security assurances to the Iraqi Government to deter any external aggression and to ensure the integrity of Iraq's territory.

Senators Jim Webb (D-VA), Bob Casey (D-PA), Robert Byrd (D-WV), Ted Kennedy (D-MA), Carl Levin (D-MI) and Hillary Clinton (D-NY) responded to that with a terse letter to the President. Short version: not without Congressional approval.

The future of American policy towards Iraq, especially in regard to the issues of U.S. troop levels, permanent U.S. military bases, and future security commitments, has generated strong debate among the American people and their elected representatives. Agreements between our two countries relating to these issues must involve the full participation and consent of the Congress as a co-equal branch of the U.S. government. Furthermore, the future U.S. presence in Iraq is a central issue in the current Presidential campaign. We believe a security commitment that obligates the United States to go to war on behalf of the Government of Iraq at this time is not in America’s long-term national security interest and does not reflect the will of the American people. Commitments made during the final year of your Presidency should not unduly or artificially constrain your successor when it comes to Iraq.

The letter is a waste of time. When does Bush ever listen to anyone that is not a neoconservative when it comes to foreign policy matters. I am open to bases in Kurdistan, as well as diplomatic efforts to ease the tensions between the Kurds and Turkey. The Kurds have made it quite clear they have no interest in a longterm U.S. military presence.

The sad thing is the Kurds are the most friendly Iraqis towards the United States. When they want Americans gone that shows all efforts to win the hearts and minds of Iraqis is over. Nouri al Maliki only wants the United States to stay because his days of political power are over the moment the last boots leave the ground.

Violence Worse In Iraq

U.S. military casualties have gone up during the surge. The Bush administration have repeatedly stated that U.S. military casualties in Baghdad are down. They will not offer statistics to back their assessment. Here are the numbers from Iraq Coalition Casualities Count.

8-2007 81
7-2007 79
6-2007 101
5-2007 126
4-2007 104
3-2007 81
2-2007 81
1-2007 83
12-2006 112
11-2006 70
10-2006 106
9-2006 72
8-2006 65
7-2006 43
6-2006 61
5-2006 69
4-2006 76

"Sectarian violence has sharply decreased in Baghdad," said President Bush. "The momentum is now on our side. The surge is seizing the initiative from the enemy -- and handing it to the Iraqi people."

McClatchy Newspapers reports that civilian casualities increased. Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has made no effort to stop Shi'ite militias from killing the Sunnis. The U.S. military's efforts to contain the violence is failing miserably.

The military has been trying to build walls between neighborhoods and around potential bombing targets. But bombings and sectarian violence still take place.

The number of Iraqis killed in attacks changed only marginally in July when compared with December, down seven from 361 to 354, the McClatchy statistics show.

No pattern of improvement is discernible for violence during the five months of the surge. In January, 438 people were killed in the capital in bombings.

General David Petraeus has launched a successful PR campaign to convince lawmakers to keep the surge going. The good General is proving that it's not the merchandise, but the sales pitch.

Shocking News: Surge Not Working

A Pentagon report states what everyone already knows about the results of the surge and Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki’s (lack of) leadership. This is coming from an Army Times article.

A Pentagon report released last week concluded that violence in Iraq edged higher during a four-month period between February and May — despite a U.S.-led security push in Baghdad. The report also raised questions about Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki’s ability to fulfill a pledge made in January to prohibit political interference in security operations and to allow no safe havens for sectarian militias.

Al-Maliki told USA Today that "terrorism and militias — especially terrorism — cannot be dealt with only by using tanks, guns and aircraft." This isn't the guy that will play hardball with insurgents and al-Qaeda. This is a different tune than what he was singing when he came into office.

As Prime Minister, al-Maliki has vowed to crack down on militias which he calls "organized armed groups who are acting outside the state and outside the law."

Much has been made of how General Petraeus's September report. In Washington, it has served as an unofficial deadline for continued U.S. involvement in Iraq. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has admitted as much on Face the Nation.

Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky said most senators in his party think September is the critical point.

"The proper time to really make a serious evaluation of the direction we ought to head is in September," McConnell said on CBS' "Face the Nation."

It's June and McConnell is very displeased. One can only imagine his mood come September.

``The Iraqi government has been a pretty big disappointment,'' Mitch McConnell, Kentucky Republican and minority leader, said on CBS's ``Face the Nation'' show. ``We've given them an enormous opportunity here, over the last four years, to have a normal country. And our commitment will not be there forever.''

McConnell is openly discussing pulling troops out of Iraq. This man isn't Chuck Hagel. McConnell is a fierce partisan Republican. If he is jumping off the Iraq bandwagon than the White House is in trouble. Bogart and Bergman will always have Paris. Bush will always have Lieberman.