By issuing a partisan attack piece on the morning of the State of the Union Address,The Bush administration reiterates it's position on Iraq: no matter what is said tonight, there will be no real change in strategy or policy. Bush will leave office to crawl back to Crawford with a full complement of troops fighting, and dying in Iraq, and he will do everything within his power to blame the next President for his failures.
Liz Cheney doesn't even bother to make effort to disguise her op-ed in the Washington Post as an analysis. Instead, she makes it clear what she's about when she begins with a childish smear about Hillary Clinton's ambitions. The following is a slur, not an argument:
Anyone who has watched her [Clinton's] remarkable trajectory can have no doubt that she'll do whatever it takes to win the presidency."
Cheney (fille) then writes a lot of garbage that defies both historical and current reality in Iraq. One of her more outrageous assertions is that we must stay to protect allies like Pakistan's Pervez Musharraf. Based on a lot of recent reporting, the N.Y. Times wrote in an editorial today:
Pakistan is now the third-largest recipient of American foreign aid. Yet more than five years after 9/11, the Bush administration has still not been able to secure Pakistan’s active and consistent support against the Taliban. The very least Washington should be demanding of President Musharraf is that he enforce an immediate halt on Pakistani military support for the Taliban insurgents who are crossing the border and killing American troops.
Frankly, I don't want to see a single U.S. soldier die to protect Musharraf, and his "support... for ...insurgents... who are... killing American troops.
Cheney writes that the recent rout of Republicans in Congressional elections did not show that Americans:
want us to allow Iraq to become a base for al-Qaeda to conduct global terrorist operations., They did not say that they would rather fight the terrorists here at home.
They also did not say that they want permanent war. What their votes did prove is that they no longer believe the lies of the Cheney/Bush team, nor do they accept the use by this administration of fear, of terror, as a campaign tool.
Although I have strongly opposed to this war since before it began, I am concerned about our responsibilty to Iraq for the evil we have unleashed in that benighted land. I would welcome serious analysis or suggestions on what we should do next - but there is no way that these will come from an administration that relies on Dick Cheney or Karl Rove.
These guys are poison to our body politic. They insult us by continuing to use slurs, lies and fear in lieu of arguments which would sway us.
(Thanks [?] to memeorandum)