Thursday’s Mini-Report

Today’s edition of quick hits.

* More disaster in Iraq: “Iraqi tribal leader Abdul Sattar Abu Risha, a key figure in U.S. efforts to turn local residents against al-Qaeda in the restive Anbar province, was killed today by a roadside bomb, U.S. military and Iraqi sources confirmed. Abu Risha was a leading member of the Anbar Salvation Council, a group formed a year ago Thursday that proved critical to a recent reduction in insurgent violence in the province. He worked closely with U.S. officials, a fact that made him a target of militants angry about his decision to cooperate with the United States and his ability to convince other tribal sheiks to follow. He and two bodyguards were killed near his home in Ramadi.”

* Marc Lynch offers some helpful and informative analysis of the Risha assassination.

* The Center for American Progress’ Brian Katulis offers a fairly detailed preview of what to expect from the president’s speech tonight, and why Bush is mistaken.

* A new AP poll measures public opinion after the Petraeus/Crocker testimony, and finds nothing much has changed. Support for Bush, and his handling of the war, foreign policy, and terrorism are all practically identical to where they were a month ago.

* Speaking of new polls, Fox News asked respondents whether they believed Petraeus’ testimony was “truthful and objective,” or “slanted toward the policies of the Bush administration”? A plurality (40%) said the latter. Obviously, if right-wing talking points are correct, this means Americans hate the troops.

* John Kerry ripped House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) for dismissing the sacrifices of the troops in Iraq as “a small price.” Kerry implored Boehner to apologize.

* The DNC condemned Boehner’s callousness, as well.

* For reasons that I don’t understand, Kerry and the DNC were pretty much the only Democratic leaders to take Boehner to task. Where was everybody else?

* George Will, surprisingly enough, hit Fred Thompson pretty hard in his column today: “Fred Thompson’s plunge into the presidential pool — more belly-flop than swan dive — was the strangest product launch since that of New Coke in 1985. Then, the question was: Is this product necessary? A similar question stumped Thompson the day he plunged.”

* It runs counter to the conventional wisdom, but it turns out that Americans don’t actually approve of warrantless searches.

* I have no idea if it was photoshopped, but Wonkette has a picture of Bush making the “hook ’em, horns” gesture during the 9/11 memorial ceremony this week. I’m going to hope the picture isn’t real, or perhaps the gesture was made by accident?

* War supporter Michael O’Hanlon said today that he could “easily see myself changing camps in the next six to nine months.” What is it about war supporters and six-month increments?

* Sometimes, O’Reilly manages to surprise. Describing Middle Easterners, the Fox News personality said, “They want their meals. They want to smoke. They want to go to the mosques. They want to sit around, and that’s what they want to do. Do they want to vote? Do they want to get involved? Not really.” He then said the U.S. should nevertheless stay in Iraq for at least another year.

* Brian Beutler does a fine job explaining why, when it comes to economics, Amb. Ryan Crocker seems terribly confused.

* Standing up for quality journalism and professional standards: “On Glenn Beck, Howard Kurtz said that Keith Olbermann has described Fox News as a channel that ‘poses as a news organization and puts out dangerous misinformation [and] is a cheerleader for the Bush administration, that it is misinforming our society.’ Kurtz added: ‘But you know what? They’re entitled to do that.'”

* If the election were today, one Connecticut poll says Lamont would beat Lieberman.

* And finally, wouldn’t you just love to have been in the room to see the look on the president’s face? “When top Democratic leaders visited him at the White House this week, President Bush told them he wanted to ‘find common ground’ on Iraq. But when the president said he planned to ‘start doing some redeployment,’ the House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, cut him off. ‘No you’re not, Mr. President,’ Ms. Pelosi interjected. ‘You’re just going back to the presurge level.'” Awkward.

Anything to add? Consider this an end-of-the-day open thread.

John Kerry makes a stand and fights hard. CT voters want Lamont. Way to go. A year or three too late and a trillion or so dollars short.

  • “A small price to pay…” that’s a Republican mantra isn’t it?

    1). Sacrificing parts of the constitution is a small price to pay….
    2). Torturing other humans, ends justifying the means, is a small price to pay…
    3). Spending billions of dollars is a small price to pay…
    4). Sacrificing personal integrity is a small price to pay to stay in power….
    5). Our troops, a small price to pay…

  • That Fox “News” poll is interesting. Only 35% of respondents thought that Petraeus’ testimony was “truthful and objective,” but 40% thought that it was “slanted toward the policies of the Bush administration.” The rest didn’t know, so it seems that the rest had some skepticism about it or perhaps were just clueless.

    That’s pretty bad for Bush. Barely one-third of people expected Patraeus to be “truthful and objective.”

    Another observation from the same poll: Hillary has the highest “unfavorable” rating of any Democrat (she is 49% favorable, 45% unfavorable, and only 5% “can’t say.” The only two people in the poll with higher unfavorable ratings than Hillary are Bush (56%) and Cheney (58%). Jeb Bush comes in at 42% unfavorable. Apparently they didn’t ask about Newt.

    The poll is here (.pdf).

  • * A new AP poll measures public opinion after the Petraeus/Crocker testimony, and finds nothing much has changed

    Why should it have? There was nothing in there which was unexpected. In yesterday’s NYTimes, Maureen Dowd disclosed that Petraeus, when growing up, used to be nick-named “Peaches”. I wonder if Crocker’s nickname had been “Cream”. ’cause, for sure, to listen to the two of them, everything is (almost) “peaches and cream” in I-wreck.

    * For reasons that I don’t understand, Kerry and the DNC were pretty much the only Democratic leaders to take Boehner to task. Where was everybody else?

    Asleep at the switch? Hiding under the bed, with one finger out to see how the wind’s blowing?

    * If the election were today, one Connecticut poll says Lamont would beat Lieberman.

    But those elections won’t be re-played till ’12. Until then, we all have to suck on the lemon you’ve served us.Thanks, Connecticut! Where were your brains last November? Out at the pawn shop?

    * Sometimes, O’Reilly manages to surprise. Describing Middle Easterners, the Fox News personality said, “They want their meals. They want to smoke. They want to go to the mosques. They want to sit around, and that’s what they want to do. Do they want to vote? Do they want to get involved? Not really.”

    Substitute “drink” or “shoot” for “smoke”. Substitute “church” for “mosque”. Leave the rest as is… What do you get?

  • I don’t think the Bush photo is anything other than someone moving their fingers while having to stand still for a long time; IMO, it’s not worthy of a mention in the Carpetbagger Report, with all the other important stuff that goes in here.

    Now, if he’d been caught on camera giving Cheney a wedgie during a state dinner, that would be a different matter.

  • CNN reports that the 9/11 “mystery” plane was a military “doomsday plane.”

    So, naturally, my question is, why was an E4-B military jet –a so-called “doomsday” plane– circling the White House, while, according to the 9/11 Commission Report, F-15 fighter jets were scrambled in the wrong direction–which left Washington, D.C. and New York City unprotected?

  • Kerry and the DNC were pretty much the only Democratic leaders to take Boehner to task. Where was everybody else?

    I’m glad you ask.

  • War supporter Michael O’Hanlon said today that he could “easily see myself changing camps in the next six to nine months.” What is it about war supporters and six-month increments?

    A cheap way to purchase credibility.

  • Regarding Bush’s “hook ’em, horns” gesture . . . hasn’t it occurred to anyone that he lived most of his life in Texas, and is therefore, in all likelihood, a U-T Longhorns fan? They do the “hook ’em, horns” gesture all the time at football games. I wouldn’t read too much into it, and, as Boliver said at #5, it’s not really worth a mention.

  • The exclusion of Ron Paul continues. I guess that the gopstrawpolls.com forum is following the Foecks News’ “fair and balanced” doctrine.

    What is this? Russia? This isn’t Russia…

  • Re: the “hook ’em horns” gesture

    It’s probable a sign of guilty feelings that he chose to act light-hearted at that event.

  • How might “Bones” interpret an American citizen declaring that “it would be a microscopically-miniscule price to pay for America’s freedom from tyranny—if John Boehner were to be spontaneously flung from atop the Washington Monument without the aid of a restraining device, parachute, or safety-net?”

    And as an Ohioan—can we disown Boehner? Can we do some kind of reverse secession thing, and declare him a non-Ohioan? Because Ohio is starting to look awfully blue for a red guy like John Boehner….

  • Kurtz is right, Fox is entitled. The question is why, then, does Kurtz turn around and treat Fox like a serious news organization instead of a propaganda delivery system. You can’t have it both ways, Howie.

  • McClatchy has a great analysis of Junior’s “I don’t want to live Iraq and you can make me” speech. It compares January Junior to September Junior. Here’s the lede.

    Eight months after President Bush made public a plan he hailed as the “New Way Forward” in Iraq, he’s announced a new plan, this one called “Return on Success.”

    The new plan was reminiscent of last year’s “Operation Together Forward,” which called for U.S. troops to secure neighborhoods in Baghdad and hand them over to Iraqi security forces. It bore similarities to an even older plan commonly articulated with the catchphrase “as they stand up, we’ll stand down.”

    But on Thursday, Bush declared success and said troops were coming home, despite a range of government reports that says Iraqi civilian casualties remain high and that Iraqi security forces remain incapable of taking control.

    It’s not too long and well worth a read.

  • In his speech to the nation Thursday night, President Bush unveiled the latest official White House talking point on Iraq. Destined for regurgitation from reliable Republican mouthpieces is “Return on Success.” That business sounding jargon from our first – and failed – MBA president is designed to reassure the American people that after our troops fight them there, they can come home here.

    For the complete list of RNC-approved Iraq sound bites, see:
    “‘Return on Success’ Added to Official GOP Iraq Talking Points.”

  • With all the small prices Republicans have made us pay, al qaeda should be the most powerful and wealthiest entity in the world. Along with Haliburton and KBR they must be laughing their butts off. Maybe that’s why we are getting videos from OBL about our failing economy.

    Sometimes the price of freedom means holding our leaders accountable.

  • Prepare for John Kerry ’12! At this rate, whoever gets elected in ’08 won’t stand a chance of reelection with the problems they’re inheriting from Bush.

  • Comments are closed.