http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21945113/

Conservative Prime Minister John Howard suffered a humiliating defeat Saturday at the hands of the left-leaning opposition, whose leader has promised to immediately sign the Kyoto Protocol on global warming and withdraw Australia's combat troops from Iraq.

Labor Party head Kevin Rudd's pledges on global warming and Iraq move Australia sharply away from policies that had made Howard one of President Bush's staunchest allies. It was an embarrassing end to the career of Howard, Australia's second-longest serving leader.

-Get ready for a repeat in about a year here!

Quote from article (I did the highlight):
Rudd said he would withdraw Australia's 550 combat troops from Iraq, leaving twice that number in mostly security roles. Howard had said all the troops will stay as long as needed.
So, they're not pulling out completely as the first few paragraphs would lead one to believe. Bum deal, mate.

Get ready for a repeat in about a year here!
Yeah, a repeat here, minus an immediate withdrawal of anything from anywhere, just empty promises of "timelines" and "benchmarks." Translation: The Democrats will make people think there would be change in Iraq, but are making too much money and have too many campaign endorsements from those who are also making too much money with this scam for any actual change to happen, and will raise taxes on everyone to pay for it.
(Of course, one could vote for a Republican, who would openly admit that nobody's coming home anytime soon, the tours of duty would be extended until each and every troop reaches retirement, and would cut taxes for the rich and tax soup kitchen food and sell everyone's children to the Chinese to pay for it.)

BTW, here's an advance copy of the ballot:
President/Vice President of the United States (pick ONE):
___ Evil/Fraud (D)
___ Pure Evil/Treason (R)
___ third party candidate (maybe if we add all the total votes for all of them...)
___ Write-in

Nice try.

France and Germany are both now conservative, each having given the boot to socialist leadership.

This doesn't even take into account most of Eastern Europe, including Poland, which favours America highly.

Unless you leftists continue to cling to your fave commie nations like Cuba and China, the left is losing ground.

Spin on.

Herb

Losing ground? Dream on. The only one losing ground is the GOP that lost majorities in both houses last time around, along with a majority of governorships and state legislatures.

Australia is a lot like America, and John Howard was George W Bush's little puppy dog. The Australians saw the light and voted accordingly. Americans shall do the same in less than a year and I can't wait.

Nice try.

Off year elections almost always go to the out of power party!

But you get a C-, because unlike the union thug, you're capable of better work.

Spin on.

Herb

P.S. Besides, there's always room for improvement.

Herb

You're the one that's spinning the absolute crushing defeat of Bush Jr in Australia.

This is a preview of what's to come. Deny it all you want, it still won't change the fact that pro-Iraq warmongers and global warming deniers are going the way of the typewriter.

"Pro-Iraq warmongers?"

Do you have any idea how silly that sounds?

It would have been FAR easier to take the liberal route and allow the impotent UN to stand by whilst witnessing the rape and slaughter of innocent Kurds, women and kids.

Instead, Mr. Bush gave the Iraqi people a shot at freedom. If you're anti-freedom, it's completely understandable why you hate the guy. Otherwise, he tried to help innocent people who were being decimated.

Prattle on.

Herb

If the liberal route is to avoid such blunders (as Iraq has been proven to be) then that's fine with me.

Prattle on yourself.

Liberal route to avoid such blunders?

Oh, you mean like the botched Bay of Pigs?
Or our hostages being taken for 444 days in Iran?
Or Mr. Carter's botched Operation Eagle?
Or Jamie Gorelick's 'wall of secrecy' so our intelligence agencies couldn't share intel?

All courtesy of the left.

However, with those bungled jobs, or even Watergate, at least Sandy Burglar and Mr. Clinton didn't stuff secrets into socks, billionaire tax cheats like Marc Rich weren't pardoned, nor were military secrets declassified for sale to our mortal enemies.

You've got attitude.
I've got facts.

Herb

Ah, Watergate! How relevant! How 70's!

What's next, Pops? Telling us how you walked 6 miles to and from school, barefoot in the snow and uphill both ways?

Here, have some more leftover (Wild) Turkey, Gramps!

You've got denial, I've got reality. And Iraq is now. Live in the past if you want. Relevant people live in the now.

That's wild CROW for gramps (who no doubt is near the top of next-to-croak list.)

Oh, you mean like the botched Bay of Pigs?

The plan was hatched under Eisenhower and involved Nixon. It was passed along like a hot potato to the Kennedy administration. The CIA dropped the ball. G.H.W. Bush provided the ride. Look it up.

Or our hostages being taken for 444 days in Iran?

While Carter had negotiated a deal, they were held there through the election season and until the inauguration to benefit who exactly Herb? Nobody likes a set-up, and we were duped while those brave souls suffered. Look it up.

Or Mr. Carter's botched Operation Eagle [Claw]?

Wrong again. It was a series of honest mistakes and unfortunate events. Communication was not clear, and when the aircraft were stricken in a blinding sandstorm it was the biggest problem. Logistics and technology failed Herb, plain and simple. The lessons learned that awful day changed the way the entire military communicates. Look it up.

Or Jamie Gorelick's 'wall of secrecy' so our intelligence agencies couldn't share intel?

Actually, you and John Ashcroft are the only two people on the planet who still believe that lie. Was he under oath? Was he thinking out loud? The branches were originally separated in the 80s. Hmmm. Who was in charge? Look it up.

You've got attitude.
I've got facts.

(BTW -- Great thread Vitalogy. I love the outcome in Australia. An upsidedown part of the world is a little brighter now. I hope they say the same thing about us next year.)

[Raises glass]

Hope so. I want to believe there is finally some momentum in the right direction.

Right direction is precisely what we'll see in 2008.

It'll be a bumpy ride, but in the end, democrats will once more come up short.

Hat trick for the GOP.

Herb

You said that in 2006. Look it up.

I then encourage you to think you've got it all sewn up.

Herb

I encourage you to order up more crow.

There are some indicators that Herb's confidence being high is not without some merit:

(not that the ideas are solid --they aren't)

Judy Ruilanni behind petition fraud efforts in CA?

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/11/24/giuliani-campaign-behind-scheme-to-stea l-the-election/

This is the steal the election ploy, where we get into election reform for CA only, leaving the rest of the states alone. This one is worrysome, in that it can put both parties on a very level, if balanced to the right, playing field, despite the GOP having it's disadvantage largely due to all the shit they've supported.

http://www.bradblog.com/?p=5106

That one is on vote caging. This is a GOP staple. The fewer votes overall = advantage GOP. Why? Between the 23 percenters and the ignorant, they have a nice lock on enough voters to keep the issues from making too much of an impact, unless they are divisive ones, like flag burning, gay marriage, abortion, etc... the usuals.

There is a lot more, of course, but that's not the point.

The greater point being we live among people, who do not care about the democratic process --at least where ideas are concerned. It's just a game to be won by whatever means necessary, so that power over the people is concentrated among those who would LEAD as in Bush type leadership.

It doesn't matter whether the left continues to handwring, or insist it's got a lock.

Hillary has plenty of baggage, plenty of enemies and a very nasty primary fight. Even if she were to make it that far, rest assured her record will make for very good Republican campaign ads.

Worse of all for the left, most Americans live in a post-9/11 world, not the namby-pamby fantasyland cooked up by liberals. Off-year elections virtually always go to the out of power party.
Fact is, Americans know very well that republicans are far tougher on terror and THAT'S what will make the difference in this next presidential election.

And speaking of war, given a 11% democrat-led congressional approval, the 'blame America first' democrats who are terrified of the Surge's success in Iraq, are already retreating.

Herb

Herb I truly believe you are a very fearful person. Because for the most part fear is really all you spew out. Could go as far as calling it the GOP rhetoric.

I don't think there is one person running for President who wouldn't take serious the nature of terrorists. The mere mantra of the Bush administration's "War on Terror" is the perfect example of a fear-based position. The GOP has done a much better job of using the media to spread this fear, however I believe that it's crumbled around the edges so you have to spew more fear to try and keep your yourself protected.

It's really about semantics. And the GOP has done a better job using them.

Facts mean little to you Herb because it cuts through all your fear based agenda and you know it but can't show it.

I'm not saying the Dems will own the White House come Jan 09, but if the GOP stays divisive within their ranks, as Rudy has shown, that is the chink in the armor.

"The mere mantra of the Bush administration's "War on Terror" is the perfect example of a fear-based position."

I respectfully disagree. Instead, I believe it's about defending our nation, whilst taking at their word those who've stated they wish to destroy us. After 9/11, it's far wiser to take those threats seriously.

Herb

The ones in denial are those most afraid. We can defend our country just fine without running around acting like our heads been cut off.

Fraidy cat, vamoose!

...take threats seriously.

Ok, I'll buy that one. However, there is a line where proactive behavior becomes something worse. Obsessive, compulsive, paranoid, etc...

Taking a threat seriously means reasoned choices, risk analysis, and consideration from all involved.

That's when the threat controls you and when in the place, terror has won. It's ok to fear, ok to be proactive about ones fears.

It is not ok to be controlled by those fears to the point where little else matters.

Herb, you have made the statement: "Nothing else matters, but fighting terror and getting right wing court appointments done."

It's controlling you buddy. Get some help with that.

"Taking a threat seriously means reasoned choices, risk analysis, and consideration from all involved."

Other than 'all involved'...[I would exclude America-hating socialists who wish defeat upon our nation]...a concept upon which we can agree.

Herb

Herbster, If you can blame Carter for mistakes made by the military in trying to save the hostages, then I guess you can blame Bush Jr. for the fact we can't win in Iraq and now is seems even in Afghanistan.

Thats because the military mistakes were forced on the military by carter.

If carter had given a senior military officer the mission and let him alone, it would have been a success, but he insisted on controlling at every step from the white house, and put not one, but three officers in charge, with overlaying command.

And Bush isn't pulling the strings in Iraq?

So, explain why the generals who have been in control there now say it is a mistake being there.

"...we can't win in Iraq.."

That's an arguable point, especially with the success of the recent surge.

And I defer to Nwokie on things military, but Mr. Carter's hostage flub reminds me of the Bay of Pigs. Both appear to be instances of democrats who wanted to avoid appearing too aggressive. They would have better off not even considering their respective military operations.

Herb

"take threats seriously."

Too bad George W. Bush didn't take threats seriously before 9/11 happened on his watch.

*PLONK*

Trixter I go with the more traditional...

"Bada Bing!"

Your thoughts?

I shouldn't, but what the hell..

What's success anyway? Establishing some peace? Maybe killings are under some number easily hidden?

What?

IMHO, the biggest success would be control of the oil. Is this surge gonna do that for us? If so, what's the cost over the very longer term, say 20 years?

And where do those dollars from the sale of the oil go? Are we gonna put a bunch of them back into the treasury, to replace what was borrowed, or are we just gonna forget that, leave a what, 50K burden on everybody?

The multi-nationals want their cut too, so how big is that cut and what's their investment to earn it, or is that just a give away of sorts?

Iraq is in horrible shape still. Dollars need to go there to build out some sustainable infrastructure right?

And the people? They deserve a cut right? It is, after all, their national resource. Or, do we do another one of those nice little contracts that means they get almost nothing, in return for being freed (read: corn holed / no lube)?

Winning does involve some sane disposition on all of that, and I don't hear anybody talking about any of it. Doesn't that make you all wonder just a bit about how successful our surge really is?

The cost, so far, has been really high. Imagine those dollars applied to energy programs to reduce dependence. Lots of people working, goods getting paid for, etc...

Before we go and say we can "win", shouldn't we be in rough agreement as to what "winning" is exactly, and how that connects to the "war on terror" justification that got us here in the first place?

I'm wide open to the idea of "winning". Nobody wants to lose this big. So sell me and others here, who have gotta be wondering the same things.

What are we winning exactly, and what does that mean?

Great points have already been made by many including Vitalogy, Missing and Radioblogman.

Carter had much more on his plate than you will ever give him credit for, Herb. I think that is too bad. He negotiated for peace between nations at Camp David. He planted healthy seeds in the region. Blowing up things and breaking stuff in Iran was not an option. Carter was old enough to remember Tehran as the city that hosted the best medical facilities for the CBI during World War Two. He wanted to keep the peace for everyone.

Herb, what you are missing in the mission to rescue the hostages in Iran is what happened behind the scenes. Carter was smart to try and keep the circle tight. Our covert and corporate string pullers were hard at work too. How did those hostages go from a really stupid prank to an international crisis? Meddling. Why were they left to rot and suffer for political gain? Meddling.

These very same meddlers have had an invasion plan for the Middle East since the energy crisis of the 70s. Parts of it were even outlined in the mainstream press before disco. Though he had been in the CIA for decades, by getting Shrub paired with Bonzo, they gained executive insight beginning in 1980. For years, folks had carefully laid foundation for the New World Order.

In a speech given on September 11, 1991, a neo-con redefinition of freedom and a glimpse of the power grab were presented to an international audience. Americans were supposed to be comforted that evening by the character on the screen. He sounded like Fred Rogers reading a George Orwell storybook to children. How was that anniversary marked a decade later?

To begin the second Shrub regime, the Americans and Israelis bluntly walked out of an international conference on civil rights. Of course, there was Palestinian apartheid in 2001. We watched as they erected huge walls, sent in troops and cut off basic necessities like water, electricity and income so that more armed subdivisions could be built. This moment had consequences, as did ignoring the transition team, the infamous memo, and many others. These intentional mistakes defined the course of this swaggering lunatic and his merry band of profiteers.

Winners usually start out with a leg to stand on. When you see the new owner of a building hoard newspaper and pallets for six months, you smell gasoline walking by one afternoon, and watch it burn that night on the news, it is called arson. Arsonists are never winners, but they are often good at making a profit by any means.

Unless there is martial law or election fraud, the Republicans will enter 2009 with less power. However, being supremely confident of that outcome is hardly a comfort. The more desperate elements of the party become, the more likely we are to see another fire at the Reichstag.

I am happy for you Herb. The history books will begin to sort this out some day, and fortunately, you will not be embarrassed by questions from great-grandchildren. Unlike the frank and open dialog between generations of Germans, this history will stay buried long enough to save your fragile ego.

Comparing our nation to nazi Germany.

That's why America bashers will lose in 2008.

And they'll deserve it.

Herb

I am an American. I can still be mighty damn proud of that fact without believing in the integrity of my leaders.

It truly makes me sad to have to draw any parallels, but I would be remiss to ignore them.

Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.

DUByah must be a real ignoramus then ay!

Americans love their country, love their brave troops in harm's way and are proud of their fight to give others not so fortunate a shot at freedom. You lose them when you compare them with evil murderers. It didn't work in Vietnam, and it won't work now.

Oh sure, you'll twist in the wind whilst trying to deny each time the president is slandered with such insipid vitriol. Yet this is exactly what I mean when I talk about Bush haters. How much worse can it get than to compare the president to a leader like Hitler?

And liberals whine, wondering why the democratic process is so divisive? Better wash your own hands while you're at it. Your hands are no cleaner than those whom you accuse.

Herb

I would love seeing Herrbocrite leave here with all of his pet sayings, his inflatable Nixon doll under his arm, and his tail between his legs after "he" loses the 2008 election.

Of course, he needs to wait until inauguration day so we can enjoy every minute of his defeated walk to the waiting helicoptor.

How much worse can it get than to compare pro-choicers and abortion providers to a leader like Hitler?

Uh, you go first.

Herb, Bill Clinton made terrible mistakes too. While he played a mighty mean sax, he also could be ruthless as a leader. He also did his darnedest to cover it up. Remember the other news from the Balkans on the day of the Columbine shooting? Remember the knee jerk attack on Iraq when the Monica story was beginning to entice the editors? Remember the horrors of raids by our government that killed children? These were real tragedies on his watch.

The difference is that Bill Clinton did not redefine what it meant to be an American. He was not busy trying to rewrite our laws and our Constitution. He was a two termer with a terrorist attack on his watch and yet he managed to pass along our happily dysfunctional Democracy and solid intelligence to a new administration. He was not a great guy, but he was not a despot either.

He did this all without making trillions for a handful of people, without killing thousands and injuring tens of thousands of our troops, without making every American citizen a target for suspicion, and without glibly making terrorists the reason for destroying our way of life.

So, Merkin had a question about drawing parallels. What do you think?

"The difference is that Bill Clinton did not redefine what it meant to be an American."

Many people have differing views about what it means to be an American. I honour many of those views.

I also respectfully, and I mean truly respectfully, submit to you that life is substantively different for the vast majority of western civilisation after 9/11.

In comparing the wanton slaughter of innocent pre-borns with overcoming evildoers who oppress, gas, rape, torture and murder innocent freedom-yearning peoples not buying into an extremist agenda, better check your moral compass.

However, if you want to make the argument that it has a lot to do with oil, I'll concede that point. I agree we shouldn't limit our helping others simply to those with oil or some other commodity we want. That's why, if I were president, I wouldn't stop at Iraq or Afhanistan. I'd be all for freeing the enslaved innocent peoples of Africa, North Korea, China and, as president Kennedy used to call it, 'Cuber.' That's helping to spread democracy among those who want it and that, in my opinion, is one way to be a good American. As for Saudi Arabia, I don't think they behave like very good friends, even to many of their own people.

Herb

"I also respectfully, and I mean truly respectfully, submit to you that life is substantively different for the vast majority of western civilisation after 9/11."

Our constitution didn't.

It still hasn't.

This means we need to step up and act like Americans, not simple minded, scared shitless, sheep.

Either we can address terror without having to surrender our values, or we can't. What are you saying Herb? Are you saying we can't do this, meaning terror wins?

FDR and Abraham Lincoln did things differently during times of war.

We are in a war for our very lives.

The times call for no more, but certainly no less, than what those two fine presidents did.

Herb

"We are in a war for our very lives."

No, we're not. We are in a war of choice.

It's admirable that Herb brings up past presidents more than any other poster on this thread. Somehow trying to draw conclusions that will somehow justify Iraq.

Yes learn from the past, but be a student of the now and of the cultural nuisances of those whom you deem a threat.

Herb when's the last time you stepped foot out of the USA? Canada is exempt from this question.

Let me tell you, when you get a chance to talk to Americans living overseas or to the average European on the street, perspective changes. And yet America's greatness is still intact because most of the average citizens of the world look past the bozos in charge. They see the real people of this wonderful country.

Herb you do loads of armchair quarterbacking. You talk game but simply don't have game. So you are left with the past or in the past in many cases.

When under threat you go to cliché’s Ville. Using the same fear mantra as before. But I believe you truly believe you're right and that the GOP once again will hold the White House. It's good you have that belief. Better to have the belief than actually deal with the reality.

"We are in a war of choice."

Right. We have the choice of allowing more 9/11's and the mass slaughter of innocent Americans, Brits and Spaniards. Or we can do as Mr. Bush has done in giving terror no quarter.

Rest assured, radicals would be howling if there had been another attack on US soil since 9/11. Socialist ingrates.

God bless the president.

Herb

God forgive the President.

(And She should too, because She had a hand in the President's low brain cell count. Unless it was purely an evolutional thing.}

In comparing the wanton slaughter of innocent pre-borns with overcoming evildoers who oppress, gas, rape, torture and murder innocent freedom-yearning peoples not buying into an extremist agenda, better check your moral compass.

And that would mean you should check DUHbya's while your at it.... 10's of THOUSANDS of Iraqi WOMEN AND CHILDREN are dead Herb!!!!!!!!
God will NOT bless YOUR President and when he is standing at the pearly gates they will be SHUT on him! He has 10's of THOUSANDS of murdered babies on his list and when God looks at his list HELL is the ONLY place he is going!

Trixter.

Show us the proof that Mr. Bush intentionally did what you accused him of. You won't, because you can't. Fact is, many of the innocents were likely killed by their own barbaric leaders, who like Saddam gassing Kurds, have little regard for life.

Trixter. These are the same terrorists who blow up little kids. Don't buy the scare america line on this. You'll only look like a leftist.

Herb

Gassing Kurds with GAS given to HIM by RONALD REAGAN!!!!!!!!!
We bombed the living SHIT out of their contry and your going to tell me NONE of those 10's of thousands were killed then??? YOUR INSANE!
This shows your ignorance for FACTS! You do live in your own little bubble don't you. WOW!
I'm done....

Like I said, you won't, because you can't.
I'll call you on your baseless statements til' the cows come home.

Herb

Or at least until 2008.

Herb

War kills more innocent life than soldiers. That is a known fact.

Ok.

Herb

There are no innocents in war!

WOW!!! explain that to the Jews in WWII.

Let's take Anne Frank for instance.

Ah, Ms Frank and the other Jewish people wern't killed by acts of war, they were murdered by their government.

So, we drop a bomb, shard kills old woman trying to go to market.

She's "in the war" because the war ends up being where she has to exist. She's innocent too, just trying to go to market.

Seems cut 'n dried to me.

"There are no innocents in war!"

Wow, that's THE dumbest thing ever posted here. EVER!

"Ah, Ms Frank and the other Jewish people wern't killed by acts of war, they were murdered by their government."

This gets an honorable mention.

I am sure the Dutch are not pleased as punch by that revelation, but the evidence is still in their favor. She died a prisoner of war in Germany. She and six million other Jews were casualties of war.

War does nothing but kill, maim and shuffle the power structure. If the end result is positive, it is called a just war. Hindsight notwithstanding, the costs are exactly the same.

The Dutch were an interesting case, they had more resistance fighters as well as the largest per capita to join the waffen SS.

And she was turned over to the Gestapo by local officials.

And the SS as well as Gestapo were ruled criminal orgainzations, not military.

Hey, I'm not passing judgment - I've been there too until someone said something - but is anyone else getting tired of this yet?

I am.

EJ Dionne says a lot of what I'm saying...I might have to sue him for plagiarism.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/26/AR2007112601854. html

There are no innocents in war!

Nwokie is INSANE! All the Iraqi women and children that were/have been killed are not innocent? You need to up your Prozac like Herb.....
WOW! No wonder people are leaving the EXTREME RIGHT in droves. With that kind of thinking it might be YOU that becomes just like the 10's of THOUSANDS of INNOCENT Iraqi children killed by bombs or flying bullets.