We aren't going to solve a damn thing until the 14 permanent bases and the ultra palace embassy are abandoned. It has to start with getting rid of those for anything else to work. IF that isn't done, then the fighting will never stop. I don't see that mentioned in this "report" anywhere. This bail W's ass out while staying the course is nothing more than a propaganda bullshit report.
The purpose of the ISG report in the first place was to put the fig leaf of 'independent comission'on the Bushco "stay-the-course-until-the-defeat-and-pullout-can- be-blamed-on-the-incoming-administration-in-2008." And nothing more. The ISG was NEVER going to cause a change. Bush is incapable of admitting he's a moron, and has never done one thing right in his entire life. I certainly don't expect him to start now. His ego matters more to him than the lives of every soul killed in his private, personal "war".
While all the hoopla has been going on about the ISG report, ELEVEN MORE OF OUR KIDS GOT KILLED .

Bush...has never done one thing right in his entire life

Sounds like someone didn't hear about the Hawaiian Marine Reserve.

But seriously, after reading Greenwald's post, I'm suddenly salivating at the prospect of the next Congress which will have the power to do the real version of stuff like this.

Yes, Greenwald and others are right, and Feingold is exactly right that the report is a work by a committee of people who have no interest in saying that they were wrong and bear none of the costs for continuing the war, so the report does not really examine the full range of our policy options or balance Iraq with a broader view of the rest of our foreign policy.

But let's not forget that there is now a Democratic Congress whose hands are not tied by the Administration. They are not powerless, and it is time for them to do their own job. They should conduct their own hearings on Iraq, both prospective and retrospective, call witnesses and come up with their own recommendations. And at the end of the day they can refuse to fund the war - Congress, not the President, has the power of the purse.

This President and Administration do not deserve any respect and should not be allowed to continue to fuck up our foreign affairs and national interest unchecked, just to cover their own asses or so they can pretend they haven't been delusional and venal. It is high time for the Congress to act like it has some responsibilities under the Constitution.

But let's not forget that there is now a Democratic Congress

Not till January, Tom.

M/M - are those weasel words? The Dems need to get cracking! They can plan and announce all manner of things before they actually take control. No reason to be mouses anymore.

Now that our side has won a majority in both houses they should actually USE the subpoena power in January with the beginning of the new session and launch a REAL independent investigation into 9/11.

One thing that struck me as odd in the days after 9/11 was Bush saying "We will not tolerate conspiracy theories [regarding 9/11]". Sure enough there have been some wacky conspiracy theories surrounding the events of that day. The most far-fetched and patently ridiculous one that I've ever heard goes like this: Nineteen hijackers who claimed to be devout Muslims but yet were so un-Muslim as to be getting drunk all the time, doing cocaine and frequenting strip clubs decided to hijack four airliners and fly them into buildings in the northeastern U.S., the area of the country that is the most thick with fighter bases. After leaving a Koran on a barstool at a strip bar after getting shitfaced drunk on the night before, then writing a suicide note/inspirational letter that sounded like it was written by someone with next to no knowledge of Islam, they went to bed and got up the next morning hung over and carried out their devious plan. Nevermind the fact that of the four "pilots" among them there was not a one that could handle a Cessna or a Piper Cub let alone fly a jumbo jet, and the one assigned the most difficult task of all, Hani Hanjour, was so laughably incompetent that he was the worst fake "pilot" of the bunch, with someone who was there when he was attempting to fly a small airplane saying that Hanjour was so clumsy that he was unsure if he had driven a car before. Nevermind the fact that they received very rudimentary flight training at Pensacola Naval Air Station, making them more likely to have been C.I.A. assets than Islamic fundamentalist terrorists. So on to the airports after Mohammed Atta supposedly leaves two rental cars at two impossibly far-removed locations. So they hijack all four airliners and at this time passengers on United 93 start making a bunch of cell phone calls from 35,000 feet in the air to tell people what was going on. Nevermind the fact that cell phones wouldn't work very well above 4,000 feet, and wouldn't work at ALL above 8,000 feet. But the conspiracy theorists won't let that fact get in the way of a good fantasy. That is one of the little things you "aren't supposed to think about". Nevermind that one of the callers called his mom and said his first and last name ("Hi mom, this is Mark Bingham"), more like he was reading from a list than calling his own mom. Anyway, when these airliners each deviated from their flight plan and didn't respond to ground control, NORAD would any other time have followed standard operating procedure (and did NOT have to be told by F.A.A. that there were hijackings because they were watching the same events unfold on their own radar) which means fighter jets would be scrambled from the nearest base where they were available on standby within a few minutes, just like every other time when airliners stray off course. But of course on 9/11 this didn't happen, not even close. Somehow these "hijackers" must have used magical powers to cause NORAD to stand down, as ridiculous as this sounds because total inaction from the most high-tech and professional Air Force in the world would be necessary to carry out their tasks. So on the most important day in its history the Air Force was totally worthless. Then they had to make one of the airliners look like a smaller plane, because unknown to them the Naudet brothers had a videocamera to capture the only known footage of the North Tower crash, and this footage shows something that doesn't look like a jumbo jet, but didn't have to bother with the South Tower jet disguising itself because that was the one we were "supposed to see". Anyway, as for the Pentagon they had to have Hani Hanjour fly his airliner like it was a fighter plane, making a high G-force corkscrew turn that no real airliner can do, in making its descent to strike the Pentagon. But these "hijackers" wanted to make sure Rumsfeld survived so they went out of their way to hit the farthest point in the building from where Rumsfeld and the top brass are located. And this worked out rather well for the military personnel in the Pentagon, since the side that was hit was the part that was under renovation at the time with few military personnel present compared to construction workers. Still more fortuitous for the Pentagon, the side that was hit had just before 9/11 been structurally reinforced to prevent a large fire there from spreading elsewhere in the building. Awful nice of them to pick that part to hit, huh? Then the airliner vaporized itself into nothing but tiny unidentifiable pieces most no bigger than a fist, unlike the crash of a real airliner when you will be able to see at least some identifiable parts, like crumpled wings, broken tail section etc. Why, Hani Hanjour the terrible pilot flew that airliner so good that even though he hit the Pentagon on the ground floor the engines didn't even drag the ground!! Imagine that!! Though the airliner vaporized itself on impact it only made a tiny 16 foot hole in the building. Amazing. Meanwhile, though the planes hitting the Twin Towers caused fires small enough for the firefighters to be heard on their radios saying "We just need 2 hoses and we can knock this fire down" attesting to the small size of it, somehow they must have used magical powers from beyond the grave to make this morph into a raging inferno capable of making the steel on all forty-seven main support columns (not to mention the over 100 smaller support columns) soften and buckle, then all fail at once. Hmmm. Then still more magic was used to make the building totally defy physics as well as common sense in having the uppermost floors pass through the remainder of the building as quickly, meaning as effortlessly, as falling through air, a feat that without magic could only be done with explosives. Then exactly 30 minutes later the North Tower collapses in precisely the same freefall physics-defying manner. Incredible. Not to mention the fact that both collapsed at a uniform rate too, not slowing down, which also defies physics because as the uppermost floors crash into and through each successive floor beneath them they would shed more and more energy each time, thus slowing itself down. Common sense tells you this is not possible without either the hijackers' magical powers or explosives. To emphasize their telekinetic prowess, later in the day they made a third building, WTC # 7, collapse also at freefall rate though no plane or any major debris hit it. Amazing guys these magical hijackers. But we know it had to be "Muslim hijackers" the conspiracy theorist will tell you because (now don't laugh) one of their passports was "found" a couple days later near Ground Zero, miraculously "surviving" the fire that we were told incinerated planes, passengers and black boxes, and also "survived" the collapse of the building it was in. When common sense tells you if that were true then they should start making buildings and airliners out of heavy paper and plastic so as to be "indestructable" like that magic passport. The hijackers even used their magical powers to bring at least seven of their number back to life, to appear at american embassies outraged at being blamed for 9/11!! BBC reported on that and it is still online. Nevertheless, they also used magical powers to make the american government look like it was covering something up in the aftermath of this, what with the hasty removal of the steel debris and having it driven to ports in trucks with GPS locators on them, to be shipped overseas to China and India to be melted down. When common sense again tells you that this is paradoxical in that if the steel was so unimportant that they didn't bother saving some for analysis but so important as to require GPS locators on the trucks with one driver losing his job because he stopped to get lunch. Hmmmm. Further making themselves look guilty, the Bush administration steadfastly refused for over a year to allow a commission to investigate 9/11 to even be formed, only agreeing to it on the conditions that they get to dictate its scope, meaning it was based on the false pretense of the "official story" being true with no other alternatives allowed to be considered, handpicked all its members making sure the ones picked had vested interests in the truth remaining buried, and with Bush and Cheney only "testifying" together, only for an hour, behind closed doors, with their attorneys present and with their "testimonies" not being recorded by tape or even written down in notes. Yes, this whole story smacks of the utmost idiocy and fantastic far-fetched lying, but it is amazingly enough what some people believe. Even now, five years later, the provably false fairy tale of the "nineteen hijackers" is heard repeated again and again, and is accepted without question by so many Americans. Which is itself a testament to the innate psychological cowardice of the American sheeple, i mean people, and their abject willingness to believe something, ANYTHING, no matter how ridiculous in order to avoid facing a scary uncomfortable truth. Time to wake up America.

Intersting - we have a crescendo about Christmas songs, but little discussion about getting us out of Iraq.

What are Dems in Congress doing? If the election was a referendum on the war, why aren't the Dems making more a fuss over it? Could it be that they are gutless wonders like the Republicans, and more interested in milking the flow of taxpayer money than good policy and Constitutional prerogatives?

Here's a pessimist's view.

I'd say it's a bit more complicated than that, Tom. And, of course, Reason is the original "pox on both your houses" outlet, so nothing surprising there.

As for what the Dems are doing, it's probably fair to at least wait until they are actually in the majority and Congress is back in session before passing judgment. I'm no water-carrier for the Democrats; they're mostly hapless. But at least they aren't actively malevolent, so it's a net gain regardless.

I do think they'll probably wimp out on Iraq and allow Bush to traipse down the same idiotic path he's been on, but that doesn't have anything to do "milking the flow of taxpayer money". Honestly, any sober analysis of Republican versus Democratic budgets over the past few decades shows the Dems to be better fiscal stewards than the GOP by a country mile. It isn't even a contest.

If the commander-in-chief is going to dig in his heels, force the showdown, and leave abrupt defunding as the only option, that's problematic because even just force protection during a withdrawal of 150K troops costs serious money.

It's a completely fucked situation, and that's part of the reason why I had so little patience with Democrats and progressives who went along with this insanity. Because it could only have ended up here, with the entire country painted in a corner without the faintest idea what to do next, while we ludicrously try to deny responsibility for hundreds of thousands of deaths. It's why I might not vote if Hillary Clinton gets the nomination (unless she's running against McCain, who's one of the few people on the GOP bench who I hate more than Bush, but by God I won't be happy voting for her). There's no way she should be considered a viable candidate any longer, just based on this alone.

Believe me, I'm pessimistic about the options out of DC for quitting Iraq. But as important as Iraq is, there are still other issues out there, and for my money the Democrats are better on every single one.

Apo, thanks.

You didn't mention it, but I sure hope that the Dems use the fucking subpoena power and just savage the hell out of the administration on every issue possible. But they haven't shown any balls yet over the past five years.

Sure, they're not "actively malevolent", but most of the Republicans in Congress have not been either - the whole kit and kaboodle of them have simply rolled over.

We need some hard-headed Senators and Congressmen willing to seriously discuss our nation's long-term interests. The most obvious one is to stop the hemorraghing in the ME, at a huge cost to our real interests and finances. What else is on your agenda?

I sure hope that the Dems use the fucking subpoena power

Me too, and having Waxman and Conyers in charge of relevant committees will help. They've been lonely voices of protest in the Democratic caucus. The question is what happens when the administration simply refuses to comply? Lord knows I don't count on the courts to come down on the side of the rule of law any longer. So, a constitutional crisis is probably in the works. Anybody's guess how that plays out.

they're not "actively malevolent", but most of the Republicans in Congress have not been either

We're going to have to agree to disagree on this point. I think the GOP has been rotten to the core since Nixon, and the Texas takeover of the party leadership has made it much, much worse. These are not good people. They do not not have the good of the country on their priority list. Malevolent is the polite term for what I consider them.

What else is on your agenda?

As I've said before, my number one issue that trumps every other one is keeping the religious right out of power at any level. So all the uncomfortable culture war issues: abortion, gay rights, separation of church and state, free speech, etc.

After that one comes getting the budget deficit under control and paying down the federal debt. This has to be done from the revenue side, unless some magic consensus forms to radically slash the Department of Defense. I don't think I'll live to see that consensus, though.

Third is joining the rest of the first world by coming up with a sane health care funding system. Five years ago, I'd have thought this was impossible. I don't think that any longer, but it will take a Democratic president. Republicans will never buck the insurance lobby.

So, most of my agenda isn't achievable during the next two years. The big immediate goal is to stop the accumulation of power in the executive branch and roll back the obscene expansion of secrecy in government. I'd like to see every Democratic candidate for president say something like the end of this post.

Apo,

"keeping the religious right out of power at any level. So all the uncomfortable culture war issues: abortion, gay rights, separation of church and state, free speech, etc."

What, you can't tolerate intolerance? I'm with you in spirit on this one. We need to stop the divisiveness agenda. But let's make sure we fight fire with water, not more fire. There's a wave of fundamentalism globally; we need to understand the human needs that lie at its core it order to respond effectively. We should resist pandering to it (and oppose those who do), but be careful not to further enflame it by simple opposition or hostility. We must love our neighbors, as hard as it may be. Savage beasts must be soothed, as slaughtering is out of the question.

"what happens when the administration simply refuses to comply? ... So, a constitutional crisis is probably in the works. Anybody's guess how that plays out."

There are always people who will comply with sub poenas because they don't want to be thrown into jail; self-preservation comes first. These plus public opinion will be a lever. Those at the top of the Administration might stall, but there are only two years left.

There is always the power of the purse - the Congress can refuse to appropriate funds. This is the ultimate check on the president. A rather unwieldy tool, admittedly.

"Texas takeover of the party leadership has made it much, much worse. These are not good people. They do not not have the good of the country on their priority list."

Yes, I agree that the Republican party has been run by alot of power-hungry sick fucks who managed to shit on their own principles once they realized they had grasped all of the keys and opened the doors to the inner sanctum of the Great Candy Store. But the Dems will face the same temptations about what to do with power, especially if they gain the presidency in 2008. As far as I'm concerned, we need divided government in order to prevent the excesses that the Republicans have shown.

As to other parts of the agenda, the Bush budget legacy will be a real problem. You are not optimistic about paring back defense, but I think it is absolutlely essential to maintaining a dynamic economy and will help us with our global interests to boot.

Yeah, I'd like to do something about health insurance as well, but SS also needs fixing.

I would like to see the US again take a proactive approach in trying to solve shared world problems - tragedy of the commons type issues that require leadership and widespread cooperation: climate, development (ending kleptocracy and providing rule of law), rational use of shared resources like fisheries and oceans, and mechanisms that allow the West to have an effective voice in protecting tropical forests and biodiversity hotspots.

While we can't force an end to antagonism and war around the world, we can stop enabling it and fanning the flames, and can offer other agendas that tend to bring people together and to bridges differences.