baliberal

Anyone who isn't pissed off at what's happening to this country just doesn't get it.

The typical conservative fundamentalist Christian does not want to be an Intolerant Christian and they certainly do not see themselves in this way. And fortunately most are not. The majority of fundamentalists are good, well-meaning individuals who are woefully misled and misinformed. The typical American is not well informed about other peoples, cultures and religions. The American people are not stupid but too many are isolated and sheltered, or only knowledgeable about things of little consequence. They have a very limited worldview and don’t realize the harm that their leaders and pretend leaders do in their name. The worldview advocated by the Jerry Falwells, Pat Robertsons and Dr. James Dobsons of the Christian right are dangerous and their actions are causing problems not only for Americans, but also for the entire world.

As with most religions, Christianity has a violent history and has brought about immeasurable harm, as well as much good to the world. It was the ideas and ideals of Western Christianity that formed the foundation of societies that could produce the Scientific Revolution and the Enlightenment. These changes in European society had a dramatic impact on the future development of American society. However, beginning with the landing of the Pilgrims on Plymouth Rock, America has also had a very strong fundamentalist Christian influence. The arrival of thousands of Puritans and their attempt to establish a “city upon a hill” helped to set the stage for the future success of a conservative Christian theology in America.

After the upheaval of the American Revolution, the arrival of thousands of new immigrants in the early years of the republic and the cultural disruptions involved in establishing a new nation, the American people were ripe for a religious revivalist movement in the late 18th and early 19th centuries. This “Great Awakening” established an even more powerful conservative evangelical Protestantism that enhanced an already very strong fundamentalist underpinning within American society. However at the same time that the Baptist, Methodist and Presbyterian movements were spreading across America through the efforts of charismatic traveling preachers, an American political culture was being established that also placed an emphasis on religious tolerance and the freedom of each individual to worship as they pleased.

The established Congregationalist and Anglican churches were not happy about this development, which cut dramatically into their membership. The new churches were dependent upon this emphasis on freedom of worship since they were challenging the special status of the denominations that preceded them. Political and economic turmoil in early America also provided for a sense of uncertainty among a large portion of the population, which left them particularly open to fundamentalist message of this revivalist movement. America was a wild and unruly place and the women living the frontier, often left alone with their children found solace in this new movement, often bringing their reluctant husbands with them to the vast open-air camp revivals of the itinerant preachers.

The Sixteen Acre Ditch

I couldn't agree more with almost everything Billmon writes today....well I agree with him most days, but with this post he expresses how I'm feeling.
Sad, but true!

Before 9-11, settling the Arab-Israeli conflict could have gone a long way toward resolving the growing divide between America and Muslims around the world. And immediately following the horrific events of that day there was an opportunity to "force" both sides to give a little and move toward a difficult but acceptable arrangement for the establishment of a Palestinian state in return for recognition and acceptance of Israel.

Yes, terrorists, chiefly al Queda, had already begun to focus there attentions on the US before 9-11. And the Arab-Israeli conflict was only one of many grievances they held toward the US. But convincing the Israelis to compromise even just a little, would have forced moderate Muslims to see that although US was willing to use all of its power to go after terrorists, that our leaders were also willing to recognize the "legitimate" concerns of millions of Muslims. Instead, the Bush administration gave a free hand to Sharon to deal with the Palestinians in his own, often harsh and deliberately belligerent way.

With the current leadership in the US it may be too late to prevent the clash of civilizations that the neoconservatives and their rabid following in the "wingnutosphere" seem to so desperately want. The attack on 9-11 provided the neocons the perfect opportunity to demonstrate to the rest of the world just how "tough", the US is. After 9-11, the overwhelming majority of Americans wanted nothing more than to destroy al Queda, and anyone who supported them. Invading Afghanistan was the right thing to do. But for so many who still believe this, the idea that it would be done so incompetently just did not occur. It is now obvious that what would and should have been a success story is far from it five years later. Totally eliminating the Taliban would not have been easy, but the recent resurgence of the Taliban in Afghanistan would not have taken place without the eagerness of the Bush administration to shift its focus to Iraq. Ignoring, or at least not maintaining adequate resources in the struggle against the Taliban and al Queda was a serious failure of leadership and foresight that will likely haunt the US for years to come.

How could our leadership not have learned from the Soviet failures in Afghanistan? The Taliban and al Queda certainly did. Rather than stay and fight many of them fled as quickly as they could across the border to Pakistan, and the havens they were so familiar with from the struggle against the Soviets. Now that they have had time to recover, "they're back"! They have returned with a vengeance, and they've even had the opportunity to learn new tactics by watching the success of the insurgents in Iraq.

The Clinton administration certainly bears some of the responsibility for the problems confronting the US today. The Lewinsky affair undoubtedly diverted attention away from more important matters. Of course, the Republicans who tried so relentlessly to destroy Clinton, also contributed to the problem. If the Clinton administration had been as aggressive as many now claim they should have been, they would have been accused of trying to divert attention away from the presidents personal problems. Let's not forget, that was exactly what happened after the bombing of Sudan in 1996. If one were to try to cast blame for the mess that Afghanistan became, allowing for the rise of the Taliban and a safe haven for al Queda, we need to look back to the Bush Sr. Administration, and its failure to pay any attention to develops following the Soviet withdrawal, and the ensuing civil war.
More lessons from history that Bush the history major has not learned.

So "the decider" has decided it's his responsibility to enlighten the uneducated masses of America. I can't remember where I read the above title, but it was a self-description by Bush. It would be funny if it weren't such a tragedy that we are being "led" by such a moron.

David Broder seriously needs to retire. His column calling on the media to apologize to Rove is ludicrous at best. He has to be best example of the bubble surrounding the Washington media. He admits that he hasn't written much about the Plame affair. It must be too complicated for him to wrap his puny little brain around. The way this administration has delt with the media, orchestrated by Rove......and he's asking the media to admit they were wrong, when the whole story behind this sordid affair certainly hasn't been told yet. So Rove was able to cover his ass and now Broder wants the media to kiss it.

My Brother's Keeper (continued)

Various denominations and sects of Christianity use a variety of aggressive and increasingly innovative methods in their attempts to proselytize their version of the Christian message. Their numbers are growing rapidly as a result. In general, the more mainstream Protestant denominations preach a message of love and tolerance, and are much less aggressive in their missionary activities. The evangelical and fundamentalist movements however place a special emphasis on the inherent sinful nature of humanity, and the message of these fundamentalist ministers is too often one that threatens what will happen to you if you do not live up to their vision of Christian perfection. Although evangelical and fundamentalist missionaries also preach the message of love and acceptance, they devote much of their time and resources to spreading a message of intolerance. By preaching against the “threat” of homosexuality to traditional marriage, by encouraging changing state and national laws to prevent homosexuals from having the right to adopt children, and in general by denying basic human and civil rights to homosexuals, these Intolerant Christians have abandoned the most important message of the Bible.

A major transformation of the evangelical and fundamentalist movement in the US occurred in the late 1970s and early 1980s when the Southern Baptist Convention was taken over by a more radical, and politically motivated leadership. The birth of the Moral Majority, led by Jerry Falwell and the success of Pat Robertson’s 700 Club added a new element to the American political and cultural mix. The incredible amounts of money raised by televangelists such as Robertson, movements such as the Moral Majority, and more recently by the Christian Coalition and the Family Research Council, and what is being raised today by the mega-churches, helps to fund their anti-abortion and anti-homosexual crusade, and the politicians who pander to their cause. They dedicate not only money. They also marshal tremendous human resources to advance their intolerant agenda.

Rather than raise money to address more important social ills, such as poverty, in this country and abroad, these Intolerant Christians have dedicated themselves to preventing others from attaining basic civil rights. This is a perfect indication of just how far so many have strayed from the true message of Christianity. The message of acceptance and love embodied in the text of the New Testament. Rather, they choose selective Old Testament passages to support their intolerance. Peace, love and understanding appears to mean to them only acceptance for those who share your views, love only for those who have proven that they are “true” Christians, and little, if any, understanding.

Despite the distortions of the Christian message by fundamentalists, it is important to not forget and to recognize all of the good that millions of Christians do. Even some fundamentalists. A perfect example of this is President Jimmy Carter, who is certainly a fundamentalist in many of his views. But what he has done for world peace and to help those who are less fortunate, could easily outweigh the contributions of all the so-called leading Christian conservatives. Many of those who spend countless hours of selfless sacrifice to improve the lives of the downtrodden, do so because they believe this is not only what Christ would have done, but also it is what God expects of them.

Unlike conservative Christians, liberal Christians believe that spending time and energy opposing abortion and gay marriage is not the most important activities called for in the Bible. One has to wonder if many of the socially conservative Christians who engage in selfless effort on behalf of the poor, rather than receive praise from their fundamentalist brethren in Christ, are not more likely to receive scorn for wasting time and energy on the poor, since they believe so many who impoverished are either criminals, or lazy, or are both lazy and criminals.

The Christian tradition of extending a helping hand to those in need may be the greatest legacy of Christianity, but this Social Gospel message has been drowned out by a message of intolerance. This intolerance extends to millions if not billions of their fellow humans, but in America it is especially focused on anyone who advocates alternative lifestyles and on all those who do not share their view of a “culture of life”. Oddly, it is often those who are the strongest advocates of a culture of life who are also the most vocal supports of the death penalty.

Disturbingly, there have been many Christians over the past two millennia who have through their ignorance, embraced intolerance, fear and hatred. Individuals who have committed unspeakably evil acts, all in the mistaken belief that they have a special provenance to fulfill, and those who have attained positions of power and influence within Christendom have inspired millions of people who have willingly followed the their lead, and committed equally evil deeds in their name. These are people who have embraced with a certainty that some find difficult to understand, that only they know the Truth, and that they were chosen to fulfill God’s mission on earth. And since this is the case, almost any act they or their followers commit in the name of God, has God’s sanction. American politics and government have been overtaken in the past decade by these Intolerant Christians. The United States today is the one country in the world with the wealth, power and the political culture that could make a real difference toward a gradual improvement in the human condition worldwide. But a theocratic America that embraces a fundamentalist religious theology also has the wealth and power to attempt to impose this vision on others. Most of the world will resist. Violently.

The evangelical and fundamentalist movements of modern day America envision using the power of the American government to spread their message of faith by using the message of democracy, in order to transform not only America but eventually the entirety of humanity. It is a misguided use of faith and religion. Rather than bring people together in an acceptance of a loving a peaceful Christ, the leaders of this movement are attempting to use their newfound political power to impose their view of Christianity on the American public, and the world. They are also attempting to suppress any of the ideas and attitudes of people that do not support their vision. In their view it is essential to repress those who do not agree with them so that they can build a “kingdom” on earth that will welcome the return of Christ. For many, Christ will not return until this is accomplished.

America was founded on a profound belief the inherent worth of each individual. And, with the adoption of our constitution, our system was enshrined with a conviction that all “men” are entitled to live a dignified life. The Judeo-Christian tradition was also an essential element in the development of an American socio-political culture that made this possible, as were the ideals of the Enlightenment. A Christian theology that encouraged the belief in the ultimate value of each human life was a necessary component to this cultural evolution. This Christian acceptance of the inherent value of each individual had earlier contributed to the intellectual transformation of European culture that began in earnest during the Late Middle Ages. With the Renaissance, the Scientific Revolution and the ultimately the Enlightenment, the essential elements needed for the development of a progressive Western society were established. This political and cultural transformation of Western Civilization culminated in the American and French Revolutions, and modern liberal civilization was born. But, in order to move beyond the ignorance, fear and hatred that religion can also inspire it was also necessary that Western society break away from the tradition of religious fundamentalism and religious intolerance. This was partially accomplished during the enlightened era of 18th and 19th century Europe and America, when so many great men and women built upon the contributions of earlier humanist philosophers and created democratic political systems that could, for the first time in the history of humanity, embrace fully the human right of all people to engage in the pursuit of happiness.

Given the tenor of the times today, one has to wonder if this belief in the dignity of each individual will continue to prevail. Conservative Americans loudly proclaim that liberal Americans pose a threat to the very nature of American society. Just as loudly they claim that liberals hate America. Liberals do not hate America, but many liberals do hate what people in power often do and have done, in the name of America and Americans. Liberals are also capable of looking critically at American history, while conservatives denounce this critical analysis as un-American. Intolerant American Christians cannot, or refuse, to see the ugly side of the American experience. This refusal to admit mistakes is particularly relevant today when one considers the level of corruption, and the willingness of so many supposed Christians to lie, cheat and steal their way to the top, and to do anything to stay there. The gravest threat to America does come from within, but it is not from liberals who value the inherent self-worth of all people, but rather from intolerant religious conservatives who believe their path is the only one which all of humanity must follow. It was Senator Joseph McCarthy in the 1950s who posed a real threat to political freedom in America, and not the few communists he saw in the shadows. Just as too many in the conservative fundamentalist evangelical communities see enemies everywhere today, in one sense they are correct. We are faced with a grave danger to our way of life, but it comes from within.. When you perceive someone as an enemy and treat them as such, it is likely that they will become your enemy. This is why liberals and progressives in America are finally beginning to speak up in a way that just a few years ago many would have hesitated to do. Truly liberal and progressive Americans see the real threat to freedom in America, and we know in what direction to look for it. Of course fundamentalist religion is not the only problem. But what fundamentalist Christians are willing to do in the name of religion is a serious dilemma. The true Christian message that many believe in is a magnificently beautiful one. How can one get better than to say “love thy neighbor as thyself” or to insist that “the meek shall inherit the earth” and that one should “turn the other cheek” when threatened with violence or to declare yes, “I am my brother’s keeper.” However, too often, what is truly special about Christianity is too often brushed aside by those who insist that the most important message is that “everyone must eventually accept Jesus Christ as their savior,” or be condemned to the fires of hell.

My Brothers Keeper


“No kingdom has shed more blood than the kingdom of Christ.”
Montiesque

Since the first human gazed up at the stars and wondered why, mankind has endeavored to explain the purpose of existence. This ability to imagine and dream is perhaps the most incredible aspect of human nature And, throughout the millennia humanity has developed an amazing variety of ideas, or belief systems, in our struggles to bring meaning to life beyond the mundane trials and travails of everyday existence. Religious belief has also been the primary vehicle through which humankind has attempted to explain the unexplainable. We are naturally curious creatures and this curiosity has led us to believe that there must be more to life, and to believe that life must have a purpose beyond this simple everyday existence. Just as people have a natural fear of loneliness, as a species we also fear being alone. And just as a child who longs for protection from adults, as adults we long to have a protector or an all-powerful creator. And, we have imagined a creator who will offer, and provide the guarantee of immortality. According to those who believe, Christianity provides all of this and more, which certainly helps to explain the amazing success of what began as a small Jewish sect.

When we gaze at the stars and think about the vastness of the cosmos it is understandably easy to be overwhelmed. The belief in an omniscient intelligence or a guiding spirit that is always there to provide us with a helping hand is not easy concept to reject. We think that if somehow the cosmos is interconnected, and especially if it were created specifically for the benefit of humanity, then how special must we be. All religions attempt to answer the cosmic mystery, and explain humanities place within the cosmos. As many as two billion people today see a timeless wisdom embodied in the texts of the Old and New Testaments. Add in the Koran, which is also an outgrowth of the Judeo-Christian tradition, and three of the great world religions have been born, prospered and accepted as revealing the Truth of our existence by more than half the World’s population. There is a special genius within the pages of these texts. And along with the writings of early Buddhists they have all encouraged people to look beyond their own small tribal or ethnic identity and to see humanity as one people with a common destiny. However, it did not take long for individuals with selfish ulterior motives to begin to use these religious writings for their own personal gain. And for evil!

Too often throughout the past two millennia there have been those who have been willing to use the teachings of Christianity as a pretext to persecute those who do not agree with their interpretation what is sacred. Every religion has the potential for religious extremism. Religious zealotry and political extremism in the name of religion are unfortunately characteristic of the human condition. Because of the genuine desire of people to find meaning in their lives through their religious faith, we are too often easily manipulated by those with unscrupulous motives. Another common theme that runs through the pages of history is the willingness of those who claim to have a special relationship with God, to take advantage of this human desire for Truth for their own personal gain. The very nature of faith allows for a certain ease by which so many are deceived. There are undoubtedly many good and well-meaning individuals among the conservative evangelical and fundamentalist community of modern America. Although they may be mistaken in their vision of what is best for our society and in their interpretations of scripture, many do so with an open and loving soul.

However, when a movement becomes as successful as the conservative fundamentalist and evangelical movement has become, it is almost inevitable that unscrupulous individuals, people who are willing to take advantage of their naive and often uneducated followers, to attain positions of power. And, they are more than eager to use that power in unethical and immoral ways. These American conservative religio-political elites insist that religious freedom is an essential and “ordained” right of all humanity, but in reality they embrace religious intolerance towards anyone who does not ultimately accept his or her specific vision of God’s will. This kind of religious intolerance is a threat to any truly free society, and if taken too far, to the very future of humanity. Those who are the most certain about their beliefs are in essence the gravest threat to those who disagree with them. The examples of the extremes that people will go to attain their religiously inspired goals are innumerable, but the inclination to persecute others for their beliefs is based at least in part on ignorance, fear and even hate. One could almost forgive those who engage in this kind of religiously inspired intolerance if not for the damage they do to the lives of so many on a daily basis. Of course, there are also those who claim to “believe”, and to base their actions on this belief, when in reality they are just cynically acting for their own personal or political gain.

The Intolerant Christian

“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God.”Epicurus

I plan to post on this blog a series of posts, which I will call The Intolerant Christian. These posts are not intended to be an all-encompassing philosophical treatise on the interaction of religion and politics in America, although I hope mythoughts are at least somewhat instructional regarding what may be the most important issue confronting American democracy today. America has reached a new stage in the relationship between its political and religious leaders, and the institutions they represent. A very powerful religiously inspired element within our society is determined to base all political ideas and ideals, all of their decisions and actions, solely on their limited vision of what a Christian society should be and do. The Intolerant Christians that I refer to throughout this series of posts, primarily consists of people who are socially conservative and belong to evangelistic and fundamentalist Protestant denominations, but also includes many conservative Catholics, who all believe that America was founded as, and should remain a Christian nation. These are the people who have what I believe is an extremely dangerous worldview. Not all Christians believe this way, however even moderate and liberal Christians are too often willing to excuse the behavior of these conservative Christians because they believe that “at least they are trying to do the right thing”. This is a threat to the basic pluralistic nature of American society, and to the democratic political culture of American civilization. This religiously inspired element embraces an “ends justifies the means” mentality that has been embraced by The Intolerant Christians of modern America. If this movement is successful in imposing its vision upon the nation, it will result in an America that is an intolerant theocracy, and will mean the end of liberal democracy as we know it.

Our founding fathers wisely warned against a possible “tyranny of the majority”. To avoid this possibility they created a constitutional form of government that protected the rights of the minorities, as well as the freedom to worship as we please. A “Tyranny of the Theocrats” led by Intolerant Christians who believe that all of the solutions they propose for our society are “inspired by God” is a nightmare that these wise leaders attempted to avoid. Referring to so many of those who believe in the Christian God as intolerant Christians is certainly harsh. But I believe it accurately portrays their attitudes, if not their intentions. In order to understand why this description of the such a large percentage of the Christian population of modern America is accurate, I will evaluate briefly the history of Christianity, in order to reveal where the potential for such behavior emanates. Unfortunately, Christians have engaged in “intolerant” acts in the name of God almost from the moment of the crucifixion. Christian apologists have always excused the inhuman acts of Christians by saying that it is not God, or Christianity, that inspires evil, but insists that these actions are merely the result of the misinterpretation of God’s will by imperfect men. But one cannot deny that they always claim that what they are doing, every evil or un-Christian thing, has been done in the name of God!

Today is one of those days that I find it hard to be optimistic about the future, not only of the US but also the world in general. Maybe I'm watching and reading too much of the MSM, although I do more than balance it out by surfing through the liberal blogosphere. I get so sick of hearing the wingnuts screech about how the liberal media is unfair, or even part of a liberal conspiracy intended to prevent the conservatives from accomplishing anything, that I could just scream. Anyone who doubts just how illiberal the MSM really is only needs to read the hatchet job that Fread Hiatt did on Joe Wilson on the editorial page of the Washington Post today.

First of all, I'd like to think that considering how badly the Bushcofascists have screwed things up over the past six years, that a majority of Americans would be ready to show them the door. And even though most polls give the dems a good chance of taking over the House this time around, somehow I just don't believe its going to happen. The demo leadership is just not as ruthless as the rethuglicans, and even though dems have made some progress on the raising of campaign funds, they'll still get outspent in the end. Plus, I'm certain that we are in for more than one October surprise, like a major terrorist plot being uncovered at the last minute.

Not only do I not have enough confidence about the dems regaining some political power, I also have serious doubts about what they would do with it if they did. Maybe its just because I'm a "radical dad" as my liberal daughter recently told her mother, but the leadership of the democratic party will not even attempt to do so many things that I think are essential, and even if they were willing to try the corporatists who really control the American political system would prevent them.

I am also becoming increasingly convinced that the Bushcofascists are going to expand their "war on terror" to include Iran. I used to think they'd take out Syria first, but I think they'd decided to go for the whole enchilada. I think this is more true today because of the difficulties we are having in Iraq. I think they now believe that the only way we will ever end up with an acceptable and friendly Iraq, is if we take out the Iranian "fascists" first. They will probably try to decapitate the regime with air power, hoping that their targeting of the nuclear facilites also takes out Ahmadenijad and most of the mullahs, thinking this will be enough to prevent a major Iranian terrorist sponsored retaliation. Yes, I do think these people are crazy or deluded enough to think this will work.

Well, I'm not sure but I think this rant helps me even if no one ever reads it.

badick

What is up with Mitch McConnel voting against the flag amendment and are the wingnuts ready to burn him in effigy for it?

Red state dems voting for it I can understand but why would Reid and Feinstein and what are some of the other exceptions they would like to make to the 1st amendment?

With Afghanistan starting to look more and more like a mess how much is that going to effect our decision making on pulling troops out of Iraq?

The current Israeli "incursion" into the Palestinian territories should be good for a few more thousand terrorist recruits.

Other than on Altercation I don't see much written about the Palestinian / Jewish conflict on the blogosphere...........may just be the blogs I'm reading regularly. Anyway, in light of the connection of this conflict to the rise of Islamoextremism it is certainly a topic worthy of greater coverage. There is perhaps no greater example of religious intolerance than the current conflict between Israelis and Palestinians. On both sides. Americans generally have a natural affinity for the state of Israel. This is not simply because of the large Jewish population of the US and any undue influence that a powerful Jewish lobby purportedly has over the policies of the US government. Of course our common religious traditions play a big role as well in our affection for and support of the Israelis.

I think this support also comes down to an American willingness to pull for the little guy. The small state of Israel is surrounded by a sea of Arabs and has fought at least 4 major wars against them, often against overwhelming odds. Americans love an underdog, and early on in the existence of the Jewish state this was certainly the case. Not only this, but one could also say that the history of the Jewish people post-WWII is also perhaps the greatest comeback story of all time. After being almost eliminated by a genocidal maniac in Hitler the Jewish people were able to come together and arise from the ashes of ruin like a phoenix. Anyone who has read Exodus can not but help to admire the Jewish people and their difficult struggle for survival.

Yet the American love affair with Israel is also one that is fraught with difficulty. The neoconservatives who pushed for the war in Iraq did so at least in part because they believed that it would benefit our Israeli ally. However, the Iraq War could actually prove to make things worse for the state of Israel. While Saddam Hussein may have paid for terrorists to blow themselves up on Jewish buses, his state was not really a threat to the existence of Israel. The continuing US presence in Iraq and the impact that this is having on recruiting for the Islamofascists could prove to be a longer term threat.

Also, in gereral the US support for Israel continues to be a problem in our dealings with the Arab/Muslim world. While I am not advocating that the US should abandon its support for Israel it is essential that we do more to support a peaceful negotiation of the differences between the Israelis and Palestinians. Given the nature of American politics anyone questioning support for Isreal will quickly be ostracized. Somehow we have to get beyond this. The US government must be more forceful in convincing the Israelis to work out a negotiated settlement before it is too late..........if its not already. Things seem to be going in the opposite direction, especially the last few years under the Bush administration. All parties share some blame in this but it is time to move beyond the "blame game." My big concern is that a Democratic administration might not do much more to push the Israelis toward a peaceful settlement. Here is where the politics of the Jewish vote in the US unfortunately does make a difference. I don't know the answer to this delimma but I do know that as long as the state of Israel basically treats the Palestinian territories like Bantustans and the US doesn't at least seem to do something about it, our relations with the Muslim world will not improve and Islamic extremism is likely to continue to grow.

So how is the "decider" going to deal with the Iraqis telling him they want the US to get the hell out. Kinda puts a kink in the whole "permanent bases from which we can control the oil strategy."

And how will they reconcile the issue of "terrorists / insurgents." Yes, most of the resistance in Iraq today could be called a legitimate national liberation struggle against an occupying power. Certainly that's how the majority of the Sunni insurgents see it. But these groups must have cooperated with the Al Queda terrorists. Giving them an unqualified amnesty seems problematic at best. How will the families who have lost loved ones in Iraq feel about this?

Merla Haggard........a rebel with a cause.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13520363/site/newsweek/