Friday, March 11, 2016

Dum-Dum Drum takes it to the mattress

BULLY BOY PRESS &    CEDRIC'S BIG MIX -- THE KOOL AID TABLE


ANGRY OLD WHITE MAN KEVIN DRUM IS SPITTING MAD.

JORGE RAMOS, AT LAST NIGHT'S DEBATE, "BADGERED" POOR OLD CRANKY CLINTON.

"BADGERED," OLD MAN DRUM HOLLERS.


CRANKY DID NOT ANSWER JORGE'S QUESTION.

REPEATEDLY.

AND IT UPSETS KEVIN DUM-DUM DRUM THAT SHE WAS FORCED TO.

IN THE FUTURE, NO CANDIDATE KEVIN DUM-DUM SUPPORTS WILL BE FORCED TO ANSWER A QUESTION BECAUSE, WHEN THE QUESTION IS ASKED, KEVIN DUM-DUM WILL STREAK ACROSS THE STAGE STARK NAKED AND THE BELLY LAUGHS THAT GREET THAT ACTION WILL DROWN OUT ANYONE'S MEMORY OF A QUESTION BEING ASKED.




FROM THE TCI WIRE:

Changing topics . . .


In Iraq, the Iraqi Security Forces, which include Iraqi Army and Counter-Terrorism Services (CTS) forces, Kurdish Peshmerga, and various Sunni and Shia volunteer elements, with the support of U.S. and Coalition air operations and advisors and materiel donations, have effectively halted ISIL's advance . The enemy is now almost exclusively focused on defending his strongholds rather than projecting combat power. Additionally, ISIL's counter-attack capability has been reduced as a result of battlefield losses, although we see the group conducting deadly terrorist attacks against Iraqi forces in Anbar and west of Baghdad, and, worryingly, civilian targets -- including in areas far from its control, in Baghdad and parts of the Shia-populated south.


That's US CENTCOM commander Gen Lloyd Austin speaking at Tuesday's Senate Armed Services Committee which we covered in Tuesday's Iraq snapshot and this morning in "Magical Bernie trumps Tired Hillary."

Austin was one of three generals appearing before the Senate Armed Services Committee to offer testimony in the hearing.  The other two were  Gen Joseph Vogel (Special Operations Command) and Gen David Rodriguez (US Africa Command).  The Chair of the Committee is Senator John McCain, the Ranking Member is Senator Jack Reed.

The quoted section in bold above was from Austin's opening remarks.

The opening remarks are sometimes also referred to as the prepared remarks or the written testimony because witnesses are supposed to submit those to the Congressional committees in advance.  This allows members of Congress (and their staff) to pour over that prepared testimony in advance and to come up with questions to expand on issues being raised in that testimony or questions on issues that they see are not being covered in the written statements.


When Secretary of State John Kerry was a Senator, if he headed a Committee (such as the Senate Foreign Relations Committee), he would urge witnesses to summarize (briefly) their pages of written testimony instead of reading them word for word.

He was the exception.

(And as Secretary of State, he himself reads every word dully and in monotone, eating up time and dragging each hearing down.  Were he the Chair of a Committee he was testifying before, he would cut himself off and tell himself to summarize the statement to save time.)


In most hearings, most witnesses still read every word.  They may alter a word or two -- often due to getting lost while reading out loud from the pages before them -- but they don't usually introduce new ideas.  There's a time limit for these opening statements and non-government officials will sometimes see the warning light flashing (indicating time is almost up) and try to quickly summarize the rest of their pages.


But for the most part, people stick to the written testimony when reading word for word.


So this is from Austin's prepared remarks:

We are making progress militarily in our efforts to defeat ISIL, as demonstrated by the recent victories in Ramadi and Shaddadi . However, military success will be lasting only if corresponding political progress is achieved in both Iraq and Syria . The Government of Iraq must take the necessary steps towards greater inclusiveness. Iraq will not remain a unified state long-term without the support of the major ethno-sectarian groups.


And we are noting that because it's important and it's something the State Dept (and that includes Barack's Special Envoy Brett McGurk) repeatedly forget to address publicly.


The White House continues to supply the Baghdad-based government in Iraq with weapons, US troops and money.

And it never says, "Haider al-Abadi, you've been prime minister since 2014 and we're not seeing any progress on inclusion.  If you don't stop the persecution of the Sunnis, we're not sending use these jets" or whatever.

Under Barack, the US State Dept doesn't do diplomacy.


While Austin's point is very, very important, he made another remark that was also highly important.


Gen Lloyd Austin:  Of note, the Kurish Peshmerga remain critical to our efforts on the ground in the northern part of the country.  They are irreplaceable and we must do all that we can to support them.



Some readers will agree with him on that, some won't.

Most members of the US Congress -- Democrats and Republicans -- will agree with that remark.


Does the White House?

Actually, no, it does not.

Nor does the US State Dept which tries to pretend it's being 'impartial' while toadying to the Baghdad-based government.

That makes the statement important.

You know what else makes it important?

It appears no where in his written testimony.

He wasn't two minutes into his opening remarks when he made this comment, reading from a version of his opening remarks that was pretty much word-for-word what he submitted (and what will be in the official record -- the written testimony is put into the official record).

But that passage?

His comments on the Peshmerga did not appear in the submitted remarks.

Why?

Because the remarks would not have been cleared for submission had the statement appeared in them.

The official position of the administration goes against those remarks -- as is clear in every State Dept press briefing.



RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"Magical Bernie trumps Tired Hillary"
"She needs to get off the Spotify"
"THIS JUST IN! CRANKY AND INSANE!"
"Hillary is such a fake ass"
"AMERICAN CRIME"
"Rachel and the other MSNBC whores"
"Colin Powell did not have his own internet server"
"a people's movement requires dreaming"
"Fundamentally change the country?"
"Jaclyn Smith"
"So true, Bill Curry, so true"
"Propaganda mills"
"Hillary has no genuine movement"







  • Thursday, March 10, 2016

    She needs to get off the Spotify

    BULLY BOY PRESS &    CEDRIC'S BIG MIX -- THE KOOL AID TABLE

    WILL CRANKY CLINTON DROP OUT OF THE PRESIDENTIAL RACE IF SHE IS INDICTED?

    HELL NO!

    REACHED FOR COMMENT, CRANKY TOLD THESE REPORTERS, "MY BABY DON'T MESS AROUND -- NO, BARRY O WOULD PARDON ME.  IF I WAS INDICTED, BARRY O WOULD IMMEDIATELY PARDON ME BECAUSE I GOTS IT LIKE THAT, YOU SEE.  I GOTS ALL THIS JUNK IN THE TRUNK.  MAMA'S MILK SHAKE BRINGS ALL THE BOYS TO THE YARD, YEAH!"



    FROM THE TCI WIRE:

    And if things are going so well, why was a Senate Committee told today that more US troops would be needed in Iraq to take back Mosul from the Islamic State?


    Three generals appeared before the Senate Armed Services Committee today:  Gen Joseph Vogel (Special Operations Command), Gen David Rodriguez (US Africa Command) and Gen Lloyd Austin (CENTCOM).  The Chair of the Committee is Senator John McCain, the Ranking Member is Senator Jack Reed.



    Here's the key exchange.



    Senator Mike Rounds:  General Austin with regards to the challenges surrounding the retaking Mosul and Raqqa by December of this year coming up.  You've currently got about 4,000 ground forces, if I'm correct.  Is that enough?  Do you have enough to assist in your plans to retake Mosul and Raqqa?



    Gen Lloyd Austin:  The, uh, the approach that we have used -- and continue to use, as you know, Senator, to use the indigenous forces in the operations on the ground and enable those forces with out aieral fires and other enablers.  As we look towards Raqqa and other and Mosul clearly there will be things that we want to do to, uh, increase the capability a bit to, uh -- to, uh increase the pace of operations and that will require some additional capability and we've gone through and done some analysis to see what types of -- what types of things we need to provide and that's, uh, we've made those recommendations.


    Senator Mike Rounds:  Could you share those recommendations with this Committee?

    Gen Lloyd Austin:  Uh, no, sir.  I would not care to do so because I have just provided those to my -- to my leadership.


    Senator Mike Rounds:  But you have -- you have made those recommendations and you're waiting on a response to your recommendations at this time?


    Gen Lloyd Austin:  Yes, sir, it's -- it'll work its way up the chain here.


    Senator Mike Rounds:  If you were allowed to have, uh, more ground troops what would be the capabilities that you could accomplish?  Or what could you accomplish if you had more individuals on the ground there



    Gen Lloyd Austin:  We could, uh, develop more, better human intelligence.  We could, uh, we could perhaps provide, uh, uh, more advise and assist teams at various levels.  We could, uh, we could increase, uh, our assistance in terms of providing help with some logistical issues and, uh, we could increase some elements of the special operations footprint.



    Senator Mike Rounds:  Assuming we were successful in retaking both of those two towns, what then? Clearly, it's broken.  So you come back in and reestablish order and so forth -- when we take them back do we have a plan in place -- a plan that we want to execute to bring back in a sense of order to those communities?  What does it look like right now and what part would we play?


    Gen Lloyd Austin:  Uhm, the short answer is "yes," Senator. First of all, we will -- the Iraqis will take back uh, uh, Mosul and we will take back -- we will work with the Syrian indigenous forces to take back Raqqa as well.  Uh, as you've seen us do, as they've taken back towns in Iraq, that includes, uh, Ramadi, Baiji, Tikrit, uh, Sinjar and other places the effort has been to reestablish order in those places and then immediately try to uh, uh, do what's necessary to repair damage and make sure that, uh, that we're taking care of the people and the people are able to move back in and resume their lives.


    So that's Gen Lloyd Austin playing coy and hinting about his recommendation to send more US troops to Iraq while insisting he can't really talk about it because it's going up the chain of command.

    He's also telling fantasies of liberation where Ramadi and Tikrit were peacefully liberated, where the homes weren't trashed, the stores and homes looted and civilians harmed or killed.



    RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
    "Human rights abuses and Hillary delusions"
    "Special Presidential Envoy Brett McGurk Visits Ira..."
    "Protests can wait?"
    "Hejira"
    "Trash of the week"
    "It shows they don't know anything"
    "Again on WHISKEY TANGO FOXTROT"

  • "THIS JUST IN! SHE NEVER KNOWS WHAT SHE'LL DO NEXT!

    "It takes a Cranky



    Sunday, March 06, 2016

    It takes a Cranky

    BULLY BOY PRESS &    CEDRIC'S BIG MIX -- THE KOOL AID TABLE




    REACHED FOR COMMENT, CRANKY EXPLAINED AWAY HER CHANGE BY INSISTING, "I'M SO NUTS EVEN I DON'T KNOW WHAT I'M GOING TO DO FROM ONE MINUTE TO THE NEXT.  LOOK, IF I WAS STABLE WOULD I HAVE LIKE 37 DIFFERENT HAIRSTYLES A YEAR?  COME ON!"





    Tuesday, War Hawk Hillary Clinton managed to dupe enough people to win the Democratic Party primary in seven out of eleven states.  Or, as one friend put it, supposed Ms. Inevitable managed to lose four states to Senator Bernie Sanders:  Oklahoma, Vermont, Colorado and Minnesota.  Oklahoma must have been especially painful for Hillary to lose.  In 2008, Hillary carried Oklahoma.  She won with 55% of the voters to Barack's 31%.

    But Tuesday?

    Bernie won the state by 51%.

    From 55% in 2008, Hillary's support in Oklahoma dropped to 41.5%.


    Ms. Inevitable is far, far from Ms. Incredible.

    A point underscored today when Sanders defeated her in Kansas.


    And her inability to close the deal is a reality a number of people have noted this week on Twitter because Incredible People don't back illegal wars.



    55

    31









  • . u acknowledge that support for Iraq War was a mistake, so why did you encourage military option in Libya? 



















  • But you can't have a rush of reality without a backlash of whoring.


    Enter the courtesan.


    Michelle Manning Barrish.

    Is she know for anything besides who she slept with?

    Supposedly, she's an activist.

    I've been speaking out against the Iraq War since February 2003.

    I never heard of her doing any activism.  (MOVEON commercials are not activism.)

    But then I don't consider sleeping with rich men to be radical action.  Although maybe big divorce settlements count as one way of redistributing the wealth?

    She shows up at -- where else -- THE HUFFINGTON POST to insist that she's always been against the Iraq War, to toss around mentions of her "brother" repeatedly (is she trying to hide behind him) and insist that when Hillary is crowned the nominee, everyone must unite behind her.


    Let's be really clear on that.

    Michelle Manning Barish?

    She's not running a damn thing.

    She needs to sit her tired  ass down already.

    No one asked her.

    Your vote is your vote.

    It's not her vote.

    No one needs anyone to tell them how to vote -- and when someone tries to tell you how to vote, they need to be told to mind their own damn business.

    Your vote belongs to you.

    You can use it to vote for Hillary, to vote for Donald Trump, to vote for Jerry White, to vote for whomever.


    You can use your vote by not voting because you don't feel anyone has earned your vote.

    If Michelle wants to stick to why she's supporting Hillaary, that's fine.

    But when she thinks she has any right to tell anyone else how to vote?

    She needs to grasp that if we need to know where to get vast amounts of collagen shot into our lips, then she's out go to.


    But to know how to vote?

    No.

    You have to be at least 18 to vote in the United States.  Which means every voter in the US is an adult.

    No adult needs to be told how to vote.


    RECOMMENDED:  "Iraq snapshot"