According to reports coming out of D.C. things are looking pretty grim for Mr. Bush's surge. Back in January a group of benchmarks were written into the appropriations bill that demanded that both the Iraqi goverment show some progress toward meeting specific goals, and that their military show some progress toward being field ready. The surge was supposed to provide opportunity for both.
An intermim report is due to congress next week detailing progress toward the stated goals, with a final report due in September. According to sources on the ground in Iraq, not a single goal will be met nor will any appreciable progress be reported toward meeting any of them. The speculation is that Mr. Bush and the commanders will try to cobble together other indicatiors which they claim shows "real" progress toward establishing peace and stability in Iraq and progress within the military and the government.
Sounds like the same old rhetoric on a different day to me. It's another of those famous Bush "yes, but" moments in which he curcuitously admits he's failed without ever actually admitting it and then twists onto a new path which he will then try to pretend was where he was going all the time. He will never actually say that the other measures on which he promised results had failed despite concerete evidence that they have.
Apparently there is no progress toward power sharing, dividing oil revenues, or in the military being able to defend itself much less defend Iraq or maintain any semblance of order or reduction in the violence. The government is gridlocked, and in the words of one of our military commanders, approximately 50% of the Iraqi miltary are more part of the problem than part of the solution.
It appears as if we've been sold another bill of goods. The so-called surge was not able to do even the slightest part of what was predicted and the Iraqi government is still either unwilling or unable to do anything at all. More pieces of that government are drifting away mostly because of this stubborn refusal to do the hard political work. So in the end it's going to be up to congress to either put up or shut up on the Iraqi funding. Bush will never admit he has failed completely in his nation building experiment, and Halliburton et al. are going to be pushing hard to get him to remain so they get their piece of the oil pie. If congress backs down this time, then the responsibility for any further deaths of our troops rests squarely on their shoulders.
Mr. Bush got us into this war and will not get us out. He's once again made promises he cannot meet and will attempt to change the subject and pretend things are going just rosily in Iraq. The question is whether or not, given the proximity to the next elections, whether congress will act to begin withdrawing the troops or will cave once again to Mr. Bush's stubborn arrogance. They got the benchmarks into the funding bill. Mr. Bush agreed to them and failed to deliver. What more proof of failure do we need?
You can read the full story at this link.
recommend this
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 49
Our military has never been given the number, the equipment, or the leadership (no, not the military leaders, but the political ones) to do their job. It's not their fault they are being used as pawns by Mr. Bush et al. They are doing the best they can with what they have and considering the situation they're in.
I admit is will be interesting over the next few weeks to watch Mr. Bush twist and turn and try to come up with excuses why we shouldn't pay any attention to the man behind the curtain. My fear is that in the end congress will cave in again rather than finding some backbone and forcing Mr. Bush to begin a phased withdrawal of troops in face of the Iraqi government's refusal to honor its obligations.
"An intermim report is due to congress next week detailing progress toward the stated goals, with a final report due in September. According to sources on the ground in Iraq, not a single goal will be met nor will any appreciable progress be reported toward meeting any of them."
Then, you continue with, "THE SPECULATION?"
The speculation is that Mr. Bush and the commanders will try to cobble together other indicatiors which they claim shows "real" progress toward establishing peace and stability in Iraq and progress within the military and the government."
What do YOU suggest the problem is, and how would YOU solve it?
The problem is that we went into Iraq with no plan for an occupation. When an insurrection began we waited without acting against it, convinced that it would just go away in a few weeks as it was "on its last legs." When the sectarian violence started we continued to expect miracles. Mr. Bush had "stay the course" tattooed on his forehead by that time.
I would have solved it by not going in in the first place. If I absolutely had to go in I would have had experts craft a plan for the postwar period. Neither of these was done as Mr. Bush expected the Iraqis to step forward, take over, rebuild and kiss his .....uh....feet in gratitude. Given his situation, I would have listened to the commanders on the ground who told me to send in tons of troops and crush the insurgency at its beginning. There are lots of thing I would have done that Mr. Bush didn't do because of his arrogance and delusional thinking.
It is not a matter of what I would do, however. I am not the commander in chief. The problem is obvious....a country in civil war with an insurgency on top of that. Neighboring countries adding to the problem by supplying arms and supply lines. Too few troops sent in too late with insufficient equipment and body armor. An Iraqi government that won't act and an Iraqi military which is missing about 30% of its forces on any given day and that is riddled with corruption and infiltrated by the insurgency.
The problem is also a spineless congress that is unwilling to stand up to Mr. Bush and bring the troops home because they are more concerned with keeping their jobs than doing their jobs.
If you wish more information, click the link I included in the story and ready the source material yourself.
That said ... I am not sure we can get out of Iraq at this point. They should pull back perhaps and protect the soldiers. It just seems like Bush has screwed America up so bad that we do not have the time, money, energy, commitment, or stength to take are of Iraq at this bad time during the war on Islamo-Nazism. The man has incompetently led us up the river without a paddle.
I think we have a lot of fixing to do in the US if this country expect to engender enough patriotism and loyalty to get people to fight for it at this point.
"It's ironic, the outcome of the US presidential elections in 2008 will be pegged to a couple of pieces of Iraqi legislation."
It's ironic and tragic that after all this time, and all the destruction, that the Iraqi's just don't WANT the kind of 'democracy' we're promoting. Anyone with even half a brain cell knows what the interim reports and the ones after that and the one in September will be all about -- face saving -- and lots of spin for the elections.
While we were arguing about Tony Snow's take on whether Iraq was in a civil war, both the Shia and the Sunni have dug their heels in -- with a little 'ASKED FOR' help from Iran and other friends to keep control of the oil spigot; but, most importantly, to keep control of the region and their own interests in the world at large. To continue the charade that they are just too backward to learn how to fight for their own democracy -- or to know what to do with all that oil -- is going to kill us, one way or the other, over the long run. I think the puppet government we installed understands that pretty well. Too bad this administration and the congress on both sides of the aisle believe that we the electorate are too stupid to figure it all out.
When will it occur to the voting public to look at Iran's pursuit of nuclear power in other than the light that the west is putting on it? Their refining capacity is decreasing [what if the word "peak" is real?]. Doesn't anyone suppose that with the ensuing fierce competition for energy that a little nuclear power might buy a few other things? We'll be going after it ourselves soon enough.
Great article Carolyn. Thanks for presenting this information and for connecting some of the dots. More please. We can use all the information and all the intelligent opinions we can muster up right now. 2008 is right around the corner. Candidates have to know that "we know" what they've been doing and not doing.
Your response to John was dead on. Bush/Cheney's foolhardy failure to give a thought to crafting an "exit strategy" (the need for which was a lesson learned in Viet Nam) before invading Iraq set us up for disaster.
As Missy points out Iraqis have no interest in making the democratic process work. They are not interested in negotiating, compromising, or sharing. They don't give a rat's ass about the concept of nationhood. The only thing each faction is interested in is owning Iraq, and its oil.
Our troops continue to bleed and die in the interminable process of "buying time" for the Iraqi government to get its shit together--which clearly is NOT happening, and not going to happen. It's time (way past time) to bring this moronic misadventure to an expeditious end.
Because there was no occupation plan and no contingency planning in Iraq prior to, or even for as much as a year after, the invasion, and even then there was no recognition of the real conditions on the ground on the part of this administration, the resulting chaos has destabilized the entire region. If the Al-Maliki government falls there is literally nobody or nothing to replace it. Most of Iraq's intelligentsia have fled the country rather than live amidst the chaos.
I did read an interesting point some weeks ago. The author stated that the Iraqi government actually has little incentive to finalize the oil revenue sharing plan or to include the other factions in the government in any really significant way. Remember, thanks to Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney development and operation of 64% of existing oil fields will be turned over to the likes of Halliburton with the resultant loss of oil revenue to the Iraqi government.
This is a complicated subject. The bottom line is that agree with the war or not, Mr. Bush had an opportunity to make a long-lasting difference once the war was launched and he chose to dig in his heels and react not to what was happening, but to what his fantasies told him "should" happen and "would" happen with just a teensy bit more time. That's what comes of picking a war in a region where you know nothing about the political, social, and historical background.
I remember Blix and the U N weapons inspectors begging for more time, now who is begging for more time. No amout of time will suffice.
Oh and Charles M, there are about 19,000 deserters in our volunteer military. I read an article last month about a trooper with 3 tours in Iraq changing his mind on the war when an Iraqi soldier they were training to fight insurgents, had attacked u s troops.
I'm not saying that the war has gone according to plan and there were times that there didn't seem to be a plan. (why are caveats like this needed oh yea without them I'm a warmonger)
This brings up a couple of interesting points. Why are our soldiers over there fighting and dying while the government sits on its hands and refuses to do even what it says it's going to do? Right now the Iraqi parliament is so fed up with Al-Maliki and his stalling and do-nothing cabinet that on July 15th they're contemplating a vote of no confidence which will effectively topple the government.
What are we fighting for if they don't care enough to do something to help themselves? This is ridiculous. Back in February I saw an interview in which Mr. Al-Maliki assured the American people that the government would be well on its way to completing all the benchmarks by September. Now they're saying they won't even make a small amount of progress on even one.
The Iraq oil fields are scheduled to be turned over to U.S. big oil companies like Halliburton as soon as they can get the parliament to approve the turn over. The last figure I saw was about 70% of them. I'm not sure how much of the revenues the Iraqis will get, but the last I read was so little that it is one reason why the parliament won't act.
By the way, did anyone read where there are thousands of Turkish soldiers massing on the border to the Kurdish areas. Apparently Kurdish terrorists are making cross border incursions into Turkey. Wonder what will happen if the Turks get fed up and cross the border?
Yeah. Everything over there is going just fine. Wonderful. Stay the course.
Isn't there a name for behavior that is just so blatantly obvious in its intent yet the perpetrators just continue with the behavior because they think that nobody would expect them to do it or to keep doing it because it's just so blatantly stupid??? is that the definition of Bushian Behavior? It's like a Monty Python skit, only those are funny because they are satirical of human behavior... This administration is just Sick...
What happened to the rights of the citizen soldier? Yes ours is a volunteer military and those who sign up are making a heroic sacrifice with putting their lives at the call of service, but where are their rights not to have their lives on the line for idiocy and personal egos??? I thought the days were past for: "Ours is not to wonder why, Ours is but to do and die" for the sake of personal ego, greed, and empires and dance... Never get in a land war in Russia in Winter, Never Take the "backward" Afghan Tribes for granted, avoid a war on two fronts if possible, and most importantly... Listen to those who know what they are talking about...
Wrong, Charles. Dead wrong. Read your newspaper. Did you hear about the 200 who just died in a single incident in Baghdad?
"...there were times that there didn't seem to be a plan"
Yeah, man. You got THAT right. Other than the plan to throw ourselves, unilaterally and without provocation, into a spider web that even Bush's Daddy was smart enough to avoid, there was NO plan for what to do with the country after Hussein was deposed. It was all flying by the seat of their pants, all by guess and by golly. We didn't even get really serious about training Iraqi security forces until almost two years had gone by. It's no wonder that chaos resulted.
There is STILL no plan, no well-defined objectives, and no end in sight.
All we have is Bush's mealy-mouthed platitudes: "Fight 'em there or fight 'em here!"
Crap, George. You're a totally incompetent fool who's done more to harm this country than Osama bin Laden ever contemplated.
The Republican party needs to rise up, NOW, and demand an expeditious end to this lunatic misadventure if it wants to save itself from its own nominal leader.
Don't know about you, but if I were in Baghdad or environs with my back against a wall in some alley hoping that the Iraqi next to me is really on my side, I sure as hell wouldn't want to think I was doing it because some politician said 'go.' I would tell myself I'm on a mission to do the right thing -- and how come those stupid people back home don't get it. I jolly well wouldn't want to have any other thought in my head except that -- for fear I'd get shot in the midst of the thought. What soldier is going to admit even to his best buddy that he's not entirely with the plan? Gives a whole new meaning to the words 'fodder for the machine."
All the neocons, from both sides, should have to go there just the way they sent our troops -- without proper equipment, without proper backup, and without the most rudimentary planning -- and they don't get to take a short cut through the Green Zone.
Declaring war on Iraq was an excuse to get at Iran, to get oil, and to get control of the region; it was and is immoral and will prove to be ultimately futile. We need to redeploy our resources [what's left of them] to facing our energy addiction and failed fiscal policies, without having to steal and murder. We don't have the resources to stay; we'll have to pray that Petreus -- or someone -- can get us out without greater losses and with something left of our credibility and ability to negotiate. Unless, you like the idea of unending world war?
Would you PLEASE tell us what's happening with the oil. I wouldn't be a bit surprised but what it's being piped into Israel. That WAS part of the original plan -- along with 'quiet' expansion of the settlements in a configuration of the 'wall' that would also ensure that they get the water as well. Wonder who is going to say 'tear down that wall' besides Hammas, and Hezbollah, and . . . . who knows what strange bedfellows will be going after both oil and water.
I got my 2 cents in a bit late and a little off track -- but I do wish Spartan would stop being coy about the oil. Do you know? I believe we had better face up to the fact that we're not the only players in the grab for world resources. You know who's going to pay in the end -- we, the people -- all around the world. Great article.
I didn't use the word 'macho.' I know what it means and it doesn't apply here -- Perhaps an entirely justified and rational 'psychological self preservation' for want of better words for the moment. The mainstream media blows whichever way the corporate wind and the ratings meter blows -- so scratch them for any credibility whatsoever. [Sometimes a picture is worth a thousand words and sometimes not but there are, thank god, bonafide and respectable journalists who report the truth.]
I agree that the troops on the ground may know more, and better, than the media and the politicians about day to day operations. I would add that they are probably also the LAST to know about significant facts, which put them in a do or die position. I wonder how many boots on the actual ground know how the plans for privatizing the oil are coming along. For those who have a good inkling and agree with the venture and how long we'll have to be there to guard what we took, that's their personal perogative. It's NOT, however, a mandate from the American people to be there -- even if the Pentagon and some crackpot civilian planners and neoCONS from both sides of the aisle think they do -- have a mandate -- [to go all around with world, doing as 'they' see fit].
But they can't say so, because to say what they really feel would
dissent with government policy, and, since they are still employed
by the government, they won't state their true opinions.
You can't ignore the fact that Republican Senators are getting nervous
that this 'surge' isn't working.
After all, the 2008 Presidential Election is coming up and they want to
cut their losses.
Why is that?
I agree that the troops probably know more than we know. I wonder how many of them have any doubt as to the harm's way they are in if the region blows. Carolyn said the entire region is now destabilized: Yes it is, and that was the entire idea. We've been there and done that before. It's perhaps comforting for some to believe that the factions in Iraq all hate each other more than they hate the infidel invaders and it's nice to think that it's all that corrupt puppet government's fault -- if only they'd get the hang of things.
Isn't this history repeating itself; history that the pentagon and civilian planners and congress know very well, but never seem able to get quite right?
One of the biggest problems with this so-called surge is that it was done to give the Iraqi government time to start actually doing something with regard to the things that must be done for the violence to stop. They aren't doing it. As for people saying that the violence in Baghdad is less now; they are correct. When we started cracking down on some of the militias there they simply moved to where we were not and did their thing there.
They are still finding up to 200 tortured dead bodies in the streets of Baghdad each month so it's hardly fair to say that the violence is getting a lot less.
One of the biggest problems in Iraq at the moment is the government's unwillingness or inability to do anything to restore even a semblance of normality for the common person in terms of such things as water, electricity, or safety. They are no further toward reconciliation and my personal opinion, based on a fairly good understanding of the social and ethnic dynamic there, is that they are not going to.
Remember, it's not the fault of the troops that things are so bad there. The troops have performed well and have done whatever they were asked to do. The fault is in the Iraqi government that won't do the hard work it needs to do, and with the police and military there, both of whom are riddled with sectarian militias and even after over four years cannot be counted upon to stand up in a fight. Now this isn't all of them, but it's the majority. As they say, a house divided against itself cannot stand.
I see where the Republicans are about to prove how little they truly support our troops in an upcoming vote. A democrat has proposed giving our troops sufficient time home after a deployment to begin to recover and come back to their full strength. We promised them that when they enlisted, but have broken that promise repeatedly. Jim West wants to put it into the next appropriation bill. All it says is that they get an equal time at home to the time they spent in Iraq before being redeployed if they are RA, and three times that if they are National Guard.
Everything I'm reading is that while a majority will vote for it, it won't be the 60 votes needed in the Senate to override an expected veto. So I have a question: If the president and congress both "support our troops" why are they opposed to seeing those troops rested and having time to spend with their families before being sent back into harm's way?
If this president had the courage of the troops going to Iraq, he would would make the best decision for this country given his track record on his ability to carry out his job... and he would resign... But he won't because it's all about ego for him... He's a sick individual...
Denying additional leave is a travesty, though the diehard Bushie supporters still seem to be fine with it. I guess it will take the very real prospect of a 'draft' to really wake people up. Republican House Leader Boehner is telling repubs not to join ranks with the "wimps.' Re veto: They're all trying to save their hides by jumping at long last on the Baker-Hamilton band wagon -- which was a pathetic attempt at CYA in the first place. Harry Reid is getting a drubbing from both sides, but he's probably correct when he says no matter what they do, Bush is going to do what he wants. Sad but true -- though his time will come and a lot of the 'stay-the-course-for-the-LONG WAR' hawks and the wishy washy 'have-it-both ways-wimps' [on both sides] are going to go down with him.
The concoction of this war was a crime from start to finish -- a war crime. Maybe Moore's next one after "Sicko" will be something like: "Murder, they wrote!"
However, I have never been a supporter of George W. Bush, the man or his administration. At this point I still think the biggest long term threat to the world is Islamo-Nazism ... however, the biggest short term threat to the world, and to our country is the tyrannical control that certain multination corporations are trying to exert over the US to control both the US and the world in order to stomp out democracy in a way that is just as much of a threat as radical Islam.
Bush is one man. Cheney is one man. These men did not get where they were on their own. There is billions if not trillions of dollars behind this effort, and it utililzes organization and people who do not even know they are unwittingly being used and duped by this machine.
I might even go as far to say that the whole system of money is a lie. There is so much money stolen, ( just look at the financial scandals of the last 30 years) oddly many of them happening around the Bush family, and imagine billions of dollars funnelled off for diversion to projects to grab more and more control over a newly and poorly regulated global economy and you might be able to grasp just a smidge of what I am trying to get at.
My point is - what good is it even if we do righteously blow the living be-jesus out of the Islamo-Nazis if our country has a fatal disease injected by those who have been elected to manage it at the highest levels of all its institutions.
What good does it do for you and me to have our military, the world's largest military - designed and paid for by millions of Americans so they would be able to live in peace and minimize the risk of their and their children's lives and limbs in fighting the evil in the rest of the world in the hands of a clever group of those same powermad people who have been clever enough to fool us by exploiting our trust, and bulding a noose of economic dependency for local people all over the world?
I think it has been a very very bad deal ... I think we need a new deal ... or a new new deal.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/military/2007-07-15-ied-cover_N.htm
"... Years before the war began, Pentagon officials knew of the effectiveness of another type of vehicle that better shielded troops from bombs like those that have killed Kincaid and 1,500 other soldiers and Marines. But military officials repeatedly balked at appeals — from commanders on the battlefield and from the Pentagon's own staff — to provide the life-saving Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicle, or MRAP, for patrols and combat missions, USA TODAY found. ..."
[ Eh? ... Islamo-Nazi!?!?!?! What?!?!?!? ]
That is still no reason to keep troops there when the Iraqi government refuses to make any of the important steps necessary to ensure any sort of success. They prefer to take vacations, argue, and watch our troops die and theirs desert.
It's all pretty much a moot point now anyway as they have invited us to leave. I would sure love to be a fly on the wall in D.C. right now listening to the spin meisters figuring out how to convince us all that Al-Maliki didn't say what he said. It's got to be frustrating as hell for them that he happened to say it in English so they can't even claim a mistranslation. What I do know is that no matter what Mr. Bush promised in the past, he will absolutely not keep his word on this one. I would stake my life on it.
The same idea is true of Southern Lebanon, that they Hezbollah bribed and propagandized people who live there would get along fine with Israel if it were not for Israel's invasion in responce to rocket attacks and having their soldiers kidnapped.
My feeling is that the war is being fought in these people hearts, the training is lifelong, in school they are taught to hate the West and Israel. That some day Islam with dominate the world, and it is their duty to contribute to that in some material and important way.
This kind of society cannot be allowed to exist. If we do not poke it, what will happen is that it will simply expand into new areas, grow and agitate to re-organize these new Islam lands under Sharia. If there is resistance, terror is used, as it is used to indoctrinate children and rebellious adults freely inside the bounds of the lands of Islam.
I can more agree with your pramatic questioning of the value of maintaining troops in an area where they are in harms way but their accomplishments are questionable. I think the crowd in the White House is incompetant in all dimensions of measurement. They are costing the success of the war, and huge costs in lives, money and medical liabilities.
In fact if you look at what the main motivations of the hardline Republicans around the Bush family, Reagan, and the Global Corporation Ownership Society proponents, one of their loudest and most vociferous goals has been to drown the US government in debt so that a crisis will occur and will be resolved by a coup of Capitalist/Global "leadership", drowning civil government for good.
This idea, since it is really not discussed, not well advertised unless you read the right wing white papers and listen carefully to their rhetoric, is treasonous to the Constitution of America, which these people have disingenuously sworn to uphold.
The answer to all these problem is in getting rid of the influence of Bush, Cheney, the far ideologically indocrtinated right, and never letting them return to any power in the US government again. Otherwise kiss this country, and the world good-bye.
Another example is how now the European Union is being blackmailed and overpowered to force genetically modified potatoes to be grown there, under US political force. If they can do this in Europe, what have they done and what are they doing in the US. If you think you are free, but you do not exercise your freedom or protect it as a citizen one day you will wake up in concrete boots.
I would urge everyone to write their Congress-people, and Nancy Pelosi, whatever party you are in, whatever you believe in and support actions of impeachment of the President and Vice-President. Let them hear how tired we are of all of this tyrannical group of idiots who are undermining the Constitution and grabbing power under the aegis that they know better and can do better, yet everything they get any chance to touch turns to garbage, and death, and drags the country down.
Let's get these clowns out for good.
I don't for a moment argue with your basic premise regarding the nature of radical Islam or its goals. That's another reason I say we should have won in Afghanistan and stabilized that area. Just as radical Islam grows and takes over, a stable democracy anywhere over there would probably do the same over time.
You're not going to see an impeachment because the mess the Republicans made by attempting to impeach Clinton over a blow job has soured everyone on dragging the country through another such mess. Besides, there is neither time nor votes to do so.
I fear though that the corruption of which you speak is already deep within each of the parties and virtually all of the elite classes. I have read about the GM food debate. Personally I will not knowingly eat that stuff, but for the most part we don't even know since the manufacturers successfully have paid off enough congressmen and women to ensure we are not told. They know that if we know we won't buy it. That's something they cannot have.
I'll lay you a wager that the number and volume of presidential papers placed under total secrecy from this president will outstrip the rest of them combined. It will be a generation before we know for sure just how deep the corruption runs and how much damage they've done. It's really sad and unfortunate that there are a lot of Democrats out there who will try to do the same thing.
or...
wait...
Maybe it's the French... Yeah, that's who it is ... They've always had it out for the Germans (AKA NAZIS aye aye aye huh huh wink wink) ... And boy are those French Squirly !!! I'm glad I switched over to FREEDOM FRIES!!!! Those French were trying to kill us with Cholesterol!!! Damn them with their French Red wine daily to counter act heart clotting Fries!!! and their Layz Ay Fair approach to things ... Jwah day Vee Indeed!!!
oooooh!!! No wait!!! It's those Russians!!! You know how they Hated those Nazis!!!! Oh, and they've always been so good at PROPAGANDA aye! aye! aye??? Isn't Propaganda A Russian word any way??? Well, It just sounds Russian... It should be Russian... They like invented the whole idea!!! didn't they??? Saying stuff that REALLY isn't true and calling things by sneaky tricky names so people will see things the way THEY want them to.... OOOOOh those sneaky Russians!!!! Twisting the truth!!! Making stuff up to Justify their actions!!!!! Ooooh it's them it's them it's them!!!!! OOOOOH good one there BOLLOCKS!!!!! You're a sharp one!!!! Ouch!!!!
Oh!!! No wait.... The BRITISH!!!! How sneak is that!!!! They got pounded by the Nazis.... Oh that would be the height of sneakyness.... Ooooh You are Clever Bollocks!!!!
Oh wait!!! The Jews!!! Of course!!!! ... No ... Wait... but then your Sick Hatred would just be hanging out there for the whole world to see.... Wink Wink Wink Nudge Nudge ... wouldn't it?
unless you were really sly about it.....
know what I mean???
that will be the tar-baby that sticks to
all the Republican Presidential candidates
in 2008.
No matter how they will try to distance
themselves and shake off the Bush
tar-baby, it will still stick.