New York Times: "In the Christmas spirit, the time has come for the reality-based community to reach out to the White House.The Bush warriors are so deluded, they're even faking their fakery.
This week, the president presented a plan-like plan for 'victory' in Iraq, which Scott McClellan rather pompously called the unclassified version of their supersecret master plan. But there would be no way to achieve victory from this plan even if it were a real plan. If this is what they're telling themselves in the Sit Room, we're in bigger trouble than we thought.Talk about your unknown unknowns, as Rummy would say.The National Strategy for Victory must have come from the same P.R. genius who gave President Top Gun the 'Mission Accomplished' banner about 48 hours before the first counterinsurgency war of the 21st century broke out in Iraq.It's not a military strategy - classified or unclassified. It's political talking points - and not even good ones. Are we really supposed to believe that anybody, even the most deeply delusional Bush sycophant, believes the phrase 'Our strategy is working'? The president talked about three neatly definable groups of insurrectionists. But as Dexter Filkins reported in yesterday's New York Times, there are dozens, perhaps as many as a hundred, groups fighting the U.S. Army in Iraq, and they have little, if anything, in common. Mr. Bush's presentation claimed that the U.S. was actually making progress in Iraq. But outside the Bush-Cheney-Rummy bubble, 10 more marines were killed by a roadside bomb outside Falluja, for a total of 2,125 U.S. military deaths so far. The administration must realize it needs a real exit strategy, because it's advertising for one. The U.S. Agency for International Development is offering more than $1 billion for anyone - anyone at all - who can come up with a plan to pacify and rebuild 10 Iraqi cities seen as vital in the war."

by Carl Hiaasen�
The loudest cheerleader for invading Iraq is on the stump once again, defending the bloody, bogged-down occupation and lambasting its critics.

Getting a war lecture from Dick Cheney is like getting dating advice from Michael Jackson."

by Ralph Nader
The debate between progressives and corporatists over the state of the mass media goes like this-the former say fewer and fewer giant media conglomerates control more of the print and electronic outlets while the latter respond by saying there has never been more choices for listeners (radio), viewers (television) and readers (magazines, newsletters and newspapers combined).
Progressives add that half a dozen big companies, which control so many media, lead to a sameness of entertainment, news and advertisement overload. Corporatists counter by saying that there are more and more specialized media available for just about every taste in the audience.
I want to take a different approach here from my personal experience with the fourth estate and appearing before national audiences. There has been a non-stop decline in access for serious subjects of contemporary importance, especially those topics that challenge corporate power."

Gene Lyons
Wednesday, November 23, 2005
Seemingly stung by polls showing 57 percent of Americans now believe that he 'deliberately misled' the nation into war with Iraq, President Bush did what a successful con man always does in a tight spot: he doubled his bet, resorting to falsehoods so brazen as to invite citizens almost to doubt the evidence of their senses. Who are you going to believe, your president or your lying eyes?

On Veteran's Day, Bush chose another of the handpicked audiences he likes best--soldiers at a Pennsylvania Army depot--to accuse Democratic critics of a 'deeply irresponsible' effort 'to rewrite the history of how (the Iraq) war began.' Bush alleged that Congress saw precisely the same intelligence regarding Iraq's mythical WMDs the White House saw. Consequently, 'when I made the decision to remove Saddam Hussein from power, Congress approved it with strong bipartisan support.'

The president also claimed that a 'bipartisan Senate investigation found no evidence of political pressure to change the intelligence community's judgments.'

None of these things is true. Taking the last first, the Senate Select Committee on pre-war intelligence has pointedly refused to probe White House arm-twisting and selective use of evidence. Indeed, Democrats recently called a surprise closed session to demand answers, provoking GOP Majority Leader Sen. Bill Frist, R-Tenn., to pitch a hissy-fit. Bush simply made that up.

It's also categorically false to say that Congress approved removing Saddam Hussein from power. 'Regime change' never came to a vote. The White House strenuously insisted that its October 2002 Iraq resolution was not a de facto declaration of war.

Bush vowed to work through the U.N. Security Council and to exhaust every peaceful remedy for the alleged Iraqi threat. He portrayed himself as reluctant to fight. 'I am very firm in my desire to make sure that Saddam is disarmed,' he said two days after the vote. 'Hopefully, we can do this peacefully. The use of the military is my last choice, is my last desire.'"