WHO'S REALLY UNDERMINING U.S. TROOPS?

Today Darth Cheney accused the Democratic leadership of undermining the troops. I haven't spoken to a single enlisted man who buys that line of crapola. Instead I got some information that clearly shows exactly who is undermining the troops.

This morning I got some even more disturbing news from the front. Aside from the regular stuff about how things are getting worse and worse, which one always hears from guys stationed in Iraq, something new and very ominous. The soldiers are being told that the Democrats are cutting off funding. That has started manifesting itself in reduced meals, reduced perks, signing for ammo on a per-round basis...

If this is true, it's insane! Are they actually trying to make it look like the Democrats are screwing the troops, something not even the most gung-ho anti-war Democrat would ever allow? Or are they trying to save money to make up for what they've already stolen? Or stretch their resources so they can keep the fighting going longer? Reducing meals immediately makes me thing of Halliburton profiteering. But they could also be reallocating money for covert operations or even an attack against Iran.

Or maybe troops like the idea of going over the Iraq without sufficient armor? And know that if the lack of training and lack of adequate supplies causes them grievous injury, they'll be dumped in a vermin infested hovel for sub-adequate care (unlike Cheney's private hospital at his home)? Congresswoman Solis told me she had just come back to the U.S. from a fact-finding trip to Iraq where she did listen to the profession Bush Regime propaganda specialists pushing the Regime line but that she also made a point of speaking to random enlisted men and women at every opportunity. Her impression: many of these young patriots were biting the bullet, doing their duty and praying they'd get home in one piece and in a reasonable amount of time. They were in fact, "doing time."

I do however, think the Democratic leadership has undermined the only troops Cheney actually cares about, his Halliburton shock troops of grand larceny. In fact, they're so undermined-- and so petrified of investigations into their war profiteering, recklessness, and theft in the range of many millions of dollars, that they're picking up stakes and moving to a safer place... safer than Texas? What could be safer for a corrupt corporation than Texas? Halliburton, meet Dubai; Dubai, Halliburton. Oh, you already know eachother? Oh.. that well. Who knew?

Well, the question might be-- aside from you really knew?-- who should have known and, more important, who should have done something about it. Pinocchio-in-Chief and his rogue regime found another poor schnook to offer up as a third scapegoat for their malfeasance and criminal incompetence regarding Walter Reed. Bush feigned shock and horror when told. Any shock and horror, though, was the shock and horror of being exposed for what a bastard and hypocrite he is.

Forget for a moment that top Regime supporters and rubber stampers in the Congress like John McHugh (R-NY), C.W. Bill Young (R-FL) and Steven Buyer (R-IN) were supposed to know what was going on with the care of military wounded were getting, did know all about the disgrace that a Halliburton offshoot had turned the place into, and chose to brush it under a rug and make light of it. Instead, let's look for a moment at Bush's desperate attempt to play dumb.

Although Bush can plausibly deny he reads newspapers (or anything other than Shakespeares and Camus), a major series in the Washington Post can hardly be ignored by the entire Regime. However 2 full years ago when Mark Benjamin first broke this story at Salon and then on National Public Radio's On the Media (with a follow-up on January 5, 2005), Bush and his co-conspirators could keep their fingers crossed and hope no one with a louder voice said anything-- or that the next episode of the Paris Hilton/Anna Nicole Smith roadshow du jour would overpower it, not just on Fox, but on the pathetic Fox imitators like CNN. It worked.


UPDATE: AND NOW WILL CHENEY CRAWL BACK IN HIS UNDISCOLSED HOLE?


Cheney's outrageous slander of the day was smacked down by grievously wounded war hero Max Cleland almost as soon as he spewed it out. John over at Crooks and Liars has the video.

"Where the hell were you in the Vietnam War?" Cleland asks the odious and oft-deferred vice-president. "If you had gone to Vietnam like the rest of us, maybe you woulda learned something about war. You can't keep troops on the ground forever-- you gotta have a mission, you gotta have a purpose. You can't keep sending 'em back and back and back with no mission and no purpose. As a matter of fact, the real enemy is Al Qaeda, it's Al Qaeda stupid, it's not in Iraq."

Speaker Pelosi can't call Cheney an idiot (too polite and respectful of the office). But she might as well have:

It is a disservice to our military personnel for President Bush and Vice President Cheney to continue to advocate for an open-ended commitment in Iraq, while brushing aside the advice of military leaders and the bipartisan Iraq Study Group, all of whom argue that the war in Iraq cannot be resolved militarily but only through diplomatic, economic and political means. As the Vice President's remarks today prove again, the Administration's answer to continuing violence in Iraq is more troops and more treasure from the American people.

The House Appropriations Committee will consider a plan this week that will take Iraq policy in a new direction. The bill will hold the Iraqi government to the President's own performance benchmarks, reduce the number of U.S. troops in Iraq, honor our promises to our military personnel and veterans, and refocus our efforts on Afghanistan and fighting terrorism.