Fineman's been telegraphing Bush's plan for Iraq next year on MSNBC.

[blm]

On Tweety, Fineman said the WH has successfully framed the debate emotionally that Democrats want to cut and run while Bush and the Republicans will "stand firm" and tough.

We know they use the "immediate withdrawal" line from Murtha and distort it to mean immediate and sudden pullout.

Except they are already planning to do drawdowns to protect the GOP congress for 06 elections. They will make it appear that they are following their own plan and that they are able to pull out BECAUSE they are succeeding, not retreating like Dems wanted.

Not full withdrawal by the end of 2006 like Kerry's plan, but, enough of a drawdown to at least get them through the Nov election.

Then...who knows what they'll do....my bet would be that they send more troops back in.

[still_one]

1. BULL

They have NOT sucessfully framed anything

If there is anything that is being done to confuse the situation, it is a few democrats who are stepping out of the ranks

I have no doubt that we will be in Iraq for years, until people are tired of sacrificing their children for a war based on a lie

[blm]

3. MEDIA'S using WH frame that Dems want immediate withdrawal. Fineman just

reiterated that point because it makes Dems the "mommy" party.

Of course, it's bullshit, but almost every news show is allowing it.

Now do you get why the media only made noise about the immediate withdrawal plan while refusing to discuss Kerry's withdrawal plan in any detail? Kerry's is harder to frame as cut and run.

[still_one]

4. just like the off year elections

I think we will be in for some pleasant surprises in 2006

The alito nomination is coming up, and even if it doesn't go well it will be the first stake in the repukes heart. The idiots in this country are becoming well aware of what is happening, and drawing down token troops from Iraq will NOT make them comfortable with the plans they have for medicare, social security, energy, and much more

[Joe for Clark]

2. On the second at Gettsyburg, Hancock was posed a

similar question when confronted with the advance of the infamous general into the wheat field. You know what he said?? "God I wish that it were so, but I don't believe those people will allow it."

Joe

[Joe for Clark]

6. Sickles, of course, was that general.

Couldn't allow that to go forward without correction, clarification.

Even my own lack of clarity.

Maybe, in a way, it is 1863 for our generation.

But, indeed, there was an 1865. And there will be now. Just Johnson will not be the guy impeached.

Joe

[liveoaktx]

5. VIDEO

Edited

[KharmaTrain]

7. Bingo...Now That There's 3 Of Us Who Can See It

I'm tired of the corporate media trying to expect a "Democratic" plan. The deal is this is a Repugnican war...let them fight it. If people aren't satisfied in how it's being run...or if its needed at all, then that's where Democrats come in. The last thing I want is this to go from being their war or ours.

I applaud Murtha for holding firm and that the emphasis has to be placed on Repugnicans taking responsibility...forcing them to define who we're fighting, why we're fighting them, why it's so important and what definite, concrete landmark indicates a "victory".

But none of this matters as booosh is hellbent on profitting this war to the bitter end...we'll still have troops in there in 2008.

[wisteria]

8. Yeah, using Iran as the excuse and the need to protect the Iraqi's

from them.