MTP-Uh I think Gen. Adizaid is going to "spend more time with his family"

[underpants]

Just now on Meet The Press Russert asked him if question the conduct of the war underminds the troops and their morale.

Abizaid-~No debate is good it is what our country is about and hopefully there can be such debate in Iraq as well, that is our goal~

~close quote something like that

THEN Russert asked him about the elections in Iraq

~I think that any form of election is good. In two weeks they are supposed to have elections in Afghanistan and they might not be without problems and there may be problems in Iraq but as I recall we had some problems with our own elections in 2000

WOW!

[ClassWarrior]

1. He said that elections would be held in "the majority" of Iraq.

That's be better than 2000 in the USofA.

23.

[0007]

2. What a boring double speak son of a bitch

Abizaid is a junior shill and no more. A general of a shit house that junior is in charge of.......

[trapper914]

3. Also noticed...

He's reading quite a bit from cue cards or a teleprompter (Watch his eyes).

Does MTP submit questions in advance so they can script the answers?

[IkeWarnedUs]

4. you might want to put a comma in the first quote

To go from "No debate is good" to "No, debate is good".

I am listening to the interview and when I first read your post I thought we were watching different shows.

About the second quote - WOW is right.

I wonder if this administration is shooting itself in the foot about postponing our elections in case of a terrorist attack. If Iraq and Afghanistan can hold elections with hundreds dying every day, we can hold ours too - no matter what.

[underpants]

5. Time for edit has expired

but thanks for mentioning it.


I thought both were WOW moments. First Franks says that Kerry CAN be commander in chief -only a douchebag like Hannity would even ask that no hold it Russert asked a like question-now Abizaid blows W's whole "Look at how 'Murkan I am" arguement.

[VolcanoJen]

6. Anyone catch Safire talking about the debate commission?

He's helping to spread the pre-debate Rovian strategy of blaming the commission for unfairness if anything bad happens to Bush during the debates. :eyes:

Yesterday, from Chris Bowers' blog:

http://www.mydd.com/story/2004/9/25/145429/883

However, what I really think is going on here is an attempt by the Bush campaign to shift the post-debate focus away from the content of debate itself and toward a "Biased Debate Commission" storyline. This would especially be the case if things do not go well in the debate for Bush, and would be very similar to what happened with the CBS memo story. The Republican post-debate spin could center on how the commission and the moderators, who refused to sign the agreement, did not abide to the agreement and were unfair to Bush during the debate (a couple of lame examples will be offered up and hammered over and over again by the VRWC). It is an attempt to make the medium the story, and once again produce the culture war narrative of a small conspiracy of liberal elites working against the President and the majority he represents. It will become impossible for Kerry to win any future debates, because the pundits will be frightened and many people will have the perception that Kerry has an unfair advantage due to the Protocols of the Liberals of Hollywood and Academia.

[underpants]

7. ~Bush will try not to lose and Kerry MUST WIN!!

I think it was Safire who said that.

Gimme a f'ing break.