Who Really Took Over During That Colonoscopy


Published: July 29, 2007

THERE was, of course, gallows humor galore when Dick Cheney briefly grabbed the wheel of our listing ship of state during the presidential colonoscopy last weekend. Enjoy it while it lasts. A once-durable staple of 21st-century American humor is in its last throes. We have a new surrogate president now. Sic transit Cheney. Long live David Petraeus!

[need access?]

Published in: on July 29, 2007 at 11:06 am  Comments (1)  

The URI to TrackBack this entry is: https://donkeyod.wordpress.com/2007/07/29/who-really-took-over-during-that-colonoscopy/trackback/

RSS feed for comments on this post.

One CommentLeave a comment

  1. I can only assume that Rich is attempting comedy with his comment “Sic transit Cheney” as the Latin phrase means “Thus passes” … pleeze, we could only be so lucky that Cheney would pass the torch onto someone else. I seriously wonder if Cheney’s cabal brethren do not have a plan to maintain the Fourth Branch of Government after January 21, 2009.

    Gen. David Petraeus is acting as America’s Viceroy.
    RECOMMENDED READING this article where Petraeus is moving on another strategic change with the “hiring” and arming Sunni’s as local protection forces. Did Petraeus not learn anything from his Mosul experience? As the article warns”More than one influential Sunni in Rasheed indicated they had ambitions beyond securing their immediate neighborhood. “Our first priority is to go after al-Qaeda. Then we can support the Americans in fighting Jaish al-Mahdi,” said one Sunni leader, referring to the Shiite militia that operates in the district. This is a change in US policy and that has not been debated or discussed as it should have been. In fact, this is exactly opposition of the McCain offered plan that advocated forcing the ethnic and religious groups to be part of a united Iraqi military. This may be the basis of the suggestion that Prime Minister al-Maliki wants Petraeus replaced.
    Petraeus’s other plan to have US forces there through 2009 is a blatant challenge to the al-Maliki government and to the US Congress.
    With both of these actions, the question must be asked : Why is Petraeus acting without approval and in concert with the al-Maliki government … or is he acting in preparation for the al-Maliki coalition government failure? Shouldn’t America be “supporting” the “elected government” ?
    Both of these actions seem to be counter to al-Mahdi’s expressed goals of getting America out of Iraq. Why isn’t Petraeus placing more emphasis on going after the people who are sending mortars into the Green Zone? Those mortars are launched from close distances and are a direct affect on the operation of not only the US Embassy but also the operation of the central government.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: