Anti-war Democrats?

Some House Democrats want the Iraqi prime minster’s speech to them cancelled because he, imagine the insolence, won’t parrot the US line on Israel. They’re even threatening to boycott.

And get this, Speaker of the House Hasfert is playing the moderate against them, saying the PM certainly will not be disinvited (while laughing up his sleeve at Democrats who are trying to be more right-wing than neocons while pretending to sort of oppose that other war.)

As for netroots darling Ned “Anti-war Lite” Lamont, why his views on the Lebanon invasion are as myopically one-sided and pro-Israel as his opponent, ultra-Zionist Joe Lieberman. Except Lamont’s so clueless he thinks the US should not, you know, force anyone to do anything, and certainly not actually speak to Hamas or Hezbollah. but nonetheless somehow should magically make peace happen. Pixie dust, anyone? As if US policy wasn’t directly responsible for the invasion in the first place.

Why Israel is losing

And it is precisely because America and Israel are losing influence over global events, that an American attack upon Iran in 2007 becomes more likely.

God help us all.

Like Foghorn Leghorn says to the little chickenhawk in the Warner Brothers cartoons, “Is any of this getting THROUGH, son???” Not through to Democrats, that’s for sure.

If insanity is doing the same thing over and over, expecting different results, then the Democrats fit the definition, Both in their brain-dead attempt to move to the right to grab votes from Republicans (a ‘strategy’ that has been a spectacular failure) and now, yet again, playing mini-Me cheerleading for more wars, forgetting the last two wars they backed have been failures, and, oh yeah, they’re supposed to be against them now, right? How deeply clueless they are. “No guts, no blood, no brains at all.”

Meanwhile, in the real world, Annan: Israel airstrike ‘deliberate’ on UN post