The latest Democrat-supportive, actually non-Conservative "skirt text under pretty SCHIP title" and "Iraq was stupid and so is the flag except say Mexico's or ANY other as we buy immigrant credibility on the cheap while building cabrini Green and Cook County Hospital around them" blarney, to come into my email was PFAW, telling me Congress needs to grow a spine and stand up to Bush.

 

Okay, okay, okay. Have a position favoring as little defense as possible for any future storm troops riding into the USA and crushing the bodies not of officials who fled or govern remotely, but the mere population in its immigrant, racial, and gender diversities. Call the USA flag a useless reminder of a bygone Constitution and reputation...whatever sickens you about it as you pretend to civic pride and service. Say it's okay to do what Bush does UNLESS al-Qaeda really meant it when they said leave fill in the blank alone...so far, no Qaeda complaints about Darfur or Kosovo or such, so a-ok there, even if Laden or Mymood Alibabajihad or whoever just gobbles up Iraqis like you'd stop somewhere else with much more ease...be people who pander fear of EVERYTHING and prove your grit only via endorsing swatting tiny sitting ducks, but running from or appeasing or leaving alone even al-Qaeda. All of that is political speech aimed at saying only a rare few elitists are gifted enough to collectivize and apportion life as they alone deem critical to New Urban communities, diplomacies and workforces known only to them, as is this mythical 1960's style polluting industrial-military behemoth only 99% of the world can't see. All that is stuff for primary and general ballots.

 

But could we PLEASE stop saying that Congress isn't standing up to the BUSH who caused it all and inexplicably even to Democrats has somehow made what you don't like, whoever you are, permanent, so what can his successor do but expand those cards? See, even if Bush DID do it all at home, deepening it isn't a spine, is it? Are we to also believe that, say, Mayor Daley or Governor Blagojevich are but cringing waifs before Bush, only pretending to be pinky ring silk suit swagger masters of the new Illinois THEY refuse to even allow to consider having private enterprise equal to or even on the map compared to mass subsideized or public housing? Isn't true that for years the biggest lobbyists in DC have been States and Cities? What do they do with the money they demand, and if as they please, how is Bush or anyone else responsible?

 

The plain fact is, Iraq is due a chance as General Petraeus outlined, and undercutting him with then calls for partition, toss to Iran and Qaeda, and pullout for pastures "easier" is what wastes our time, Iraqi and USA troops' lives and sacrifices, and money...so far, even as to Qaeda, all one really sees is some say leaving the pukes alone and obeying their warnings "like we should've done re Iraq when Qaeda bombed under Clinton as Durbin called for Iraq action" will 'reddeploy' smartly.

 

The only "spine" Congress needs to show is what it expects USA general defensive capability to look like under them, what kind of business, free trade and job opportunities they will aggressively pursue once everybody has a subsidized or public home and only public healthcare is allowed...that, and how long we'll have to wait for it; after all, you can see that even omnipartisan "hate Bush" folks are planning to natterjack over a litany of tinier military actions, every bit as costly or more so than Iraq, so why not cut the anti-Iraq and pro-Socialist non-worker society chatter, let Petraeus proceed, and start lobbying for States and Cities to promote businesses and agriculture that will give ANY President better trade treaty options, allow us to stimulate other nations' growth through renewed ability to buy from and thus invigorate them which increases our prospects, allow us to stop inferring all immigrants are illegal and that all nationals think all immigrants have to go, and be less obssessed with fear of everyone and everything, most importantly fear of voicing opinions or hopes to elected officials? I mean, when you hear how States and Cities should each determine what does or doesn't sound like terror talk, just grousing about losing a subprime home or eviction after job loss could de facto equate you with the dispossession dogma of the PLO and get you on watch lists or worse, in some towns. 

 

The absence of same only seems to benefit those who create it, offer to save from it, and spend their lives saying somebody else must have created it and a "conspiracy" keeps them from altering it. So since all I hear is "wahhhh, Bush bad!" and not what specifically beyond the now-stale rhetoric "hope" his critics aspire to domestically (we've been hearing that blarney "hope amid the same status quo" since the MAN from 'Hope' was elected in 1992), I continue to support Bush in his assessment of Iraq upon the Petraeus report, and I continue to support Conservatives for 2008 office.

According to America's Job Bank, that U.S. Dept. of Labor tool we've all heard about for so long and described as typical of where all those jobs hiding online hang out, it ceased operating as of July 2007, three months ago; non-Conservatives haven't yet even mentioned that teeny weeny item, currently reviewable at http://www.jobbankinfo.org/ , so again, just how serious are some Cities and States and others that they'd as much as entertain designs for more jobs than they've got?