President Bush meets with a Marine combat patrol unit at Al-Asad Airbase in Anbar province after making a surprise stop in Iraq to meet with Gen. David Petraeus, commanding general of the multinational forces in Iraq, U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker, Iraqi leaders, and U.S. troops. (AP Photo by Charles Dharapak)
by Mark Silva, updated with reports and new photos from Iraq:
With a surprise Labor Day landing in western Iraq to lay the groundwork for a renewed campaign for the war on Capitol Hill this month, President Bush asserted that his escalation of U.S. forces is helping to restore order.
If security gains already made in Iraq continue, Bush said during his personal inspection today, the U.S. will be able to “maintain the same level of security with fewer American forces.’’
“When we begin to draw down troops in Iraq, it will be from a position of strength and success, not from a position of fear and failure,’’ Bush told several hundred Marines assembled at an air base in Anbar province. Any drawdown will be based on a “calm’’ assessment of conditions on the ground by military leaders, Bush said, not the “nervous’’ reaction of politicians watching polls.
The president, making his third unannounced appearance in Iraq since the U.S.-led invasion that toppled Saddam Hussein in March 2003, landed in the heart of a province where the military points to gains in security made since the start of a “surge’’ of troops earlier this year. That escalation has targeted Baghdad, but also includes thousands of Marines in Anbar province.
The commander-in-chief’s surprise address to Marines in a remote and contested region of Iraq serves as a dramatic opening for two weeks of contentious congressional hearings on Capitol Hill, where Democratic leaders will question not only gains made with the military surge, but also the future course of the war.
“The strategy we put into place earlier this year was designed to help the Iraqi’s improve their security,’’ Bush said in Iraq, before a six-minute address to the Marines, “and that is exactly the effect it is having in places like Anbar… If the kind of success we are now seeing continues, it will be possible to maintain the same level of security with fewer American forces.’’
Bush met with Gen. David Petraeus, commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, as well as Iraqi leaders. After an 11-hour flight of Air Force One shrouded in secrecy, the president spent about six hours on the base before heading to Australia for a summit of the leaders of Pacific Rim nations meeting in Sydney this week.
The al Asad Air Base, temporary home for 10,000 U.S. forces, is the center of power for coalition forces in a region where tribal leaders are credited with regaining control from terrorists who had made the region one of the nation’s most dangerous.
The president, en route to a summit of Pacific Rim nation leaders in Australia this week, made the announced stop on his way. The visit comes as the White House prepares to defend its "surge'' of forces in Iraq during two weeks of hearings on Capitol Hill and report to Congress by Sept. 15 on the progress of the war, as Democrats have demanded.
Read more, and see more photos of the president's stop in Iraq below:
In addition to seeking congressional patience for the U.S. mission in Iraq, President Bush is trying to shore up the government of Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, which has failed to meet most of the benchmarks which Congress has set -- a subject of much testimony coming this week on Capitol Hill. (AFP/Getty Images/Louai Beshara)
After a secret flight of Air Force One, President Bush arrives at Al-Asad Airbase in Anbar province today. Second from left: Lt. Gen. Ray Odierno, Gen. David Petraeus, the president, Adm. William Fallon, outgoing Joint Chiefs Chairman Marine Gen. Peter Pace, Defense Secretary Robert Gates, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker. (AP Photo by Charles Dharapak)
The president's trip, as with previous surprise stops in the war zone, was a closely held secret, for security reasons -- though the White House had announced before the trip that First Lady Laura Bush, receiving physical therapy for a hiking injury, would not accompany the president on his journey to Sydney, a sign that a detour such as this could be coming.
The president, who also stopped in Iraq on Thanksgiving 2003 and in June 2006, was scheduled to leave for Australia today, but Air Force One took off from Andrews Air Force Base Sunday evening instead. Bush landed at about 3:45 pm local time in Iraq and planned to stay for six hours, with an address to nearly 1,000 troops at the al Anbar air base.
Bush was joined by National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley and Secretary of State Condolleeza Rice. Defense Secretary Robert Gates was traveling there separately. All of this precedes the testimony that Gen. David Petraeus, the commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, and Ryan Crocker, the U.S. ambassador there, will deliver to Congress next week.
"The idea for this visit arose about five or six weeks ago,'' Hadley said aboard Air Force One during its secret, 11-hour journey to Iraq. "We began thinking about next week and the focus on the Petraeus and Crocker testimony.''
The mission to shore up support for the war was shared with only a small circle of White House staffers and members of the media, who were told that if news of his trip leaked early, it would be scrapped, the Associated Press reported this morning.
There are now 162,000 U.S. troops in Iraq, including 30,000 that have been deployed since February as part of Bush's surge. The president has given every indication that he will press the Congress this month to have patience with a strategy starting to yield results in Iraq.
The print pool reporter traveling with the president provided these details after landing in Iraq today:
"In a trip shrouded in secrecy, President Bush made a surprise visit to Iraq’s al Asad Air Base...The base is in the heart of al-Anbar Province, which Bush has often pointed to as an example of the success of his troop surge in creating space for grassroots political reconciliation.''
At the huge and Saddam-era base — with a 21-kilometer perimeter and temporary home to some 10,000 U.S. troops — Bush was to meet withPetraeus, Crocker and Gates, who traveled to Iraq ahead of Bush-. Admiral Fallon, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice also had joined the presidend aboard Air Force One.
Afterward, Bush was to meet with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and other members of the central government, and also meet with Sunni tribal and provincial leaders who have taken the lead in battling al Qaeda and who are beginning to make political progress in this ethnically homogenous area of Iraq.
The president plans to cap his six hours with a short address— perhaps 15 minutes -- to about 750 troops, according to spokeswoman Dana Perino.
The base in northern Iraq sits about 180 kilometers west of Baghdad and 12 kilometers southwest of the Euphrates river. The base was captured by Australian special forces in April 2003, and is now a major coalition air base.
In a gaggle with reporters, Hadley said the idea for the president's visit to al Anbar was conceived “five or six weeks ago” as part of the administration’s thinking about how to approach its upcoming report to Congress on the progress of the war.
In the interest of security, reporters taken on the trip were summoned early to Andrews Air Force Base, and told to tell only one editor about their itinerary -- and not by cell phone.
Air Force One was wheels up Sunday at 8:05 p.m. EDT, the night before the president's scheduled departure for Australia and the APEC summit.
The president had slipped out of the White House and made his way to Andrews without the typical presidential motorcade to avoid attention, according to NSC spokesman Gordon Johndroe -- who also said the story about Mrs. Bush's neck injury and physical therapy, the stated reason for not traveling to Australia, is real.
Hadley spoke with reporters aboard the presidential aircraft. So did Gen. Douglas Lute, the deputy national security adviser for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The White House rejected any notion that trip is a publicity stunt. Instead, they said that the president wanted to meet in person with not only his commanders and Iraq ambassador, but also Maliki and local Sunni leaders, whom he wants to nudge toward political reconciliation.
President Bush speaks with Gen. David Petraeus, center, and others upon arrival at Al-Asad Air Base in Anbar Province. Admiral William Fallon is seen at right. Photo by Jim Watson, Agence France Presse/Getty Images
"The idea for this visit arose about five or six weeks ago,'' Hadley said. "We began thinking about next week and the focus on the Petraeus and Crocker testimony.
:The report that is due to the Congress on Sept. 15,'' he said. "It calls, of course, for a review of where we are on Iraq. And we began to think about how the president should prepare himself for his own role in that process. Obviously, he wants to hear from Petraeus and Crocker directly about how they assess progress on the ground, what their recommendations are for going forward. He will have an opportunity to do that meeting with them face-to-face during this trip. And, obviously, it is an advantage for him to be able to do that face-to-face.
"There has been a lot of talk about both the security situation and the political progress—both the issue of so-called top-down progress out of Baghdad on the national level and also bottom-up progress in places like Anbar Province. And of course this gives the president an opportunity first hand to hear from people directly involved and make his own assessments at the same time. So he will be meeting with Prime Minister Maliki who will be coming to Anbar Province. Possibly other leaders will as well from the national government…
"He will obviously congratulate them for the statement that was issued about a week ago indicating a way ahead among the key leaders of the Sunni, Shia and Kurdish groups, talking about how they will work with one another, strengthening the cooperation between the prime minister and the presidency council.
"Talking about a sub-Cabinet, if you will, to try and focus on the reform agenda and talking about the provincial law and de-Baathification and preparing legislation in other areas for the Parliament when in reconvenes this month,'' Hadley said. "So this is an important development of a week ago. So the president will want to hear from them directly about how they see things going forward at the national level. He will also be meeting with those national leaders and representatives of the Anbar Provincial Council. Again, it will be an opportunity then for him to hear what has been really a remarkable story in Anbar Province.”
Hadley went on to say that a year ago al Qaeda was in control of the capital of Ramadi, the province, as well as many of the major cities. He recalled a military intelligence officer who said, “Anbar Province is lost.”
“The president saw an opportunity to turn that situation around, “ he said, adding that the president talked about that opportunity in his speech back in January. At the time, Bush had announced that he would add 4,000 troops in Anbar to aid the bottom-up reconciliation process.
"The president wants to see that for himself,'' Hadley said. " Wants to hear from and talk to the Iraqis that have been at the forefront of that pretty remarkable event.”
President Bush laughs with Gen. David Petraeus, second left, and Lt General Odierno, left, as he arrives at Al-Asad Air Base. Photo by Jim Watson, Agence France Presse/Getty Images.
Gen. Lute, the Army general who joined the White House staff in civilian clothes in July, also spoke with reporters aboard the plane. He described al Asad as a Saddam-era airbase built in the 1970s that the coalition has been using since 2003. It is halfway between Baghdad and the Syrian border, right along the Euphrates River Valley, he said.
“This is the middle of the middle of the great desert in al Anbar province, but it is geographically close to the center of the province itself.,'' said, noting that troops here include 7,000 Marines and 3,000 Army. The Marine air wing is headquartered here.
Ed Gillespie, counselor to the president and former chairman of the Republican National Committee, was aboard as well. He said there would be a photo release from the president's meeting with Petraeus and Crocker, a statement from the president after the Maliki meeting, and more photo opportunities with the tribal leaders. Then Bush would address troops.
Asked how he expected the visit to affect the debate in Washington over the war, Gillespie said: "It is hard to tell. I think there has been a lot of information that has been added over the course of August. Because so many members of Congress have come over to see for themselves, as well, and this will be a part of it.
"There is no substitute for that kind of first-hand experience and seeing directly for yourself and talking directly to not only to national leaders but provincial leaders,'' he said of the president's own trip. "I think the information that he gets here, hopefully, will be a contribution to the discussion that we will have in September.”
The Associated Press and the White House pool reporter on the president's trip contributed to this report.
• 
• 
• 
• 
Comments
President Bush landed in Iraq today, and proclaimed mission accomplished. He said that later in the day, he and McCain plan a stroll in the market.
Posted by: bill r. | September 3, 2007 8:11 AM
Har de har har, Bill. With that kind of wit, I suspect you are actually Bill Maher, not bill r.
Posted by: Ken | September 3, 2007 8:39 AM
I predict the only thing that will come out of Dubya's stop in Iraq is more happy talk.
The whole point of the surge (which is a new synonym for reinforcements) was sold to us as buying time for the Maliki government to get its act together.
It hasn't happend.
In fact their attempts have actually gone backwards.
In addition, after 4 1/2 years the Iraqi military and police have proven time and again they put their own religious, ethnic and tribal sects before nationalism.
We need to draw down in an orderly manner while leaving a spy apparatus and a robust special operations capability to act when needed. The rest is up to the Iraqis.
Posted by: Doug Zook | September 3, 2007 8:39 AM
As Air Force One slowed to a stop, President Bush was awakened by one of his advisors, "We're here, Mr. President."
"Ah, Texas. Good people here. It's nice to be home, you know."
"We're in Iraq, sir."
"Iraq?! Why are we in Iraq?"
"You didn't check your email, did you, Mr. President?"
"Rove always did that. My inbox must be bursting. Can you show me how? Wait...why did we stop here? Isn't there a war going on? Did I pack my mountain bike?"
Posted by: Luc Rodgers | September 3, 2007 8:42 AM
So Iraq isn't safe enough for Laura to stop there for a few hours with the best security the world can offer. But Iraqis, who no doubt look back
on the Saddam days as the good days at this point, are expected to live and raise their kids and work in horrendous daily circumstances that few Americans have ever known--so Bush and Clueless Condi don't have to admit they have made a terrible mistake in the invasion and occupation of Iraq.
And every time we think about getting out, Maliki will scare Bush and Condi with threats to get even closer with Iran, knowing that threat is good for getting another few billion in war spoils for rich Iraqi profiteers (like Maliki and Shia pals)...and more dead American soldiers so Iraqis don't have to serve.
Posted by: helena | September 3, 2007 8:50 AM
"The president landed at an air base in al Anbar province west of Baghdad -- a region where the president maintains that success in suppressing terrorism is evidence of the surge's progress."
Excuse me, but wasn't the "surge" all about BAGHDAD? Al Anbar wasn't part of the freaking "SURGE"! It may be a walk in the park in Al Anbar province, but it has nothing to do with whether the "Surge" is "working."
Can the reporter not tell the TRUTH?
Posted by: athena | September 3, 2007 8:53 AM
President Bush is all show. He will say anything he thinks will help his cause.
No substance or honesty required. If a fact gets in the way he disregards it.
Posted by: Ed Z | September 3, 2007 9:03 AM
I'm sorry, Athena, but it is you who are mistaken. Al Anbar Province was indeed part of the surge. The surge announced in January included about 4,000 Marines added to al Anbar in addition to the rest of the troops added to the Baghdad area, about 21,500 at the time of the initial announcement but increased to about 28,000 total since then. That's the truth.
Posted by: Mark Silva | September 3, 2007 9:10 AM
Let the photo ops begin!
Posted by: lochnessmonster | September 3, 2007 9:16 AM
President Bush is right to go Iraq since Dickie Durbin went to Iraq and has been giving several versions of what it is like there. Now W won't have to listen to Dickie's glib assertions he has first hand knowledge ready for the spinmeisters of the liberal variety. Jerry White, Springfield, IL
Posted by: Jerry White | September 3, 2007 9:22 AM
Jerry White,
What is drive by media?
Posted by: Doug Zook | September 3, 2007 9:31 AM
He ought to extend his tour of duty for an extra 3 months like he did to all the troops.
Posted by: roger d | September 3, 2007 9:43 AM
The fact that Bush still has to make 'surprise' visits says it all.
Posted by: Lauren | September 3, 2007 9:46 AM
Mr. Silva, I stand corrected about the troop presence in Al Anbar, as you report.
But can you let us know just what metrics are being used to determine the success of this project? Was not the objective to allow the conditions for political progress?
As I understand it, from Juan Cole of the University of Michigan, that while the Sunnis in Al Anbar are not supporting non-Iraqi jihadists, they are not supporting the Maliki government either. Are we now to accept NO political progress as a sign of the success of the "surge"?
Posted by: Anonymous | September 3, 2007 9:54 AM
who are the people writing these comments. you sound like cheerleaders for failure. why do you wish the US fails here.
ahhh u must be defeatocrats with to much of your own politics invested in the US failing.
wake up join the rest of the country!
your country need you and your being nothing more than discouraging and negative.
Posted by: joseph d | September 3, 2007 10:02 AM
The people of Iraq do not have the ability or desire to be self governing. That is why they had a dictatorship and will fall right back into their little camps of religious and ethnic warring as they continue to do anyway. Will their next dictator(Muktada al Sadr?)please step forward and let our troops(those who remain)come home.
Posted by: Patricia Silarais | September 3, 2007 10:03 AM
Joseph D.,
It is you who are out of step withe majority of Americans. Don't believe me? Google "iraq war polls" and see if that isn't the truth.
But I'm pretty sure you won't care anyway. I think you're putting Republican Party politics ahead of what's best for America and its military.
Posted by: Doug Zook | September 3, 2007 10:17 AM
Two points:
1) Note to 'joseph d.' : kindly stop tossing around the failed GOP bumpersticker expressions. "Defeatocrats?" Puh-leeze, man, that's so 2004.
2) To all reading this: Is there any coincidence between this "visit' and the so-called British pullout (more like 'pullback') in southern Iraq?
My point? Could it be that the oil companies are exerting their will on Bush and Brown to stay the course (another failed expression), no matter what the troop loss numbers may be over the next six months? So they (Big Petro) can keep stealing oil from those un-metered oil wells in Eye-rack?
Chew on that one especially, mister joseph d.
While you're paying more at the pump for all that free oil, you'll also be helping us to pay for the healthcare of these troops when (if) they return. I really hope you like higher taxes, sir.
Posted by: Bruce Y. | September 3, 2007 10:54 AM
Is Mr. Bush ever going to define exactly what constitutes winning the war in Iraq? If he does, maybe there is a chance that it can end. So far he hasnt.
Needing more troops, implies loosing the "war on
terror". Troops going home signifies defeat. Who then is the defeat-o-crat? Who invented this game?
I like the very first comment about Bush going for a walk in the market place. He could shake so many hand of the people who love him so much. Incredible. He wont even do that in his "own" country. Who can possibly support this guy?
Posted by: Xira T. | September 3, 2007 11:14 AM
Did Bush even know he was in Iraq and not in Texas?
Posted by: Greg Witt | September 3, 2007 11:22 AM
During World War II President Roosevelt held several summit talks with the Allied leaders (travelling to Casablanca, Quebec and Yalta, among other trips) and in each instance the trips weren't announced in advance due to security reasons.
What was plain common sense during WWII is somehow held against President Bush today.
A terrorist enemy is attacking the U.S. The U.S. is under no obligation to make it easy for the enemy by announcing our plans (including our plans for presidential visits) in advance. This is sheer common sense.
Posted by: Bruce | September 3, 2007 11:25 AM
How about a "surge" to find Osama Bin Laden? Or is that window of opportunity gone because the US wasted most of its efforts in Iraq for the past couple years?
Posted by: RomanB | September 3, 2007 11:46 AM
Well thanks to Mark Silva for correcting Helena.
There is progress being made in Iraq, whether the Left wants to hear it or admit it or not. Is there still a long way to go? Unfortunately, yes.
And, Bruce Y, just as you say "defeatocrats is so 2004," your oil conspiracies are also old and senseless.
Posted by: John D | September 3, 2007 11:50 AM
RNC Bruce,
Cite one instance where anyone posting here disagrees with Dubya's trip being kept confidential for security reasons?
Can't do it can you?
Your spin is of the corialis effect type down the porcelain device. Right where it belongs.
Posted by: Doug Zook | September 3, 2007 11:52 AM
Cheers for President Bush for visiting
the troops in Iraq. They need to know that they do have support from some Americans.
Posted by: Pierce | September 3, 2007 12:02 PM
What are you sweating about Mr. President?
Now try the photo op with about 40 pounds of field equipment and try to ignore the heat.
Posted by: Kenny Bunkport | September 3, 2007 12:02 PM
where's the
plastic turkey
heh...
Posted by: donkey | September 3, 2007 12:29 PM
RNC Bruce, the Coriolis effect also factors into sniper fire. A fact not lost on all the folks guarding Bush on his latest propaganda jaunt. Factors including the Coriolis Effect, air pressure, humidity, altitude ammo temp, etc all come into play. While some of these factors are well known and taught to military snipers, their effects are small out to the 800 – 1000 yard range. These factors are greatly magnified once you are trying to hit a distant object at 1600 yards or so, and even more critical past the 2K mark. p.s. Bruce you and your girlfriend John D are chickenhawks of the greatest magnitude. Your ramblings add nothing to the Swamp, nor will they sway rightminded individuals.
Posted by: Logic Prisoner | September 3, 2007 12:30 PM
Dadgummit John D and RNC Bruce You won me over with your logic and down-right common sense, men. "Mission Accomplished"!
Like a Cyber-Joe Lieberman, I am ABANDONING the Democratic Party and joining the Neo-Conservative Movement because I too am daggone tired of doing my own thinking. I cant wait to listen to Sean Hannity this afternoon, get my lib keister Hannitized, and blame the Libs for all the woes in America, mock them for their double-standards, and turn my cyber-back on those who insist on leeching off MY tax dollars simply because they are poor (and the bleeding heart liberals who want to help them with MY money).
I too want to admire George Bush's sense of purpose, his clarity of vision. I also want to feel that only he was the right person at the right time.
I have drank the kool-aid and the taste is oooooh soooo sugary sweet!
OK, you Loonie Lefties! Bring in on!
Posted by: Smirky McFlightsuit | September 3, 2007 12:33 PM
Little Johnny D,
You mock anyone hinting oil has anything to do with us being in Iraq but why would President Bush say this on a campaign stop in Colorado November 6, 2006?
President Bush: "You can imagine a world in which these extremists and radicals got control of energy resources. And then you can imagine them saying, "We're gonna pull a bunch of oil off the market to run your price of oil up, unless you do the following."
Looks like you are the one who is senseless. Good night, Johnny D.
Posted by: janet | September 3, 2007 12:36 PM
Commander Guy forgot his flight suit and Mission Accomplished banner.
Better bring back Karl Rove.
Posted by: Doug Zook | September 3, 2007 12:39 PM
To the person that appealed to common sense and said,
"A terrorist enemy is attacking the U.S."
Did invading Iraq solve this problem?
When the US invaded Iraq, it was already in shambles due to an earlier war and economic sanctions. Now that the US has had its grip on the country for four years, why arent things progressing? Bush now thinks its Malaki's fault. Something very important seems to be missing somewhere. Something like common sense.
Posted by: Xira T. | September 3, 2007 12:46 PM
Dubya wanted to personally hand Petraeus, Crocker and Gates their White House written speeches so they can be prepared when they report to Congress how well the surge is working.
Posted by: BC | September 3, 2007 1:14 PM
He corrected Athena not Helena.
But "progress" (a reduction in local violence including sectarian violence )in either Anbar or Baghdad is meaningless if maintainng that progress requires a decades-long massive presence of US troops and trillions of US dollars. We can't afford it. Unless we want to abandon many important projects in our own country (healh care, infrastructure, education) until the Iraqis get tired of taking our money. And given their skill in getting over half a trillion out of us so far,
they are unlikely to soon lose their appetite for US
treasure or blood.
Posted by: helena | September 3, 2007 1:43 PM
"Bush Lands In Iraq, Surprise Stop On A War Stage"
The "war" ended a long time ago (mission accomplished) the Draftdodger in Chief is trying to keep his self-created civil war in Iraq going until Jan 09, when he can pass off his mess to the new Democratic Party President.
It's far past time for the pro-war Republican chickenhawks who cheerlead for this war to back up their toughguy talk and sign up for it.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/45936529@N00/524589871/
Posted by: John E | September 3, 2007 1:45 PM
Expect more gimmicks and photo ops in the next year. Dubya will do ANYTHING to keep the war going till he leaves office.
Reality has nothing to do with Dubyas desire to leave office as a war president.
Posted by: Trust Me | September 3, 2007 2:03 PM
Loony Lefties: 30
Far-right fringe: 0
Mark Silva 1
Posted by: Swamp Scoreboard | September 3, 2007 2:05 PM
I see the lefty loons are out in force today!Ahhhh,if only Karl Rove was there too...the left would have a major Labor Day meltdown.
The Surge is working...Good for America,but bad for the once great democrat party.
***LOSERS***
Paulo
P.S.Mr.President...say hello to JohnE. for us...he's been there since Feb.15,2007.
Posted by: Paulo | September 3, 2007 2:12 PM
God Bless George Bush and God Bless America.
I and millions and millions of people around the world admire his courage as he as Commander-in-Chief joins with his Soldiers Sailors and Marines in the fight for Iraqi Freedom.
The Surge is working and the Iraqi people will be free. Freedom is for everyone.
Posted by: Dick Bergquist | September 3, 2007 2:16 PM
For the president from a military
veteran, a huge HOO-RAH!
Posted by: Douglas M. | September 3, 2007 3:21 PM
Sorry Smirky, you took the red pill. The kool aid effect will wear off and reality will come and bite you in the rear.
Posted by: weinerdog43 | September 3, 2007 4:45 PM
Alt Caption;
"OK boys, now that the surge has succeeded you are ready for Iran, right?"
Posted by: C.Morris | September 3, 2007 5:16 PM
(apologies to Beck)
Loooooooser...
In the time of neocons I was a monkey
Near Beer in my veins and I'm a born-again flunky
With the plastic tonsils, tortured by syllables
Flagging polls? Sell yellow-cake tales of woe
Kill the headlights and put it in neutral
Baghdad's flamin' with a loser and the cruise control
Cheney's in Texas, hide your friends and family
Got a 28 gauge, the world is his enemy
Someone came in sayin I'm insane to complain
About shotgun Cheney and a stain on my shirt
Don't believe everything that you breathe
Unless it comes from Colin and he speaks of WMD's
So embrace the "shock and Awe", show Iraqi's you've got heart
Don't concern yourself with casualties, I can make the Red Sea part
Yo. cut it.
Soy un perdedor
I'm a loser baby, so why did you vote for me?
Soy un perdedor
I'm a loser baby, so why don't you impeach me?
Axis of evil on a bozo nightmare
Ban all dissent with some manufactured fear
'Cause ones got a weasel and the others got a flag
Ones on the pole, shove the other in a bag
With the dog and pony shows and the Faux news-job
The daytime crap of the Oxycontin slob
He fancies himself as the voice of all right-wing
A blob of bloated flesh, takes Viagra for his thing
You cant speak if you cant relate
Trade the facts for the lies for the party for the hate
And my time is a piece of wax fallin on a wing-nut
That's chokin on Iraq
Soy un perdedor
I'm a loser baby, so why did you vote for me?
(get crazy with the hanging chads)
Soy un perdedor
I'm a loser baby, so why don't you impeach me?
(I'm the commander guy))
(yo, mission accomplished)
Soooooooyy....
(I'm a uniter, I'm the decider; things are gonna change I can feel it)
Soy un perdedor
Im a loser baby, so why did you vote for me?
(I cant believe you)
Soy un perdedor
I'm a loser baby, so why don't you impeach me?
Soy un perdedor
I'm a loser baby, so why did you vote for me?
(stay the course, baby)
Soy un perdedor
I'm a loser baby, so why don't you impeach me?
(know what I'm sayin? )
Posted by: dt | September 3, 2007 6:02 PM
Nice propaganda article on the OCCUPATION. Everyone has to stop calling this a war.
Get out of Iraq now. We are not even experts on how to run our own damn country, and last time I checked things were not that rose-y here.
Impeach Bush & Cheney now!!!
Posted by: rockskipper | September 3, 2007 6:08 PM
Great to see George W. Bush visiting the troops. I am ANOTHER vet posting here that supports the president. Taking out Saddam Hussein was absolutely the right thing to do and it should have been done YEARS ago. Do I want to see the troops come home? ABSOLUTELY. The war ended when Saddam Hussein was defeatd, captured, tried, and executed. The future of Iraq will be up to the Iraqi people but the US mission should continue as long as the commanders on the ground and the leadership in Washington deems it nescessary, not a bunch of know-nothing, never been anywhere, cry-baby because Gore and Kerry lost leftists. THis country had to suffer thru all the effects of a "do nothing" Clinton administration and like it or not, Bush has succeeded.
Posted by: Emerson Bolen | September 3, 2007 7:09 PM
John E.
How ironic that you should perfectly describe the Clinton presidency when you refer to the "Draftdodger-in-Chief" and "pass off this mess" to the next president.
As far as "Republican chickenhawks" who cheerleaded this war, I think you better go back and check on who voted to support the invasion...excuse me...the second invasion...of Iraq. I see that you are really passionate on this subject so I am sure you are ready to join our "All Volunteer" military as well, right?
PS I spent 22 years in the US Army...mostly in Special Forces.
Posted by: Emerson Bolen | September 3, 2007 7:48 PM
Why didn't Chicken George run his dog-and-pony show out of Baghdad?
Posted by: Jeff Elijah | September 3, 2007 7:52 PM
E.Bolen
We were attacked EIGHT times at home and abroad during the B.J.(do nothing)Clinton years...
B.J. could only pull the trigger and unload his gun on a blue dress... and don't forget,9/11 was planned for three years under his own nose!
Over 3,000 dead on that dreadful September morning....thanks alot B.J...and now you hope we're going to vote for your---[WIFE?]
***You're going to feel [Our Pain] next November***
Thank-You President Bush for having a good marriage,a loving wife and the vision to see...that the enemy just wants to destroy us...unlike B.J. and his...[Wife?]
Paulo
Posted by: Paulo | September 3, 2007 8:25 PM
Posted by: Emerson Bolen | September 3, 2007 7:48 PM
Hey Emerson Boozer,
Myself and many others aren't going to sign up for your Neo-con led war of choice (Iraq).
Time for you to re-up and "stay the course" for about the next 20-30 years, toughguy.
COLLEGE REPUBLICANS ARE ALL ON DRUDGE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxRj5uWyngI
When your out with your college Republican friends
In your new Mercedes-Benz
And you're on Drudge
And you show up late for school
'Cause you think your really cool
when you're on Drudge
And you put on your headphones
And you step into the pro-war zone
When you're on Drudge
But the world don't care if you're not fighting them over there
'Cause you're a college Republican chickenhawk
Give it to me
College Republican chickenhawks are all on Drudge, yeah
Never getting enough of that tough guy talk
Never get enough
They are all on Drudge, yeah
Give me some of that stuff
They twitch in their sleep
'Cause they wanna hit the street in Iraq
But they're to scared
They're on Drudge
And they cause such a fuss 'cause
There's no one but Fox they can trust
They're on Drudge
And the best of the young days
for our heroes in Iraq
will all vanish in the haze
Because the college Republicans are all still stateside
Walking 'round in a daze
They're talking tough
They are all on Drudge
And they wish they could quit
'cause they're really sick of it
But they're on Drudge
Posted by: John E | September 3, 2007 10:26 PM
Dear "Swamp Scoreboard," er John E., love you keeping score. Not much different than that NBA ref on the take, huh?
Anyway, the only real score will come in 08 when the Queen B goes down to defeat and hundreds of thousands of Loony Lefties take their own lives or finally follow through on their threat and leave the country!
Posted by: John D | September 3, 2007 10:52 PM
Paulo,
You nut. Who cares if Bush has a good marriage and loving wife (other than Bush's family). He's responsible for the well-being of 300,000,000 people, not just his family, his cronies and his "base".
If Bush has such excellent "vision", why did he plunge us into the worst foreign policy disaster in our history? Who is the enemy, by the way? The Iraqi people?
Sorry Paulo, 9/11 happened 9 months into Bush's watch. Not only did Bush's people not consider bin Laden a "priority", they completely ignored Clinton's comprehensive plan to deal with the al Qaeda network.
Then he attacks the wrong country! Tell the families of the 3800 dead soldiers what great "vision" Bush has. And what in God's name makes who think that anyone outside of the 26% dead-enders is going to vote Republican in 2009?
You are hopelessly delusional, Paulo. Repeat after me. No more neocons in 2009. Clinton's been out of office for 7 years, get over it. 9/11 happened on Bush's watch, while he slept. Most of the 9/11 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia. Bush let bin Laden slip away at Tora Bora. When Clinton lied, nobody died.
When are you morons going to realize we don't care about your phony Larry Craig, Tedd Haggard, Mark Foley, Newt Gingrich morality parade. We want a president who knows how to lead. Your obsession with Clinton suggest you have more fundamental demons to deal with. Been hanging out in men's restrooms lately?
Posted by: dt | September 3, 2007 11:02 PM
We were attacked EIGHT times at home and abroad during the B.J.(do nothing)Clinton years...
Posted by: Paula | September 3, 2007 8:25 PM
We also had a competent leader who didn't destabilize the entire Middle East. During the administration of Bill Clinton, the U.S. enjoyed more peace and economic well being than at any time in its history. He was the first Democratic president since Franklin D. Roosevelt to win a second term. He could point to the lowest unemployment rate in modern times, the lowest inflation in 30 years, the highest home ownership in the country's history, dropping crime rates in many places, and reduced welfare rolls. He proposed the first balanced budget in decades and achieved a budget surplus.
Paula your clueless!!!
Posted by: Logic Prisoner | September 3, 2007 11:58 PM
Poor Janet,
I think you totally missed the point of Johnny D's "oil conspiracy" comment. He was referring to the lefties belief that the ONLY reason we went to Iraq was to get oil...which the US imports practically zero from. President Bush's comments were about the reality of islamic extremists wanting to gain control of strategic assests (such as oil) and use them to acquire power and leverage internationally. This is nothing new of course, and if you had read into any of the doctrine that some of the radical leaders of the past and present like Nasser (Egypt), Fadlallah (Hezbollah), Turabi (Sudan), Hussein (Iraq), and of course Bin Laden himself, the goals of the Taliban, Hamas, Syria, Iran, they all support a vision of a "pan-arab" power or "islam without borders". While I believe that goal is completely unrealistic given the massive cultural and religious divisions, it does not prevent the radical idealists from actively pursuing this. Good night and do a bit more research please.
Been there, done that, have all the t-shirts...
Posted by: Emerson Bolen | September 4, 2007 12:30 AM
Geez, Paulo,
It's been 4 1/2 years since Osama bin Laden made the World Trade Center disappear. Do we know where he is? What happened to Mr. Dead or Alive? How's the war in Afghanistan going?, you know, the country that harboured the murderous bin Laden. I hear Afghanistan produced a record 6100 metric tons of opium poppies last year, 92% of the worlds supply. I guess Bush's "vision" doesn't apply to the war on drugs.
Where's the political solution in Iraq, the country we needn't have invaded? What are we going to get for our trillion dollar investment? What exactly did those 3800 American lives (and counting) buy us? WMD's? Fewer terrorist? Nope. A liberal democracy with candy and flowers? Nope. A democracy of any sort? Nope. A stable government that can provide security and basic services? Nope. Now those lofty early goals of the neocons and Bushco, that Iraq would be a beacon of democracy in the Middle East, are tragically absurd. As recently as last week several of Iraq's generals admitted we'll be fortunate if "the surge" results in a quasi-stable government period. Boy, that was worth it.
U.S. intelligence says the world terrorist threat is greater than ever and that the Taliban is on the rebound. What has the "visionary" Bush done to make us safer, Paulo?
If Bush was doing such a stellar job, why did his supporters take a monumental beating in the mid-term elections of 2006?
Who exactly is going to feel "[our pain]" next November? I wasn't aware that Bill Clinton was running for President. What does "his [Wife?]" imply? Do you despise her for "sticking by her man?"
Larry Craig was trolling men's restrooms for other men. His wife was beside him when he announced his retirement.
David Vitter's wife was standing beside him when he admitted hiring prostitutes. The same David Vitter who inherited the the seat of disgraced republican, and Speaker of the House for a minute, Bob Livingston, who himself resigned after being exposed in a sex scandal while trying to crucify President Clinton. At least we had the morally superior Newt to look up to (not)!
At the time of Livingston's demise Vitter said this: "I think Livingston's stepping down makes a very powerful argument that Clinton should resign as well and move beyond this mess." Yet, Vitter is still back in Washington being the best hypocrite he can be.
Last time I heard, Ted Haggard's wife is still around. Has James Dobson "cured him of being gay" yet?
Paulo would have us believe that Clinton's consensual sexual encounter with a 22-year-old intern was the crime of the century. Worse than Hitler's crimes, worse than Stalin's.
OMG, maybe we should blast Thomas Jefferson's face off Mt. Rushmore because of the illegitimate children he fathered with Sally Hemings. After all, that illicit affair should discount all of Jefferson's wonderful achievements and contributions to his country, right Paulo?
Does your head want to explode when all the "family value" folks you idolize are found lacking?
Be afraid Paulo, be very afraid. "The enemy just wants to destroy us", and the enemy is you. Idiot.
Posted by: dt | September 4, 2007 1:45 AM
It's been 4 1/2 years since Osama bin Laden made the World Trade Center disappear.
Posted by: dt | September 4, 2007 1:45 AM
Actually, next week will mark 6 years for WTC. The 4 1/2 years you mention would be for the war on "Iraq".
Just thought I'd point that out.
Posted by: Steve | September 4, 2007 8:29 AM
To those new to the swamp, understand that Paulo condones outing CIA agents if their husbands disagree with the current administration. Paulo's nothing less than a traitor to this nation.
Posted by: Neal | September 4, 2007 9:43 AM
Jerry- What is the drive by media?? Can you explain?? Is that a Rush Limp-baugh term??
Bush's secret trip to Iraq was nothing more than a publicity stunt and a photo op. Why didn't he meet with anyone in the powerless and corrupt puppet Iraqi government?? Oh. I almost forgot. They are all on their 2 month summer vacation.
Posted by: Doug R. | September 4, 2007 9:50 AM
"There is progress being made in Iraq, whether the Left wants to hear it or admit it or not. Is there still a long way to go? Unfortunately, yes."
Well yes, Johnny D, there's progress being made in Iraq, if you are a Shia that is.
Why is violence down in Baghdad? Because the Shia have succeed in driving the Sunni out.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20546328/site/newsweek/
Is a Shia dominated Iraq the US goal? Once again we show, Republicans are Iran's best friend.
Posted by: Tony | September 4, 2007 11:30 AM
Steve,
Thanks for correcting me. Indeed, approaching 6 years. Wifey and I were in NYC for a conference 5 months earlier. It's still hard to believe what transpired.
Never have I so wanted to rally behind our president. Never have I been so disappointed.
Posted by: dt | September 4, 2007 11:53 AM
Hey Emerson Boozehound- Your a tough Republican who has been there, done that, and knows it all, eh??
You should gear up and head over to the Pakistan/ Afghanistan border and find. capture bin Laden, the alleged mastermind of the WTC attacks.
Posted by: Doug R. | September 4, 2007 6:04 PM