If someone can remember a time Wolfowitz and is ilk were right about anything concerning foreign policy please let me know. However, I won't be holding my breath.

Does anyone desire a noble post of the entire Ode to Wolfowitz penned on Blackcommentator.com in 2003 or will this snippet suffice?

O Wolfowitz...

It was with great woe that the wise beheld thou in thy smug righteousness, when thou would not bear reproach for thy excesses and appetites, thy shock and awe, where mothers in Babylon wept...

And the wise witnessed thee before the senate, with thy chest puffed up with proud boasts, demanding the senate yoke more taxes onto the necks of the poor, so thou could pry ever more no-bid contracts for thy Caesar and his coin masters...

O Wolfowitz, Vice-regent of Neo-Babylon......

Wherefore dost thou now deny thyself the rapturous joy of a Mesopotamian sunset...?

There seems to be an unfortunate ratcheting effect in societies, where jingoism and saber-rattling enable political oppression, from which it is impossible to back away. This is what worried many Democrats and progressives under Bush.

But, also unfortunately, there seems little any country can do when another falls into the dictator trap, except cautiously and discreetly support information flow into and out of the country. So Obama is correct to speak softly, and thank you, David. He ain't stupid, at least.

One way to look at it is that neocons are finding fewer receptive places to drivel. The Washington Post has to squeeze most of them onto the broadsheets of their dying enterprise. I guess there's also Karl Rove's WSJ and other neocon scrappings that the NYT still publishes.

The whole lot of these grumpy old war barkers with their contemptible minds and dwindling minions are loudest when they're wrong--that is their signature. Loud when wrong. Quiet when strategizing about how to continue being wrong.

I have to wonder what these folks had to say about Clinton regarding Balkans/Kosovo crises.

I think it's pathetic that the first thing that pops into my head when I hear about Iranian election protests is: "I wonder if it's the same people who gamed the press with Iraq" and "Now, I though Chilabi was out of the picture." Followed closely by: "why aren't there women in line to vote. or don't they videotape that half of the borough hall."

I don't think there is a grand strategy behind all of these events. I don't believe the Ayatollah when he says this was planned, even before the election, and that the foreign media is responsible for almost a million protesters who have their own personal motivations.

I think that this is what happened.

There was a far more open election season in which many in Iran felt that they wanted Amadinejad out. That they became excited in the process. That they enjoyed the debate. They felt pride in voting.

Then, the results. For whatever reason, Mousavi announced he had won. Then, The President's camp countered. The "Supreme Leader" gave his blessing. All within hours, in which no sane person can believe all votes were actually counted.

So? There were demonstrations, protests, shouting, fighting, violence.

Why?

Is this because of some conspiracy of the "zionists," the UK, US, and Israel? Is this because of the foreign journalists, like Miss Amanpour?

Or is it that people don't like being cheated out of their vote? That they don't like being told they voted for nobody? That the voting was all just a trick on them?

I am surprised that any person could believe that this is an international conspiracy, and not just a sloppy mess that has been exposed inside Iran's establishment, which it is. The "Supreme Leader" is a windbag, and is one of the most ridiculous hypocrites I have ever heard speak in front of people.

Let me be clear: Iran's supreme leader The Grand Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, is a charlatan. He is a fraud. He is, worst of all things, a hypocrite!
I want to say this in Iran, and as the basij tries to stop me, gag me, murder me, torture me, I will keep speaking this truth!

Ahmadi is not the problem in Iran, obviously. It is the mockery and chicanery of an old man who will not outlive the justice he deserves.

Obama has no reason to speak out, especially right now. What end does it serve, other than to appease those who already have, and feel his absence.

I support their protests. So does our congress. So does our whole country, as do many.

This is not about Obama. Not yet.

Have these jackasses no shame whatsoever?

You would think after costing this country unprecedented amounts of blood and treasure in support of their "preemptive war" to get Saddam's WMD, Wolfowitz and Krauthammer would be afraid to even show their face in public. And yet, they have the audacity to write a cheerleading piece promoting even MORE neocon bullsh*t MidEast policy.

After witnessing the way in which the WaPo (and Judith Miller and the rest of the NYT staff and others) so willingly served as stenographers for the neocon criminals in the run-up to the Iraq War, I would think any news organization concerned at all about their own credibility would stay as far away from these whackos as possible.

Unbelievable!

I may finally come to Jesus and become a fan of his.

Do do it David. You're already obnoxious enough on the correct side of that argument.

"We haven't heard from Paul Wolfowitz for a long time,..."

Good - now can we not hear from him again for an even longer period of time.

"to dig in to a neutral posture"

That's nicely inept as if to dig in to a foxhole were a neutral rather than a defensive posture.

Obama is playing it loose.