Not quite nonsense, but nanosense at best.

According to Rich, "A Zogby poll last month found that a majority of Americans (52 percent) now supports a pre-emptive strike on Iran to prevent it from acquiring nuclear weapons."

The exact wording of the question is not available on Zogby's site, but in a video interview Zogby emphasizes that the question was not simply whether Americans wanted to bomb Iran, but would they support a strike if it would prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons.

The results are close to a 50-50 split. And what do you expect, when you ask people a question like that? Most of them haven't thought about it much, and for most it's Gee, I dunno. If it's going to stop them from getting the Bomb, Sure.

How this will play out in the elections, war or no war, is not so clear. In the past, it would have played to the Republicans' advantage, but Bush's warmongering is so unpopular and so discredited now, that a war scare will not necessarily play that way, and a hot war, while predictably producing a patriotic rally, will have such disastrous consequences so quickly that it's by no means a safe bet for the Bush gang.

For now, there is still space for Democrats to argue that Bush missed the opportunity for a deal with the Iranians back in 02-03 and should seek a bargain with Iran now instead of ratcheting up the war talk. Which is what all the Democrats, including Clinton, were saying in the debate last Tuesday night.

Frank Rich's last point is prescient. Hillary has given the Republicans another negative to exploit and they will. They're going to have a field day with her and she gave them the ammunition. The level of her disapproval ratings ain't nothing yet.

Maybe the Zogbys can cut the BS. 52% of Americans couldn't point to Iran on a map.

It's amazing that the polls seem to always tout the current position of the psychotics
in the Whitehouse.

Has everyone forgotten that american kids are being killed daily while these damn fools posture and spout more blather.

This is an excellent article that points out the danger of electing republican AIPAC democrats like Feinstein, Schumer, Lieberman or Clinton. We thought there was a two party system not one party with different factions as we have now. There are imperialists and empire builders in both parties and these are the people who must be defeated.

Another point:

In comparing the situation now 2002 wrt Iraq, a key difference is that, despite the portrayal of Ahmadinejad (aided by Ahmadinejad himself) as a vicious fool, we are not quite at the stage we were after 12 years of our abusive relationship with Iraq. Democratic presidential candidates today can say we should negotiate with Iran.

Nobody could say in 2002, "Negotiate with Saddam Hussein." That would have been like "Negotiate with the convicted child molester," and incidentally, not quite like "Negotiate with the Devil," because Saddam by this point was not only seen as evil, but as contemptible and not worthy of being addressed by the United States (the UN, acting as mediator, was in some sense seen as debased) in any other terms but those Bush finally laid out: Get out of town by Sundown, Brown.

The Bush gang has clearly been trying to roll out an Iran war buildup, but they've lost their grip on the strings and so far it hasn't worked. The danger is very real, but I think Rich is being too fatalistic in predicting how it's going to play out.

MARK ABRAM: Solid analysis. The way these issues (or questions) are framed often "lead the witness" to the answer the "prosecutor" intends. If the question were to say, "If it's been shown that Iran is incapable of building a nuclear weapon for at least 5 years, would you endorse a bomb campaign now?" Or same question with the add-on after now to include, "when someone potentially more sane, fair and balanced is IN the White House, would you elect to wait?" Alas, the ways, means, wonders and surreptitious twists of phrase so useful in manufacturing consent; yet even that is becoming a worthless pursuit when election outcomes are so easily rendered thanks to push-button computer technology.

Of course many of those polled haven't even the most rudimentary understanding of the world they live in. They get snippets from television and radio, if not the rightwing gagas then from the packaged neww services that unfailingly hew to the kook line.

What the Repugs understand is that people don't want to know: that know-nothings vote. Not only do they vote, they chair the major newscasts and most bubbly tv shows.

A woman the other day complained about the modest coverage of the home-ownership crisis. "Why do we need to know this? Why don't they report on what it's NORMALLY like?"

But thanks to the constant iteration of the Democratic Leadership Council mantra, that "negative campaigning doesn't work" and "stay positive" and all that BS, candidates do their damnedest to appear to be calm, wonky, thoughtful, afraid to spill the tea or frighten the horses. When Joe Biden was asked by Randi Rhodes why Democrats didn't just call the Smirk a liar, Biden went medieval on her, "You don't call the president a LIAR!!!" as if he'd never ever heard such utter naughtiness in his life. You could see Kerry timidly sniffing around the word all through the 2004 non-campaign; but the moment any Democratic candidate says "Lies, war crimes, high crimes & misdemeanors," Capitulosi, Santos, Emanuel and company see tumbrils and guillotines being prepared.

For Democrats it should be noun+verb+torture, noun+verb+Constitution.

But there are no nouns or verbs in Democratic vocabulary, apart from one candidate; the rest is all sentiments and flattery of the American public.

DICTERFREUND: This "don't worry, be happy" is also becoming the pervasive mantra in psychology, and fits in nicely with the "faith based" philosophy of life. So easy to feel good when nothing matters, when the messiah will fix it all, when you recognize the link between positive thinking and less stress (= better health); oh, to live life as if only THE SELF matters, and actual conditions in a world rapidly deteriorating on account of power accrued to the least conscionable (in my view quite veritably THE dark side) can be so readily dismissed. Reminds me of the Phil Ochs song, "And I'm sure it wouldn't interest anybody, outside of a small circle of friends."

the writer takes the long-standing American occupation of the ME as a given. it is this view which is the basis of our predicament in the ME.

this article is ridiculous

Excerpts from an article by Jim Pittaway a licensed psychotherapist. Picked it up in Pat Buchanan's website. As a liberal I have never been an admirer of Pat Buchanan but this says a lot about our inability to change direction. http://buchanan.org/blog/?p=878.

"To be fair, it is impossible for our elite to express genuine empathy in proportion to unspeakable hardship and relentless havoc visited upon the people of Iraq as a direct consequence of the American invasion. To acknowledge the horrific extent of what we have done to those very real people, their ancient society, and the world they inhabit would fly in the face of New Nationalism. That would open a dissenter to charges of undermining our troops, aiding terrorism, perhaps being labelled a "native-born enemy combatant," and all sorts of such nonsense that would amount to career suicide in our nationalistically fevered political environment.

We should be mindful that Nazi Germany, too, convinced itself that it was hated and conspired against because of its virtue rather than its thuggery, just as we proclaim that we are hated because of our "freedom" rather than our disordered need to control and the excess it breeds. There's no evidence that the Nazi leadership thought of themselves as criminals, let alone intended to become the most notorious criminals in the history of the human race. They were just a bunch of thugs who, implementing a classically antisocial system of thought and behavior, found their options progressively narrowed, as all such criminal thinkers do, until they wound up with death camps, suicide, and a rubble-dwelling Volk. The antisocial nature of Nationalism is there in the historical record, written in the blood of millions, and available for all to contemplate. The only question is, are we too far down the road to turn around?"

The thust of the article is good. I will nitpick this tiny point which is probably not worth nitpicking:- "however truculent (Iran is)".

Whether you agree or disagree with the law imposed by regligious fundamentalists, (I wouldnt like OUR fundamentalists to have their way either), Iran's foreign policy has been anything but truculant. They have not attack, nor threatened to attack any country. They have more than complied with the NNPT treaty. Their president has visited on a good will mission - what more can he do?

Can somebody please explain to me what they understand by the phrase "actual central front of the war on terror"??
How can the US with its massive investment in so called intelligence gathering, so utterly fail to understand why they excite the antagonism and hatred of so many around the world..
How many millions of other people do you need to kill, maim, render homeless and stateless, how many more countries do you need to destroy before you wake up to yourselves and your global crimes against humanity??
Who DO they think they are free to so casually damage others yet bleat so piteously when the inevitable happens and it blows up in their faces??
Is this part of the god delusion type of thinking?

Rich assumes that the Republicans are intimidating the Democrats. Most of us here see the duopoly as a matter of collusion. The 'opposition' party ploy, the notion that the majority of Democrats led by Pelosi are 'contesting' the Republicans in any meaningful way is hard to stomach at this late date. And further, the idea that the Democrats can only see what they do in terms of some future, potentially bogus, election is further evidence that Frank Rich is aligned with the CFR-dominated DLC (Democratic Leadership Council) and their thinking. He is much closer to the DLC than he is to Kucinich, the only Democrat, besides former Congresswoman McKinney, to seriously challenge the Republicrats who have locked arms against Impeachment. Can Mr. Rich say the word "Impeachment"? Not here, but he can imagine Shillary 'walking to war' and, for him, that seems worthy of posing as our primary alternative to the madness of Cheney & Bush launching an attack on Iran before the election. So the full spectrum of possible political events worthy of a New York Times op-ed comes down to this narrow framing of our possibilities. And this man represents the 'far left' of the MSM? God save us.

Again, I ask: Can Frank Rich say "impeachment"? I don't think so.

THERZAL: It's P.R. meant to dress up a callous invasion. The same way "they present" elections to keep the pack quiet, to let them THINK it's still a representative democratic republic, they seek to publish REASONS that imply reason is behind action. It is not. All has been tossed to a naked power grab, the thrill of the use of raw force, and the lust for blood profits. We are talking about souls in command who are from what any mystic would term "THE DARK SIDE." We make the mistake thinking they OWN the same humane sentiments we nurture in this forum, that intelligence and humanity have meaning for them. NO. Not at all. The good news is that no ego or human is above the law of karma. The tragedy is that so many are being taken for the merciless ride as this Truth finds its way "home."

CANQUEST: Interesting posting. Thank you for sharing it.

The Demoks have to catch the ball the Repuks throw and run with it because they are both the same team despite appearances.

"Has everyone forgotten that american kids are being killed daily while these damn fools posture and spout more blather."

If these American kids are gullible enough to be recruited and killed then they deserve to be.

Tell me , do you have the same sympathy for a drunk that steps out in front of a moving car ?

This occupation will end and the killing will stop the kids in America refuse to be recruited or the kids in America or Iraq who have been recruited , desert and not before.

When are Americans going to "get it": the continued or terminated occupation is in the hands of the soldiers not the generals.

Can you imagine, Desert Storm redux with all of us good Americans ensconced around our fireplaces and Christmas trees watching the techno-sensational media drone of precision missile camera shots, one after another.

If the overthrow of the Musharraf regime is a worry, one of the ways to prevent that is to declare a state of emergency and impose de facto martial law in Pakistan. If a military strike for this holiday season is coming up(our troops will not have to worry about fighting in the horrible summer heat), then the Pakistani coup would be part of the precautions taken.

Another setup would be for Israel to have an excuse to roll out its military and put all units on general preparedness, which is exactly what would happen if an incursion into Gaza takes place. Just such an operation is what Israel has been amping up for recently.

It's quite possible Sen. Clinton will win the presidency by being as "blurry" as possible on every single issue. Shame on the American people and media for letting her get away with it. I guess the White House will have all male interns come January 2009 so Bill won't be tempted to embarrass her again.

Ronald White wrote:

"Tell me, do you have the same sympathy for a drunk that steps out in front of a moving car?"

Yes, I do. Both for the "drunk" (which I could probably be accused of being right now) and the misguided US soldiers.

And if the person is suffering from alcoholism, he deserves all the more sympathy.

Your attitude is of exactly the same, callous, nature that drives the people running the war.

So many of us have tried to spread the word with facts about the most criminal administration in US history, but too many still don't get it and believe the propaganda corporate media and the political prostitutes in DC keep repeating.

Most of us bloggers on Common Dreams and other sites use different words to say the same thing on most articles, but it appears to me that we are a small minority preaching to the masses who seem oblivious to the events of the past seven years.

This past Friday, on the Thom Hartmann Air America radio show, Thom took a quick straw poll of the first 75 callers from around the country. As he answered each call, the caller stated who they would vote for. Edwards received 41 votes, Kucinich 21 votes, Obama 7 votes, Clinton, Richardson, and Biden received one vote, and Gravel and Dodd had no votes. Al Gore received one vote.

The corporate/military/ fascist propagandists keep telling the public that it's either Clinton or Obama, (their choice-not the peoples'), and again, too many citizens fall for it. 'There's something rotten in America, not Denmark'. It just may be too late, brothers and sisters.

It may not be too late but it's getting damn late! It will take more than an election to set this country back on a right path. So much damage has been done that I don't think has even surfaced as of yet. It will be interesting to see the path the new president takes. I think this outrageous presidency of the last 8 years will be debated and pondered for years with not only Bush and Company but a complicit spineless congress equally at blame. God help us!

I have believed all along that Bush will not bomb Iran in his term, but rather ratchet the rhetoric to the highest possible level, leaving the bombing to Giuliani or Thompson--who also appear willing to do it, later.
The Pakistan situation will likely also serve to delay any rush to bombing Iran.

In order for the Democrats to win 08, their offensive campaign must be mostly on other issues, which are both numerous and important. Republicans will try to frame everything on security fears and war. Democrats can't win by trying to act more "hawkish, nor can they win by trying to act more "dovish". They win by changing the subject, and the effort had better be good. Some polls say the Dems are ahead for 08. It ain't really so.

This article smacks of another media apology in advance for the supposedly "spineless" Dems.

I'm sorry, those who co-perpetrate evil are no more entitled to a free ride than were the German officers of old, who gave the plea "I was only following orders."

Some excellent comments here. To Dichterfreund's mistrust of today's cast of Democrats, Stiv Whitman's mistrust of Frank Rich, and Peaceman's mistrust of the presidential primary process as it is brought to us by the MSM, I would add my own opinion, though based as it is on events from 8 years ago now:

Frank Rich, Maureen Dowd, and the New York Times led the way in their kicking around of Al Gore, the candidate, based on personal characteristics rather than on what Gore stood for. Remember all that? The election was close in large part because Bush was portrayed in the MSM as the guy we could sit and have a beer with, while Gore was too stiff, too plastic, and sighed during the debates.

Frank Rich has been posing ever since as the devoutest of Bush critics.

The house and senate are all now complicit with war crimes. The democrats had their grace period and spit in our faces. Our congress has really been trivialized. All they can do is complain. The real powers running this place[financial and industrial] are just doing whatever they want.
The whole system is phonier than a 3 dollar bill, why even participate in it. I wouldn't vote for any of the people they are offering us, plus the elections nowdays are rigged.

Noun + Verb + 9/11 + Iran = Democrats' Defeat?= Who gives a crap?

First off it really makes me ill to have a "front runner" declared in a future election for which not a single vote has yet been cast. AS much as I appreciate Frank's points in this article, he has basically sold out to the MSM horse race mentality that says, "don't bother with the primaries, it's Rudy Vs. Hillary, just accept it"! Can we please have at least a couple of primaries and a caucus or two before we start declaring front runners!

The mayor is no shoe in for the Repug nomination, he ain't gonna play well in the south, and the few remaining true conservatives ain't buyin' his conservative make over. HRC is likewise no shoe in for the Dims, all that triangulating is alienating the base, and most true progressives don't like her kinder gentler version of fascism.

Second - I gotta ask, Daniel David, are you feeling alright tonight? You actually made sense in your post.

Third _ I keep wondering when one of the two parties is going to b ring out a last minute candidate with some umph, this is one sorry set of loose loose politics we got happenin' here.

Feckless articles such as this are precisely the reason why I stopped reading Frank Rich.

Rich goes on to lament: "But what happens if President Bush does not bomb Iran? That is good news for the world, but potentially terrible news for the Democrats."

What in God's name is Rich talking about? Instead of asking "what if this pernicious Bush junta doesn't bomb Iran," perhaps he ought to be doing his job and penning an article about all of the horrific war crimes this administration's committed, and perhaps we wouldn't be in this situation we're in now? However, Rich doesn't have the testicle fortitude to do something that noble.

I'm with you Munich. The cavalier way that Frank Rich stated this made my stomach hurt. Like, " Hmmmmm what difference does it make whether or not we nuke a few million Iranians? Oh wait a minute, sure, I get it. One would be good for one Party and not so good for the other." Could anything be more callous, inhuman and scary than that sort of "it's really just all about our politics" thinking? I am appalled and dishearened even more than I thought possible, but then it didn't help that I just finished watching the new documentary "NO END IN SIGHT."

Bush is planning the state of emergency after bombing Iran and potentially suspending the elections. We have to watch out and and stop any bastard by all the means available, who tries to trash or suspend our Constitution. (Bush was sworn on the Bible, not the US Constitution).

This reminds one of the saying, "Life is what happens while we are making other plans". We might as well try to forecast the date of the Fundamentalist`s Apocalyse as to speculate about going to war in Iran or who will be the candidates for president next year. Our great leaders seem mostly concerned with what course will benefit themselves the most, so how can we predict that?

Are Americans that stupid? Or are they dangerously arrogant.

Real war, potential REAL nuclear war and you flippantly talk of it as campaign strategy for a dumb election.

There is a real and present danger to our way of life. This danger does not come from Islam or even terrorists. It comes from average Americans who have disengaged themselves from the political state of their country and the world. American politicians and corporate media have nurtured this disconnectedness. The future, shock and awe indeed!

This article sounds like more bushie pr manure. .... either that or I'm not aware that there were/ are soooo many Americans happy with his idea OF bombing Iran. Where do all these people live ??
Pop polls show bush at 23/27% ... how could a large percentage of Americans want him to bomb Iran ?? Most people I know hate bush and cheney with a passion ... and pubs I know now think that he's the biggest loser around.
What is this article doing at Common Dreams ??? Sounds like a piece of pub bs for that lying idiot guiliani

Main point is that we are barking up the wrong tree. The real problem is Pakistan has the real bomb and Osama who has been turned into a cave animal would use that bomb if his traliban got hold of it and they just might because we have done a piss poor job of supporting the people of Afghanistan and also fo Pakistan-- just trwoing billions in weapons at Muchareff did nothing.

It is a travesty to spend a day thinking that we are doing a "surgical strike" on iran-- they ahve 900,000 soldiers never mind missiles and these soldiers can walk across the border and stop the supply of good to our soldiers in baghdad in the seert between Basra and Baghdad. nobody talks about that- it taks no tehcnological wapons - just boots on the ground.

Give up your stupid dream of bombing Iran-

PS-- don't we all have Persian carpets ? The country is another treasure of civilization and culture.

Call the white house and tell them to knock it off! 202-456-1111

I support Obama- he is most powerful ater Hillary and has the best chance to bring our values to the office. Other candidates will throw their votes to Obama and he will get the nomination that way- of course my true love and admiration is Dennis.

As with all polls the Zogby poll pretends to have spoken with 52 percent of Americans. Can't be done---CANNOT BE DONE. It's "52 percent of the stiffs we cornered in front of Harry's Bar...." AND THAT IS ALL. But this is how you tell the war-cheerleaders and terrorist/journalists from the rest of them....

Munich wrote:

"Rich goes on to lament: "But what happens if President Bush does not bomb Iran? That is good news for the world, but potentially terrible news for the Democrats."

What in God's name is Rich talking about?"

Bullseye! Rich is a poser, a fake liberal. The mentality he represents is really no different than the Bush-Cheney Weltangschauung. Bombing Iran and its moral consequences are reduced to how it will affect Democrats? Is Rich completely insane, or does he work for the CIA?

--
"There's a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart, that you can't take part, you can't even passively take part, and you've got to put your bodies upon the gears and upon the wheels, upon the levers, upon all the apparatus, and you've got to make it stop! And you've got to indicate to the people who run it, to the people who own it, that unless you're free, the machine will be prevented from working at all!"

- Mario Savio

People have wondered what in the world Guiliani and the Republican Party are doing, taking the hardline on the war and on waterboarding. You see the swarthy faces of middle eastern men? There is your answer:
The Republican Party and their man know there is no Christian Right to pander to, they have dug deeper into the sewage drains for the only thing left to mobilize their white voters: racism. If that is not enough, they are attempting to add to their numbers by convincing the light skin of any ethnicity to beware, be afraid, be fearful of those swarthy brown faces . . .
How different would their stand be on torture if it were white young men who were depicted in the American mental picture of a waterboarding torture victim, or a Guantanamo prisoner.

Frank Rich is just one more reason to ignore the NYT--especially the op-ed page. (Others include Michael Gordon and David Brooks)

President Ahmadinejad has a PhD. He may have a big mouth, but he certainly cannot be "a little thug". Only a biased moron could come to that assessment.

"The question for the Democrats is whether they'll walk once more into this trap."

This assumes that Democrats are an opposition party.

"…a majority of Americans (52 percent) now supports a pre-emptive strike on Iran…"

Rich's depiction that the majority of Americans are dumb and heartless is erroneous.

"…forbidding money for military operations in Iran without Congressional approval."

This is clearly saying something that need not to be said. Of course all money for all wars will have to have Congressional approval anyway. The law already forbids it if it does not have congressional approval. Looks like Clinton again provided herself with an escape route since the sentence has double meaning. "Forbidding money without Congressional approval" is meaningless.

Why does one need a congressional resolution to initiate diplomacy?

Did Carter need one to talk to the Egyptians and Israelis, or Nixon to talk to China?

I don't actually know, but I doubt it.

Bad example, but Nasty Pelosi went and talked to the Syrians. (typo intentional)

Negotiations will probably go better if you don't smear them first.

None of it makes any sense.