McCain’s editorial response was submitted and quickly rejected by the New York Times Op-Ed editor, David Shipley. In his response to the McCain team, Shipley states that he’s “not going to be able to accept [the] piece as currently written,” but that he’d be “pleased” to look over a different draft.

What does that really mean? Is that editorial decision being made based on policy or content? McCain’s camp is quick to point out that Shipley served in the Clinton Administration and that the real problem is that he doesn’t agree with McCain’s policies toward Iraq and that reworking the draft would be useless unless it came with a change in policy.

Luckily, Shipley is on vacation this week, but he did leave us with this:

“The Obama piece worked for me because… while Senator Obama discussed Senator McCain, he also went into detail about his own plans… it would be terrific to have an article from Senator McCain that mirrors Senator Obama’s piece. To that end, the article would have to articulate, in concrete terms, how Senator McCain defines victory in Iraq.”

All is fair in politics and war, so here’s McCain’s editorial as submitted to the New York Times:

In January 2007, when General David Petraeus took command in Iraq, he called the situation “hard” but not “hopeless.” Today, 18 months later, violence has fallen by up to 80% to the lowest levels in four years, and Sunni and Shiite terrorists are reeling from a string of defeats. The situation now is full of hope, but considerable hard work remains to consolidate our fragile gains.

Progress has been due primarily to an increase in the number of troops and a change in their strategy. I was an early advocate of the surge at a time when it had few supporters in Washington. Senator Barack Obama was an equally vocal opponent. “I am not persuaded that 20,000 additional troops in Iraq is going to solve the sectarian violence there,” he said on January 10, 2007. “In fact, I think it will do the reverse.”

Now Senator Obama has been forced to acknowledge that “our troops have performed brilliantly in lowering the level of violence.” But he still denies that any political progress has resulted.

Perhaps he is unaware that the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad has recently certified that, as one news article put it, “Iraq has met all but three of 18 original benchmarks set by Congress last year to measure security, political and economic progress.” Even more heartening has been progress that’s not measured by the benchmarks. More than 90,000 Iraqis, many of them Sunnis who once fought against the government, have signed up as Sons of Iraq to fight against the terrorists. Nor do they measure Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki’s new-found willingness to crack down on Shiite extremists in Basra and Sadr City- actions that have done much to dispel suspicions of sectarianism.

The success of the surge has not changed Senator Obama’s determination to pull out all of our combat troops. All that has changed is his rationale. In a New York Times op-ed and a speech this week, he offered his “plan for Iraq” in advance of his first “fact finding” trip to that country in more than three years. It consisted of the same old proposal to pull all of our troops out within 16 months. In 2007 he wanted to withdraw because he thought the war was lost. If we had taken his advice, it would have been. Now he wants to withdraw because he thinks Iraqis no longer need our assistance.

To make this point, he mangles the evidence. He makes it sound as if Prime Minister Maliki has endorsed the Obama timetable, when all he has said is that he would like a plan for the eventual withdrawal of U.S. troops at some unspecified point in the future.

Senator Obama is also misleading on the Iraqi military’s readiness. The Iraqi Army will be equipped and trained by the middle of next year, but this does not, as Senator Obama suggests, mean that they will then be ready to secure their country without a good deal of help. The Iraqi Air Force, for one, still lags behind, and no modern army can operate without air cover. The Iraqis are also still learning how to conduct planning, logistics, command and control, communications, and other complicated functions needed to support frontline troops.

No one favors a permanent U.S. presence, as Senator Obama charges. A partial withdrawal has already occurred with the departure of five “surge” brigades, and more withdrawals can take place as the security situation improves. As we draw down in Iraq, we can beef up our presence on other battlefields, such as Afghanistan, without fear of leaving a failed state behind. I have said that I expect to welcome home most of our troops from Iraq by the end of my first term in office, in 2013.

But I have also said that any draw-downs must be based on a realistic assessment of conditions on the ground, not on an artificial timetable crafted for domestic political reasons. This is the crux of my disagreement with Senator Obama.

Senator Obama has said that he would consult our commanders on the ground and Iraqi leaders, but he did no such thing before releasing his “plan for Iraq.” Perhaps that’s because he doesn’t want to hear what they have to say. During the course of eight visits to Iraq, I have heard many times from our troops what Major General Jeffrey Hammond, commander of coalition forces in Baghdad, recently said: that leaving based on a timetable would be “very dangerous.”

The danger is that extremists supported by Al Qaeda and Iran could stage a comeback, as they have in the past when we’ve had too few troops in Iraq. Senator Obama seems to have learned nothing from recent history. I find it ironic that he is emulating the worst mistake of the Bush administration by waving the “Mission Accomplished” banner prematurely.

I am also dismayed that he never talks about winning the war- only of ending it. But if we don’t win the war, our enemies will. A triumph for the terrorists would be a disaster for us. That is something I will not allow to happen as president. Instead I will continue implementing a proven counterinsurgency strategy not only in Iraq but also in Afghanistan with the goal of creating stable, secure, self-sustaining democratic allies.

I hope that McCain will submit his plan for Iraq and that the New York Times will publish it.

At first glance, What Happened seems to be a balls-out assault on the White House from “the inside,” albeit an unoriginal one. But a little sharper focus brings the backpedaling, ass-covering flavor of it all into clear view: McClellan writes that Bush “signed off on a strategy for selling the war that was less than candid and honest,” just before issuing this disclaimer about his former boss: “I do not believe he or his White House deliberately or consciously sought to deceive the American people.”

When asked on the Today show if he lied to the American public during his employment, he acknowledged that he may have “unknowingly… passed along false information,” only to admit seconds later that he “got caught up in the Washington game in terms of the spinning and obviscation and secrecy and things like that.”

Which one is it, Scott? Were you a hapless, unwitting pawn, or a mechanic on the juggernaut of deceit?

McClellan’s a pasty, sniveling hypocrite who had no trouble cashing the administration’s checks and lying to the American public for three humiliating years, and now he stands to profit massively from telling us what we already know. He was a staunch, chief defender of the Bush’s initial ignore-and-avoid approach to Katrina, of the Iraq invasion, the Valerie Plame fiasco and an untold number of other deceptions. I remember his mole-like smirking face from White House press conferences between 2003 and 2006, lying like an amateur with shifty eyes and the defensive posturing of a kid who’s yet to figure out how his parents always know when he’s lying. I remember thinking Jesus, this guy’s a poker shark’s wet fucking dream. Seriously, what’s the selection process for a job like that? How did this guy get hired to sell us on the Bush administration’s crazy fucking funhouse of bullshit?

Last week, Scotty was telling anyone who would sign a check listen how bitter he was to have been pushed to leave his White House position earlier than he had planned, as well as the fact that he was sometimes kept out of the loop on key decision-making sessions. Interestingly, it’s those very exclusions that enable him to deny any major involvement in some of the administration’s biggest blunders, particularly the decision to go to war and the campaign to sell that decision to the American people. It’s only fair to say that he doesn’t spare himself entirely, saying at one point, “I fell far short of living up to the kind of public servant I wanted to be.” But what exactly does that mean, Scotty? I get the feeling there are still some things you’re not telling us.

Anyway, he goes on to include criticism for the reporters whose questions he fielded while on the job. The news media, he says, were “complicit enablers,” of a dishonest administration, for focusing more on “covering the march to war instead of the necessity of war.” That’s a bit like the pot factory calling the kettle black, no? Are you saying you’re pissed that we didn’t make your job harder for you? 

McClellan spent three years demanding that we gorge ourselves on the toxic heaps of bullshit he helped dish up, and now he’s supposed to be painted a hero? I’m supposed to buy his book? I don’t think so. 

Overall, the book and media tour come off as a broad-stroke attack on the Bush administration by a guy who knowingly and directly contributed to the mass deception of the American public. Is he saying anything particularly groundbreaking or new? It doesn’t seem so. None of it does anything more than further confirm what’s already bound for the history books: this country has been stolen, swindled and deceived beyond anything our nation has ever seen. The Bush administration’s lies and complete hijacking of America make Nixon’s antics look like petty theft.

The real terrorists are sitting in the White House this very minute.

Not enough remembrance to risk any depth of examination into veteran benefits and treatment, mind you. But a good moment’s worth. He recommended that we place flags at the graves of veterans, visit a battlefield or say a prayer. Better yet, where can I get one of those really useful yellow ribbons that reminds everybody that I’m a good American and I’m on the right team? I seem to be overdue for one of those.

It’s a weird fucking climate out there. Clinton, reviving the familiar “offended victim” role in her desperate struggle to stay in the race for the Democratic nomination, has taken to referencing Bobby Kennedy’s assassination and having her husband shout “Cover-up!” to anyone who will listen. McCain’s riding a wave of Bush-backer appeasement to lock down the votes of the millions who are much more comfortable with the warts and sores of the standard regime than the thought of turning the country over to a bitch or a nigger. This may go some ways towards explaining why the war hero supports Bush’s rejection of the GI Bill, which would better soldiers’ future prospects by offering them the same college benefits this country offered their grandfathers six decades ago. It’s a topic of raging debate between Obama and McCain, and both candidates are doing their damnedest today to be more patriotic than the other while carefully avoiding any direct shit-talking until the festivities are over.

But to hell with all that. What we should really be focusing our attention on today are the hundreds of thousands of veterans who are alive and need our help. We could also do with a little more thorough examination of the running claim that the majority of the world holds us in such extreme contempt because they either can’t understand our “highest ideals” or they hate freedom. In the immortal words of David Cross, “If the terrorists hated freedom, then the Netherlands would be fuckin’ dust. As would Denmark and Sweden and Switzerland and New Zealand and Canada and every other country that’s truly freer than we are.”

Let’s not forget, “freedom” is the supposed reason our loved ones are dying in the sand more than 6,000 miles away.

Honoring the veterans and the fallen is one thing, but a mix of disgust and vicarious humiliation washes over me when I hear Bush speak with fierce authority about upholding “America’s highest ideals” and plucking the violin strings by poetically describing the return home of the fallen as “broken hearts receiving broken bodies.” When his administration deceived this country into supporting a viciously bloody war that’s killed thousands of our boys (and girls), imprisoned those suspected of being “terrorists” without trial or benefit of legal counsel, tortured prisoners in America’s name and done everything but set fire to the U.S. Constitution, Bush’s speechwriters should be choosing his words more carefully, just in case somebody who might’ve paid any attention over the past eight years was listening.

Perhaps the best way to honor the brave sacrifice of our soldiers is to provide them with the benefits they need and deserve after their service. Or, better yet, stop sending them to die for false causes.

In this case, Jon Stewart is talking with Doug Feith, former Under Secretary of Defense for Policy for Bush (from 2001 to his resignation in 2005), one of the so-called ‘architects’ of the war, and author of War And Decision, a memoir of exactly what went on in the Pentagon as we got into this clusterfuck in Iraq. The big question: Was the public really consciously misled into the war? Both positions are well presented, and it’s an interesting discussion regardless of which side you’re on.

Update: The video no longer works. We got rid of it. Move along.

The Defense Department refuses to adjust its approach to managing the program. And the worst part? The injured employees working for contractors- the people these insurance plans are supposed to help- have to fight the insurance companies to get their benefits,” according to Representative Henry Waxman who spoke at a hearing yesterday. “Delays and denials in paying claims are the rule.”

I’ve heard so many stories like this, about huge chunks of that $900 billion we’ve spent on the war so far going down shitters, into corrupt pockets, or disappearing into thin air. This is just the latest. What pisses me off is that it’s one aspect of the war that we actually have complete control over, and we’re colossally fucking it up. How can anyone talk of stabilizing Iraq when we can’t even manage our fucking own bank accounts?

The most interesting ad campaign I encountered in DC was an anonymous one asking a compelling question: “Do you own a US oil company?”

What a question… This is shock marketing at its finest. It’s more effective than Alicia Silverstone stripping nude for PETA or some shit, it’s truly engaging: That’s a question that will not only stop anyone dead in their tracks, but pull them in. It’s like asking, “Does your dog have AIDS?” It’s such an important question, with so many implications, how could it not have crossed your mind previously? You start examining the message. You ask yourself, “Shit, does my dog have AIDS? How do I know?” …As marketing’s magic lasso tightens around your neck.

The question is answered with a pie chart, with the heading “Look who owns America’s oil industry.” The biggest piece of the pie is 29.5% in mutual funds and other firms, and who is poking out of that pie piece but a hard working black construction worker- the very opposite of the greedy, spoiled, cigar smoking white fat cats the populists assume are pulling the strings. 27% in pension funds- grandma and grandpa. 23% to individual investors- you and your buddies. 14% in IRAs- good ol’ farmers. And finally 1.5% to corporate management, and 5% to ‘other institutional investors.’

Of course… My immediate reaction was an emphatic “BULLSHIT!!” And I started looking for holes in the presentation, which I found was the result of a study by Robert J. Shapiro, commissioned by API, an advocacy group representing the petroleum industry. I know how marketing works, and I know that you can take statistics and construe them to support any argument. I do it all the time.

Well, the numbers are right. This breakdown of who owns stocks in big oil is legit. When Exxon Mobil reports “record earnings of $39.5 billion” despite outrageous gas prices during a war for oil, people freak the fuck out. But out of that $39.5 billion, $32.6 billion is fairly distributed to shareholders public and private, and the entire US economy benefits- including grandmas with pension plans and everyday folks with mutual funds and IRAs. Since big oil is such a big part of our economy, it’s completely naïve to think that a reduced dependency on oil wouldn’t have negative effects on more than just the fat cats’ wallets.

Another completely naïve notion is that corporate greed is the reason gas prices are so high. I’m not an economics expert and I don’t understand all the ins & outs the global picture, but I do know that in a world that runs on oil, India and China are going through a period of rapid economic growth, and their combined populations are something like eight times that of ours. I do understand the concept of supply and demand, and it’s fairly easy to see that our dependency on oil grows, as our sources do not, in a pretty even ratio to the rising cost of gas.

The problem with dependency on oil is definitely a global one. As of April 10th, the broad US stock market had fallen 7.08 percent. But the UK market fell more than 8 percent, the German market more than 10, the French about 6, and the Japanese about 7. China and India? About 19 and 26 percent, respectively. Every single equity market in the world but one recorded a loss year to date, the exception being Finland who managed a slight gain of 0.25 percent.

But what’s got Americans worried isn’t so much that 7.08 percent market loss relatively even with the rest of the world, but the dropping value of the dollar, and all this talk of a looming recession as the US continues to buy more from all of our trading partners than it sells to them. Again, I’m not an economics expert- I’m not even really much of an economics enthusiast- but I can grasp that this imbalance spells, at least, higher interest rates and slower national growth.

The fact is, the American people need to decrease spending and increase saving (investment in the economy). Meanwhile, it would be great for us if the rest of the developed and developing world saved less and spent more in pursuit of more growth. And there are some other more complex factors that I’m not going to try and present as if I understand them fully. I read something about China and other Asian export nations giving artificial support to their currencies? I got lost pretty quickly.

But let’s talk about the logistics of a decreased dependency on oil.

Yes, the immediate economic effects would be negative. And clearly visible to many regular Joes. Vanguard Group, who holds my 401k plan, is the third largest shareholder in Exxon Mobil stock. The question is, to what new energy markets would my investment best be moved?

How about corn? The US government pays out anywhere from $1 billion to $10 billion each year in corn subsidies. One reason, as crazy as it sounds, is to secure a food supply for the nation in the event that we are under seige- sealed off- by either a physical force, or a global embargo, or some global epidemic that we somehow manage to otherwise quarantine. But with that ridiculous joke of a notion aside, a more compelling reason lies in our hunt for “energy security,” a hunt which a few folks are convinced will end once and for all at ethanol biofuel. So is corn the new oil?

No fucking way.

The main problem with ethanol biofuel from corn, is that it’s just not efficient. David Pimentel, a professor of ecology at Cornell University (who has been studying grain alcohol for 20 years) teamed up with Ted Patzek, an engineering professor at Berkely to check it all out. Together, they found that while ethanol contains about 76,000 BTUs per gallon, producing that ethanol from corn takes about 98,000 BTUs- from the tractor that plans the corn to the energy needed at the processing plant. It’s a net energy loss! By comparison, a gallon of gas- from drilling the well, to transporting it through refining it- only requires about 22,000 BTUs.

Another big problem: To fill up a gas tank with grain-based ethanol fuel requires the same amount of grain it would take to feed a person for a year. If every car in the US switched over to grain-based ethanol, we’d need enough grain to feed 6 billion people- the entire world’s population- just to run our cars, not to mention eat. So it’s an even less sustainable energy source than oil.

If you ask me, my money would be on algae. It’s about 500 times more productive per acre than corn, it wouldn’t compete with our food resources, it reproduces like fucking crazy fucking anywhere, and it also doesn’t mine and desertify soil like corn does. Algae also happens to provide most of the planet’s oxygen- oxygen of course being much preferred to greenhouse gases.

But… I’m way out of my jurisdiction, aren’t I? I mean, I’m in marketing, not economics. And the bottom line is that I’m genuinely impressed by this marketing campaign that effectively delivers an incredible point:

We are big oil!

I can’t find a reason to disagree with that statement, but I’m pretty sure there are plenty of other things we could be that would be better for the environment and the economy.

We could start by being smarter.

“I will have an energy policy that we will be talking about, which will eliminate our dependence on oil from the Middle East, that will then prevent us [interrupted by applause] that will prevent us from having ever to send our young men and women into conflict again in the Middle East,” Senator John McCain said at a Denver town hall meeting yesterday, just after criticizing proposals to withdraw from Iraq.

This clip excited me. My reaction was basically the same as Chris Matthews’ on Hardball: “You know, if somebody else were to say that, they would be accused of being a communist, or radical, or a leftist… for John McCain, a war hero, to say that we’re fighting in the Middle East to protect our oil sources is an astounding development.”

Then I did a little digging, and I found a catch.
On the plane out of Denver, according to CNN reporter Dana Bash, McCain told the media he was referring to the Gulf War of 1990-1991, which liberated Kuwait, and that he has been consistently on the record saying that the premise for the Iraq War in 2003 was finding weapons of mass destruction.

But that explanation doesn’t really negate a point McCain made rather clear; that no dependence on Middle East oil would equal no more war in the Middle East.

My opinion currently is that McCain and Hillary are both kinda full of shit, and Obama is honestly completely clueless. But the turd sandwich accidentally let a truth bomb slip, and while I’m disappointed by his backpedaling, It’s nice to see him break character every once in awhile and show a glimpse of what I think we’d really get if we let him through the bullshit gauntlet that the campaign trail has become.

soundman07 said:
“Agreed [Bill O'Reilly and Paul Wolfowitz are "Totally Full Of Shit"], but so is Olbermann, and you won’t see him crucified here.”

At this, I gasped. Well not really- that’d be totally gay- but I mean, I definitely don’t want people thinking that we’d ever turn a blind eye to someone being completely full of shit just because we agree with what they say most of the time.
So I immediately did two things. First, I welcomed soundman07 (and anyone out there) to supply us with any evidence of anyone being full of shit so we could give them a fair and equal crucifixion. Then, I started doing some research. Because I didn’t want to wait for someone else to do my detective work for me (in the spirit of true journalism), I set out to find examples of Olbermann lying.

I found a little bit right away.

In 2006, he painted an over-simplified and somewhat colored (even kinda sorta untrue) picture of the Bush administration’s lack of action on a daily briefing about Osama Bin Laden’s nefarious intentions before 9/11. And he didn’t jump to the point that the Clinton administration didn’t do anything when they were similarly alerted. Now, that’s not entirely true either- it wasn’t ignored by the Clinton administration nor the Bush administration- but it’s something that foes of Olbermann have pointed out as a clear example of bias.
Not exactly a clear cut case. And it’s far from current.

Then there was this time where Olbermann got caught “lying” when he said noone called him a liberal (god forbid) when he did 218 consecutive shows about the Monica Lewinsky scandal. The truth is that his network did 218 shows about Lewinsky, and while Olbermann was involved in most of them, he did in fact, take some days off. Yes, he said to Craig Ferguson “I did 218 consecutive shows” which is technically untrue. But still, nothing worth crucifying him over; the point he was trying to make was still a completely valid one. He did an assload of shows talking shit about Bill & Monica, so it’s not very fair to say he’s only attacking conservatives.
Also, that was 2 years ago.

Then I discovered Olbermann Watch- a site dedicated to calling bullshit on Keith Olbermann. Wow, finally, the treasure trove I was looking for. I’m not being a smarmy sarcastic tree-hugger here, I really was on a serious hunt for bullshit. That’s what I do.

So I started crawling the site for clear-cut examples of Keith Olbermann lying. I’m assuming the burden of proof and I’ll give Olbermann Watch the benefit of the doubt- I’ll consider all of their allegations valid unless I can prove otherwise. Here goes:

#1) Olbermann claimed that Pastor Hagee is Mccain’s “spiritual advisor,” and Olbermann is implicating the media as the bad guys in Obama’s situation over Pastor Wright.

The first part is, in fact, not true. One might call it a lie. The second part… is kinda vague. Olbermann Watch seems to be speculating on Olbermann’s intentions, and who really knows.

#2) Olbermann claims that Bush “never met with Cindy Sheehan,” yet they met in 2004.

I hunted down the full transcript of the show in question, which Olbermann Watch did not provide. What Olbermann actually said was that “Gold Star mothers like Cindy Sheehan and others for whom where (ph) had met only tragedy and waste, having been denied any chance of making their request [to stop the war] of this president.”
The truth is, there was “minimal coverage” of a meeting between Bush and Sheehan. So she did have a chance of making such a request. It’s not clear whether or not Olbermann knew that truth, and was thusly lying, or if he just didn’t know the little-known facts. But Olbermann Watch is basically right on this one.

#3) On the same show, Olbermann called Brit Hume a “McCain supporter” (alleged lie) and also “doctored” up a quote by Hume regarding something McCain said, to better suit Olbermann’s own “propaganda.” Here’s the quote, with the parts Olbermann ommitted in italics: “I think it’s probably just a blip, but it was a bigger blip than he wanted or needed at the time. I think the overall impression of the trip was this is a man welcomed by, knowledgeable of and comfortable with foreign leaders across a big part of the globe. But the mistake, nonetheless, raises questions not about his knowledgability- we all kinda believe he has that- the question, perhaps, about his age, which is an issue. You know, the feeling was not that he’s a dope, didn’t know his way around, that he might have had a senior moment there, and that’s unfortunate for him.” Olbermann then jumped on the thought of a wartime President having a “senior moment.”

Umm.. No, I think Olbermann got it straight. Hume said McCain had a “senior moment.” That was the gist, any way you slice it.
So is Brit Hume a McCain supporter? Well, probably. Of course he’d never go on record with it, but I’m pretty sure he is. At the end of the day, since noone knows for sure, I’m not sure if it’s a lie so much as a presumption. But that’s just my own personal judgment.

Then I got to a post about the March 19th show. Olbermann Watch triumphantly claimed that Olbermann was “caught in so many lies tonight that it might well be a new Guiness World Record!” By this point, I had gone through so many posts trying my damnedest to find some smoking gun type shit, I decided that this would have to be it for today. If the “#1 Keith Olbermann blog in the world” claimed that this was the gold standard of Keith Olbermann bullshit to study, it would surely determine once and for all if Olbermann was indeed full of shit or not. So here goes:

#4) Clinton is pushing for a re-vote in Michigan, even though the issue is “moot”, and she’s blaming Obama. Olbermann claims that it’s “not in Obama’s power” to determine because the state Senate won’t consider it. This is a lie because Obama needs to give his OK- which he hasn’t done.

I thought we had him here. But actually, it isn’t really Obama holding things up. The responsibility is in the hands of The Michigan Senate, where “top Democrats indicated it lacked the two-thirds supermajority necessary to pass the bill.” Obama clearly voiced his resignations to details in the legislation in question, but with him completely out of the picture, the Senate would still not have this majority. Olbermann’s off the hook and so is Obama.

#5) Olbermann makes the false claim that Sean Hannity called Barack Obama an anti-semite.

Well, he totally did. Not a lie. And Olbermann actually didn’t say that Hannity flat-out called him an anti-semite. He kept the context of the original quote, even while totally trashing the guy.

#6) Olbermann claimed that Fox didn’t cover Iraq today (March 19th).

Here’s the quote, from the transcript, which Olbermann Watch once again failed to provide: “…Fox News coverage of the war, fifth anniversary or otherwise, equally minimal, largely tangential. A lengthy segment today with the banner, ‘Obama Slams Iraq War in Major Speech.’  Better to angle each story along the lines of the war’s critics than the war’s catastrophes.
Yet even with Fox Noise, the shame seems to lie somewhere under the surface.  Once President Bush’s speech this morning was over, it was pretty much ignored.
Fox did have time to squeeze in Senator McCain’s visit with Israeli leaders, as well as dozens of other stories having nothing to do with Iraq, all par for the course.”

So… Olbermann actually clearly acknowledged that Fox covered the Iraq war. All he said was that it was kinda light, and that they covered a lot of stuff that wasn’t related at all. Totally not a lie.

#7) Olbermann claimed that Bill O’Reilly featured a “culture quiz” segment tonight (March 19th).

There are no serious implications to this lie, it’s just something Keith Olbermann said which was not true. He didn’t fabricate an imaginary segment to smear Bill O’Reilly or anything. But anyway, who gives a shit? Besides Olbermann Watch I mean. By the time I got to this one (the fourth of a total of a “world record” setting four), it was obvious to me that while Keith Olbermann is definitely biased, he is not nearly as full of shit as Bill O’Reilly. He doesn’t double check every single fact- that’s asking a hell of a lot of a guy who talks so much- but he gets most of them right.
He’ll talk loud and say some outrageous things, which do pull in the ratings. And at the end of the day, like O’Reilly, he is a television personality and not a journalist. But if he’s a liar, his most dedicated enemies aren’t looking hard enough.

And either way, we’ve got bigger fish to fry.

Five years ago.

In a memo sent to Congress the very same day, Bush declared that his decision to invade Iraq was “to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.”

With roughly 170,000 coalition troops in Iraq at this very moment, and $341 million a day being spent on a massively unpopular war when experts and analysts are screaming about a devastating recession looming, there’s little question as to why Bush is being labeled “Worst President Ever” by more and more publications every day. Yet still we see that same cocky smirk, that same wave, the same assurances that everything is fine. When confronted with the fact that 70 percent of America doesn’t support this war, Dick Cheney laughs and says “So?” We’re then reminded once again that there’s a supernaturally dangerous, freedom-hating enemy out there, one that will surely chase us onto our own turf, into our very homes with their dynamite vests. That is, if we don’t kill them first.

That all makes a good bedtime story, but I’ve got a quick question. What the fuck happened to finding Bin Laden? Where’s that Mission Accomplished banner? Naturally, we don’t want to ask those kinds of complicated questions, because the answers far exceed the attention spans and carefully cultivated ignorance of fast food America. Bush and Cheney’s financial ties to Big Oil and Saudi royalty are none of our business, and who cares if all but four of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudi Arabian? This is about freedom and evil, not facts and agendas.

There’s no denying that the Bush administration linked Saddam Hussein to 9/11 in order to sell a war of corporate interest in Iraq that has left hundreds of thousands of people dead, including 4,000 of our own troops. In five years’ time, Bush has offered zero evidence to support the accusations of Saddam’s involvement in or connection to 9/11. Yet still we march on, under blatantly false pretenses, amidst clear evidence of corruption, corporate pandering, lies and smokescreens surrounding virtually every facet of this presidential administration. Do we cut and run, or stick it out? The implications of consequence on either side are frightening.

In an impressive display of idiocy, yapping right-wing pathological liar and laughingstock of the rational world Bill O’Reilly marked today’s anniversary by making the fascinating claim that the United States never actually invaded Iraq. “We didn’t invade Iraq,” he declared on his show last night, contradicting statements he made in reference to the invasion during a January 28th broadcast. “I’ll submit that most folks still have no idea why the Bush administration invaded Iraq,” he said then.

Actually, Mr. No-Spin, we did invade Iraq. Our military forcefully entered the country in order to overthrow their leader. What else would you call it?

Furthermore, sir, you may remember this comment you made on March 6, 2006: “Iraq was invaded to create a friendly country between Iran and Syria, thereby pressuring those nations into a more sensible foreign policy.” Ring any bells?

Don’t be embarrassed, Billy. Bush agrees with at least one of the two stances you took on the “issue.” In a 2006 speech, he discussed the administration’s “two major invasions as a part of the war on terror.”

“We didn’t invade Iraq,” O’Reilly said. “It was a declaration of war. It was a declaration to enforce the first Gulf War Treaty.”

What O’Reilly calls a war treaty, the rest of us refer to as a cease-fire. In an interview with former U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix in 2004, the following conversation transpired:

O’REILLY: Do you understand that when you have 17 violations of a treaty, a war treaty, that you basically have to take action?

BLIX: Well, you’re talking about a war treaty. It was a cease-fire. It was not a war treaty.

O’REILLY: Oh, come on. Now don’t play semantics here, sir.

BLIX: Second- all right. I’m trying to be precise. You are imprecise.

Only someone with the wealth of abstract, illogical reasoning of Bill O’Reilly could mix up the words “cease-fire” with “war treaty,” right? That’s about as crazy as saying that the U.S. occupation of Iraq ended four years ago.

Wait, what’s that?

“I’m afraid that the label ‘occupation’ sticks to us even to this day, although the occupation ended in June of 2004,” said Iraq war architect Paul Wolfowitz at the Hudson Institute Monday. Undoubtedly referring to the “official” transfer of power to the Iraqi government in June of 2004, but with roughly 170,000 U.S. troops in Iraq right now, what exactly would Wolfowitz call our presence there?

Known for being the Iraq invasion’s most passionate and compelling advocate, Wolfowitz also interestingly refrained from acknowledging the presence of some 170,000 troops still stationed in the oil-rich Middle Eastern country.

As Mr. Wolfowitz and O’Reilly have most recently shown us, the disinformation machine is very much alive and grinding. The only real mission this administration has accomplished was to convince the world that this country is nothing more than the ugly, spoiled cowboy who does what he wants ’cause he’s got the biggest guns.

Happy anniversary.

Madam Speaker, Vice President Cheney, Members of Congress, distinguished guests, and fellow citizens:

Seven years have passed since I first stood before you at this rostrum. In that time, our country has been tested in ways none of us could have imagined. We have faced hard decisions about peace and war, rising competition in the world economy, and the health and welfare of our citizens. These issues call for vigorous debate, and I think it’s fair to say we’ve answered that call. Yet history will record that amid our differences, we acted with purpose. And together, we showed the world the power and resilience of American self-government.

All of us were sent to Washington to carry out the people’s business. That is the purpose of this body. It is the meaning of our oath. And it remains our charge to keep.

The actions of the 110th Congress will affect the security and prosperity of our Nation long after this session has ended. In this election year, let us show our fellow Americans that we recognize our responsibilities and are determined to meet them. And let us show them that Republicans and Democrats can compete for votes and cooperate for results at the same time.

From expanding opportunity to protecting our country, we have made good progress. Yet we have unfinished business before us, and the American people expect us to get it done.

In the work ahead, we must be guided by the philosophy that made our Nation great. As Americans, we believe in the power of individuals to determine their destiny and shape the course of history. We believe that the most reliable guide for our country is the collective wisdom of ordinary citizens. So in all we do, we must trust in the ability of free people to make wise decisions, and empower them to improve their lives and their futures.

To build a prosperous future, we must trust people with their own money and empower them to grow our economy. As we meet tonight, our economy is undergoing a period of uncertainty. America has added jobs for a record 52 straight months, but jobs are now growing at a slower pace. Wages are up, but so are prices for food and gas. Exports are rising, but the housing market has declined. And at kitchen tables across our country, there is concern about our economic future.

In the long run, Americans can be confident about our economic growth. But in the short run, we can all see that growth is slowing. So last week, my Administration reached agreement with Speaker Pelosi and Republican Leader Boehner on a robust growth package that includes tax relief for individuals and families and incentives for business investment. The temptation will be to load up the bill. That would delay it or derail it, and neither option is acceptable. This is a good agreement that will keep our economy growing and our people working. And this Congress must pass it as soon as possible.

We have other work to do on taxes. Unless the Congress acts, most of the tax relief we have delivered over the past 7 years will be taken away. Some in Washington argue that letting tax relief expire is not a tax increase. Try explaining that to 116 million American taxpayers who would see their taxes rise by an average of $1,800. Others have said they would personally be happy to pay higher taxes. I welcome their enthusiasm, and I am pleased to report that the IRS accepts both checks and money orders.

Most Americans think their taxes are high enough. With all the other pressures on their finances, American families should not have to worry about the Federal Government taking a bigger bite out of their paychecks. There is only one way to eliminate this uncertainty: make the tax relief permanent. And Members of Congress should know: If any bill raising taxes reaches my desk, I will veto it.

Just as we trust Americans with their own money, we need to earn their trust by spending their tax dollars wisely. Next week, I will send you a budget that terminates or substantially reduces 151 wasteful or bloated programs totaling more than $18 billion. And this budget will keep America on track for a surplus in 2012. American families have to balance their budgets, and so should their Government.

The people’s trust in their Government is undermined by congressional earmarks — special interest projects that are often snuck in at the last minute, without discussion or debate. Last year, I asked you to voluntarily cut the number and cost of earmarks in half. I also asked you to stop slipping earmarks into committee reports that never even come to a vote. Unfortunately, neither goal was met. So this time, if you send me an appropriations bill that does not cut the number and cost of earmarks in half, I will send it back to you with my veto. And tomorrow, I will issue an Executive Order that directs Federal agencies to ignore any future earmark that is not voted on by the Congress. If these items are truly worth funding, the Congress should debate them in the open and hold a public vote.

Our shared responsibilities extend beyond matters of taxes and spending.

On housing, we must trust Americans with the responsibility of homeownership and empower them to weather turbulent times in the housing market. My Administration brought together the HOPE NOW alliance, which is helping many struggling homeowners avoid foreclosure. The Congress can help even more. Tonight I ask you to pass legislation to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, modernize the Federal Housing Administration, and allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to help homeowners refinance their mortgages. These are difficult times for many American families, and by taking these steps, we can help more of them keep their homes.

To build a future of quality health care, we must trust patients and doctors to make medical decisions and empower them with better information and better options. We share a common goal: making health care more affordable and accessible for all Americans. The best way to achieve that goal is by expanding consumer choice, not government control. So I have proposed ending the bias in the tax code against those who do not get their health insurance through their employer. This one reform would put private coverage within reach for millions, and I call on the Congress to pass it this year. The Congress must also expand health savings accounts, create Association Health Plans for small businesses, promote health information technology, and confront the epidemic of junk medical lawsuits. With all these steps, we will help ensure that decisions about your medical care are made in the privacy of your doctor’s office — not in the halls of Congress.

On education, we must trust students to learn if given the chance and empower parents to demand results from our schools. In neighborhoods across our country, there are boys and girls with dreams — and a decent education is their only hope of achieving them. Six years ago, we came together to pass the No Child Left Behind Act, and today no one can deny its results. Last year, fourth and eighth graders achieved the highest math scores on record. Reading scores are on the rise. And African-American and Hispanic students posted all-time highs. Now we must work together to increase accountability, add flexibility for States and districts, reduce the number of high school dropouts, and provide extra help for struggling schools. Members of Congress: The No Child Left Behind Act is a bipartisan achievement. It is succeeding. And we owe it to America’s children, their parents, and their teachers to strengthen this good law.

We must also do more to help children when their schools do not measure up. Thanks to the D.C. Opportunity Scholarships you approved, more than 2,600 of the poorest children in our Nation’s capital have found new hope at a faith-based or other non-public school. Sadly, these schools are disappearing at an alarming rate in many of America’s inner cities. So I will convene a White House summit aimed at strengthening these lifelines of learning. And to open the doors of these schools to more children, I ask you to support a new $300 million program called Pell Grants for Kids. We have seen how Pell Grants help low-income college students realize their full potential. Together, we have expanded the size and reach of these grants. Now let’s apply that same spirit to help liberate poor children trapped in failing public schools.

On trade, we must trust American workers to compete with anyone in the world and empower them by opening up new markets overseas. Today, our economic growth increasingly depends on our ability to sell American goods, crops, and services all over the world. So we are working to break down barriers to trade and investment wherever we can. We are working for a successful Doha round of trade talks, and we must complete a good agreement this year. At the same time, we are pursuing opportunities to open up new markets by passing free trade agreements.

I thank the Congress for approving a good agreement with Peru. Now I ask you to approve agreements with Colombia, Panama, and South Korea. Many products from these nations now enter America duty-free, yet many of our products face steep tariffs in their markets. These agreements will level the playing field. They will give us better access to nearly 100 million customers. And they will support good jobs for the finest workers in the world: those whose products say “Made in the USA.”

These agreements also promote America’s strategic interests. The first agreement that will come before you is with Colombia, a friend of America that is confronting violence and terror and fighting drug traffickers. If we fail to pass this agreement, we will embolden the purveyors of false populism in our hemisphere. So we must come together, pass this agreement, and show our neighbors in the region that democracy leads to a better life.

Trade brings better jobs, better choices, and better prices. Yet for some Americans, trade can mean losing a job, and the Federal Government has a responsibility to help. I ask the Congress to reauthorize and reform trade adjustment assistance, so we can help these displaced workers learn new skills and find new jobs.

To build a future of energy security, we must trust in the creative genius of American researchers and entrepreneurs and empower them to pioneer a new generation of clean energy technology. Our security, our prosperity, and our environment all require reducing our dependence on oil. Last year, I asked you to pass legislation to reduce oil consumption over the next decade, and you responded. Together we should take the next steps: Let us fund new technologies that can generate coal power while capturing carbon emissions. Let us increase the use of renewable power and emissions-free nuclear power. Let us continue investing in advanced battery technology and renewable fuels to power the cars and trucks of the future. Let us create a new international clean technology fund, which will help developing nations like India and China make greater use of clean energy sources. And let us complete an international agreement that has the potential to slow, stop, and eventually reverse the growth of greenhouse gases. This agreement will be effective only if it includes commitments by every major economy and gives none a free ride. The United States is committed to strengthening our energy security and confronting global climate change. And the best way to meet these goals is for America to continue leading the way toward the development of cleaner and more efficient technology.

To keep America competitive into the future, we must trust in the skill of our scientists and engineers and empower them to pursue the breakthroughs of tomorrow. Last year, the Congress passed legislation supporting the American Competitiveness Initiative, but never followed through with the funding. This funding is essential to keeping our scientific edge. So I ask the Congress to double Federal support for critical basic research in the physical sciences and ensure America remains the most dynamic nation on earth.

On matters of science and life, we must trust in the innovative spirit of medical researchers and empower them to discover new treatments while respecting moral boundaries. In November, we witnessed a landmark achievement when scientists discovered a way to reprogram adult skin cells to act like embryonic stem cells. This breakthrough has the potential to move us beyond the divisive debates of the past by extending the frontiers of medicine without the destruction of human life. So we are expanding funding for this type of ethical medical research. And as we explore promising avenues of research, we must also ensure that all life is treated with the dignity it deserves. So I call on the Congress to pass legislation that bans unethical practices such as the buying, selling, patenting, or cloning of human life.

On matters of justice, we must trust in the wisdom of our Founders and empower judges who understand that the Constitution means what it says. I have submitted judicial nominees who will rule by the letter of the law, not the whim of the gavel. Many of these nominees are being unfairly delayed. They are worthy of confirmation, and the Senate should give each of them a prompt up-or-down vote.

In communities across our land, we must trust in the good heart of the American people and empower them to serve their neighbors in need. Over the past 7 years, more of our fellow citizens have discovered that the pursuit of happiness leads to the path of service. Americans have volunteered in record numbers. Charitable donations are higher than ever. Faith-based groups are bringing hope to pockets of despair, with newfound support from the Federal Government. And to help guarantee equal treatment for faith-based organizations when they compete for Federal funds, I ask you to permanently extend Charitable Choice.

Tonight the armies of compassion continue the march to a new day in the Gulf Coast. America honors the strength and resilience of the people of this region. We reaffirm our pledge to help them build stronger and better than before. And tonight I am pleased to announce that in April we will host this year’s North American Summit of Canada, Mexico, and the United States in the great city of New Orleans.

There are two other pressing challenges that I have raised repeatedly before this body, and that this body has failed to address: entitlement spending and immigration.

Every Member in this chamber knows that spending on entitlement programs like Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid is growing faster than we can afford. And we all know the painful choices ahead if America stays on this path: massive tax increases, sudden and drastic cuts in benefits, or crippling deficits. I have laid out proposals to reform these programs. Now I ask Members of Congress to offer your proposals and come up with a bipartisan solution to save these vital programs for our children and grandchildren.

The other pressing challenge is immigration. America needs to secure our borders — and with your help, my Administration is taking steps to do so. We are increasing worksite enforcement, we are deploying fences and advanced technologies to stop illegal crossings, we have effectively ended the policy of “catch and release” at the border, and by the end of this year, we will have doubled the number of border patrol agents. Yet we also need to acknowledge that we will never fully secure our border until we create a lawful way for foreign workers to come here and support our economy. This will take pressure off the border and allow law enforcement to concentrate on those who mean us harm. We must also find a sensible and humane way to deal with people here illegally. Illegal immigration is complicated, but it can be resolved. And it must be resolved in a way that upholds both our laws and our highest ideals.

This is the business of our Nation here at home. Yet building a prosperous future for our citizens also depends on confronting enemies abroad and advancing liberty in troubled regions of the world.

Our foreign policy is based on a clear premise: We trust that people, when given the chance, will choose a future of freedom and peace. In the last 7 years, we have witnessed stirring moments in the history of liberty. We have seen citizens in Georgia and Ukraine stand up for their right to free and fair elections. We have seen people in Lebanon take to the streets to demand their independence. We have seen Afghans emerge from the tyranny of the Taliban to choose a new president and a new parliament. We have seen jubilant Iraqis holding up ink-stained fingers and celebrating their freedom. And these images of liberty have inspired us.

In the past 7 years, we have also seen images that have sobered us. We have watched throngs of mourners in Lebanon and Pakistan carrying the caskets of beloved leaders taken by the assassin’s hand. We have seen wedding guests in blood-soaked finery staggering from a hotel in Jordan, Afghans and Iraqis blown up in mosques and markets, and trains in London and Madrid ripped apart by bombs. And on a clear September day, we saw thousands of our fellow citizens taken from us in an instant. These horrific images serve as a grim reminder: The advance of liberty is opposed by terrorists and extremists — evil men who despise freedom, despise America, and aim to subject millions to their violent rule.

Since September 11, we have taken the fight to these terrorists and extremists. We will stay on the offense, we will keep up the pressure, and we will deliver justice to the enemies of America.

We are engaged in the defining ideological struggle of the 21st century. The terrorists oppose every principle of humanity and decency that we hold dear. Yet in this war on terror, there is one thing we and our enemies agree on: In the long run, men and women who are free to determine their own destinies will reject terror and refuse to live in tyranny. That is why the terrorists are fighting to deny this choice to people in Lebanon,

Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and the Palestinian Territories. And that is why, for the security of America and the peace of the world, we are spreading the hope of freedom.

In Afghanistan, America, our 25 NATO allies, and 15 partner nations are helping the Afghan people defend their freedom and rebuild their country. Thanks to the courage of these military and civilian personnel, a nation that was once a safe haven for al Qaida is now a young democracy where boys and girls are going to school, new roads and hospitals are being built, and people are looking to the future with new hope. These successes must continue, so we are adding 3,200 Marines to our forces in Afghanistan, where they will fight the terrorists and train the Afghan Army and police. Defeating the Taliban and al Qaida is critical to our security, and I thank the Congress for supporting America’s vital mission in Afghanistan.

In Iraq, the terrorists and extremists are fighting to deny a proud people their liberty and to establish safe havens for attacks across the world. One year ago, our enemies were succeeding in their efforts to plunge Iraq into chaos. So we reviewed our strategy and changed course. We launched a surge of American forces into Iraq. And we gave our troops a new mission: Work with Iraqi forces to protect the Iraqi people, pursue the enemy in its strongholds, and deny the terrorists sanctuary anywhere in the country.

The Iraqi people quickly realized that something dramatic had happened. Those who had worried that America was preparing to abandon them instead saw tens of thousands of American forces flowing into their country. They saw our forces moving into neighborhoods, clearing out the terrorists, and staying behind to ensure the enemy did not return. And they saw our troops, along with Provincial Reconstruction Teams that include Foreign Service Officers and other skilled public servants, coming in to ensure that improved security was followed by improvements in daily life. Our military and civilians in Iraq are performing with courage and distinction, and they have the gratitude of our whole Nation.

The Iraqis launched a surge of their own. In the fall of 2006, Sunni tribal leaders grew tired of al Qaida’s brutality and started a popular uprising called “The Anbar Awakening.” Over the past year, similar movements have spread across the country. And today, this grassroots surge includes more than 80,000 Iraqi citizens who are fighting the terrorists. The government in Baghdad has stepped forward as well — adding more than 100,000 new Iraqi soldiers and police during the past year.

While the enemy is still dangerous and more work remains, the American and Iraqi surges have achieved results few of us could have imagined just 1 year ago:

When we met last year, many said containing the violence was impossible. A year later, high profile terrorist attacks are down, civilian deaths are down, and sectarian killings are down.

When we met last year, militia extremists — some armed and trained by Iran — were wreaking havoc in large areas of Iraq. A year later, Coalition and Iraqi forces have killed or captured hundreds of militia fighters. And Iraqis of all backgrounds increasingly realize that defeating these militia fighters is critical to the future of their country.

When we met last year, al Qaida had sanctuaries in many areas of Iraq, and their leaders had just offered American forces safe passage out of the country. Today, it is al Qaida that is searching for safe passage. They have been driven from many of the strongholds they once held, and over the past year, we have captured or killed thousands of extremists in Iraq, including hundreds of key al Qaida leaders and operatives. Last month, Osama bin Laden released a tape in which he railed against Iraqi tribal leaders who have turned on al Qaida and admitted that Coalition forces are growing stronger in Iraq. Ladies and gentlemen, some may deny the surge is working, but among the terrorists there is no doubt. Al Qaida is on the run in Iraq, and this enemy will be defeated.

When we met last year, our troop levels in Iraq were on the rise. Today, because of the progress just described, we are implementing a policy of “return on success,” and the surge forces we sent to Iraq are beginning to come home.

This progress is a credit to the valor of our troops and the brilliance of their commanders. This evening, I want to speak directly to our men and women on the frontlines. Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines, and Coast Guardsmen: In the past year, you have done everything we have asked of you, and more. Our Nation is grateful for your courage. We are proud of your accomplishments. And tonight in this hallowed chamber, with the American people as our witness, we make you a solemn pledge: In the fight ahead, you will have all you need to protect our Nation. And I ask the Congress to meet its responsibilities to these brave men and women by fully funding our troops.

Our enemies in Iraq have been hit hard. They are not yet defeated, and we can still expect tough fighting ahead. Our objective in the coming year is to sustain and build on the gains we made in 2007, while transitioning to the next phase of our strategy. American troops are shifting from leading operations, to partnering with Iraqi forces, and, eventually, to a protective overwatch mission. As part of this transition, one Army brigade combat team and one Marine Expeditionary Unit have already come home and will not be replaced. In the coming months, four additional brigades and two Marine battalions will follow suit. Taken together, this means more than 20,000 of our troops are coming home.

Any further drawdown of U.S. troops will be based on conditions in Iraq and the recommendations of our commanders. General Petraeus has warned that too fast a drawdown could result in the “disintegration of the Iraqi Security Forces, al Qaida-Iraq regaining lost ground, [and] a marked increase in violence.” Members of Congress: Having come so far and achieved so much, we must not allow this to happen.

In the coming year, we will work with Iraqi leaders as they build on the progress they are making toward political reconciliation. At the local level, Sunnis, Shia, and Kurds are beginning to come together to reclaim their communities and rebuild their lives. Progress in the provinces must be matched by progress in Baghdad. And we are seeing some encouraging signs. The national government is sharing oil revenues with the provinces. The parliament recently passed both a pension law and de-Ba’athification reform. Now they are debating a provincial powers law. The Iraqis still have a distance to travel. But after decades of dictatorship and the pain of sectarian violence, reconciliation is taking place — and the Iraqi people are taking control of their future.

The mission in Iraq has been difficult and trying for our Nation. But it is in the vital interest of the United States that we succeed. A free Iraq will deny al Qaida a safe haven. A free Iraq will show millions across the Middle East that a future of liberty is possible. And a free Iraq will be a friend of America, a partner in fighting terror, and a source of stability in a dangerous part of the world.

By contrast, a failed Iraq would embolden extremists, strengthen Iran, and give terrorists a base from which to launch new attacks on our friends, our allies, and our homeland. The enemy has made its intentions clear. At a time when the momentum seemed to favor them, al Qaida’s top commander in Iraq declared that they will not rest until they have attacked us here in Washington. My fellow Americans: We will not rest either. We will not rest until this enemy has been defeated. We must do the difficult work today, so that years from now people will look back and say that this generation rose to the moment, prevailed in a tough fight, and left behind a more hopeful region and a safer America.

We are also standing against the forces of extremism in the Holy Land, where we have new cause for hope. Palestinians have elected a president who recognizes that confronting terror is essential to achieving a state where his people can live in dignity and at peace with Israel. Israelis have leaders who recognize that a peaceful, democratic Palestinian state will be a source of lasting security. This month in Ramallah and Jerusalem, I assured leaders from both sides that America will do, and I will do, everything we can to help them achieve a peace agreement that defines a Palestinian state by the end of this year. The time has come for a Holy Land where a democratic Israel and a democratic Palestine live side-by-side in peace.

We are also standing against the forces of extremism embodied by the regime in Tehran. Iran’s rulers oppress a good and talented people. And wherever freedom advances in the Middle East, it seems the Iranian regime is there to oppose it. Iran is funding and training militia groups in Iraq, supporting Hezbollah terrorists in Lebanon, and backing Hamas’ efforts to undermine peace in the Holy Land. Tehran is also developing ballistic missiles of increasing range and continues to develop its capability to enrich uranium, which could be used to create a nuclear weapon. Our message to the people of Iran is clear: We have no quarrel with you, we respect your traditions and your history, and we look forward to the day when you have your freedom. Our message to the leaders of Iran is also clear: Verifiably suspend your nuclear enrichment, so negotiations can begin. And to rejoin the community of nations, come clean about your nuclear intentions and past actions, stop your oppression at home, and cease your support for terror abroad. But above all, know this: America will confront those who threaten our troops, we will stand by our allies, and we will defend our vital interests in the Persian Gulf.

On the homefront, we will continue to take every lawful and effective measure to protect our country. This is our most solemn duty. We are grateful that there has not been another attack on our soil since September 11. This is not for a lack of desire or effort on the part of the enemy. In the past 6 years, we have stopped numerous attacks, including a plot to fly a plane into the tallest building in Los Angeles and another to blow up passenger jets bound for America over the Atlantic. Dedicated men and women in our Government toil day and night to stop the terrorists from carrying out their plans. These good citizens are saving American lives, and everyone in this chamber owes them our thanks. And we owe them something more: We owe them the tools they need to keep our people safe.

One of the most important tools we can give them is the ability to monitor terrorist communications. To protect America, we need to know who the terrorists are talking to, what they are saying, and what they are planning. Last year, the Congress passed legislation to help us do that. Unfortunately, the Congress set the legislation to expire on February 1. This means that if you do not act by Friday, our ability to track terrorist threats would be weakened and our citizens will be in greater danger. The Congress must ensure the flow of vital intelligence is not disrupted. The Congress must pass liability protection for companies believed to have assisted in the efforts to defend America. We have had ample time for debate. The time to act is now.

Protecting our Nation from the dangers of a new century requires more than good intelligence and a strong military. It also requires changing the conditions that breed resentment and allow extremists to prey on despair. So America is using its influence to build a freer, more hopeful, and more compassionate world. This is a reflection of our national interest and the calling of our conscience.

America is opposing genocide in Sudan and supporting freedom in countries from Cuba and Zimbabwe to Belarus and Burma.

America is leading the fight against global poverty, with strong education initiatives and humanitarian assistance. We have also changed the way we deliver aid by launching the Millennium Challenge Account. This program strengthens democracy, transparency, and the rule of law in developing nations, and I ask you to fully fund this important initiative.

America is leading the fight against global hunger. Today, more than half the world’s food aid comes from the United States. And tonight, I ask the Congress to support an innovative proposal to provide food assistance by purchasing crops directly from farmers in the developing world, so we can build up local agriculture and help break the cycle of famine.

America is leading the fight against disease. With your help, we are working to cut by half the number of malaria-related deaths in 15 African nations. And our Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief is treating 1.4 million people. We can bring healing and hope to many more. So I ask you to maintain the principles that have changed behavior and made this program a success. And I call on you to double our initial commitment to fighting HIV/AIDS by approving an additional $30 billion over the next 5 years.

America is a force for hope in the world because we are a compassionate people, and some of the most compassionate Americans are those who have stepped forward to protect us. We must keep faith with all who have risked life and limb so that we might live in freedom and peace. Over the past 7 years, we have increased funding for veterans by more than 95 percent. As we increase funding, we must also reform our veterans system to meet the needs of a new war and a new generation. I call on the Congress to enact the reforms recommended by Senator Bob Dole and Secretary Donna Shalala, so we can improve the system of care for our wounded warriors and help them build lives of hope, promise, and dignity.

Our military families also sacrifice for America. They endure sleepless nights and the daily struggle of providing for children while a loved one is serving far from home. We have a responsibility to provide for them. So I ask you to join me in expanding their access to childcare, creating new hiring preferences for military spouses across the Federal Government, and allowing our troops to transfer their unused education benefits to their spouses or children. Our military families serve our Nation, they inspire our Nation, and tonight our Nation honors them.

The secret of our strength, the miracle of America, is that our greatness lies not in our Government, but in the spirit and determination of our people. When the Federal Convention met in Philadelphia in 1787, our Nation was bound by the Articles of Confederation, which began with the words, “We the undersigned delegates.” When Gouverneur Morris was asked to draft the preamble to our new Constitution, he offered an important revision and opened with words that changed the course of our Nation and the history of the world: “We the people.”

By trusting the people, our Founders wagered that a great and noble Nation could be built on the liberty that resides in the hearts of all men and women. By trusting the people, succeeding generations transformed our fragile young democracy into the most powerful Nation on earth and a beacon of hope for millions. And so long as we continue to trust the people, our Nation will prosper, our liberty will be secure, and the State of our Union will remain strong. So tonight, with confidence in freedom’s power, and trust in the people, let us set forth to do their business.