From Matthew Gross's blog:
Listen as Donna and Nancy Pelosi and Senator Charles Schumer take to the airwaves saying that they have to go back to the drawing board and learn from their mistakes and try to be better, more likable, more appealing, have a stronger message, speak to morality. Surf the blogs, and read the comments of dismayed, discombobulated, confused individuals trying to figure out what they did wrong. Hear the cacophony of voices, crying out, "Why did they beat me?"

And then ask anyone who has ever worked in a domestic violence shelter if they have heard this before.

They will tell you, every single day.

The answer is quite simple. They beat us because they are abusers. We can call it hate. We can call it fear. We can say it is unfair. But we are looped into the cycle of violence, and we need to start calling the dominating side what they are: abusive. And we need to recognize that we are the victims of verbal, mental, and even, in the case of Iraq, physical violence.

As victims we can't stop asking ourselves what we did wrong.

WASHINGTON - The Army has extended by two months the Iraq tours of about 6,500 soldiers, citing a need for experienced troops through the Iraqi elections scheduled for late January.

From the AP via msnbc: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6367852/

Let's all say it: Bush would never bring back the draft.  Ha.

Jim Rutenberg, in an article titled "Scary Ads Take Campaign to a Grim New Level," has the gall to write this.

"In a commercial created by a group of family members who lost loved ones in the Iraq war called Real Voices, which the MoveOn political action committee paid to run in several battleground states through Friday, Cindy Sheehan, the mother of a soldier killed in Iraq, recounts the unbearable pain of losing her son and all but implicates the president in his death."

Let's be clear, she DOES implicate Bush in his death.  But the NeoCon Times can't bear to say this. It is perfectly clear that Bush is responsible for a great deal of death.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/17/politics/campaign/17ads.html?ei=5094&en=863234845791eaec&h p=&ex=1097985600&partner=homepage&pagewanted=print&position=

This is an important story over on daily kos.

"A 17-member Army Reserve platoon with troops from Jackson and around the Southeast deployed to Iraq is under arrest for refusing a "suicide mission" to deliver fuel, the troops' relatives said Thursday.

The soldiers refused an order on Wednesday to go to Taji, Iraq -- north of Baghdad -- because their vehicles were considered "deadlined" or extremely unsafe, said Patricia McCook of Jackson, wife of Sgt. Larry O. McCook."

See the whole story here: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/10/15/92853/871

 We need to spread the word and support our troops.  Being sent into action without adequate protection is indeed suicide.  

John Kerry is boring when he talks about policy.  Many people want to scream every time he says "I have a plan" or "My plan will..." Why?

Kerry is not Clinton, not a policy guy.  He's an execution guy.  He gets the job done.  

Kerry doesn't have a distinguished Senate record in terms of legislation.  That's not where he focused his efforts.  He's a prosecutor.  And while he was in the Senate he went after the bad guys in Iran/Contra, the BCCI scandale, and more.  Although he is clearly a thinker, he focuses his energies on doing things.

This is why Kerry mopped the floor with Bush in the first two debates and why he'll mop the floor again tonight.  He focuses on the mission and he gets the job done.  And that's why he'll win this election.  

It's time to appreciate Kerry's true strengths in management and leadership, which will serve him well in the oval office.  And when he decides to go after the bad guys with the power of the presidency, look out De Lay, Wolfowitz, and all you other right-wing traitors.

I don't agree, but it is worth discussion--Chris

Let's slow down here. Are we just doing what Rove wants? Are we taking our proverbial guns off Bush to go after Sinclair, leaving Bush laughing at us?

I wonder if this Sinclair crap will really have much impact. Fox has been blasting rightwing propaganda just as bad and blatant at this faux-documentary for years. Those who are going to drink the Kool Aid on this have already done so.

Every effort spent attacking Sinclair is an effort that is not directed at attacking Bush. Every letter to advertisers against Sinclair is not a letter to your local paper attacking Bush. People are reacting, not acting. Shrinks call it being reactive: letting your behavior be dictated by the actions of others. We are going on defense instead of staying on offense.

This is something Rove has proved very good at. He gets us all riled up chasing off in different directions, instead of maintaining focus on knocking Bush off. The Kerry campaign seems to get it: there's nothing on the web site about Sinclair that I've seen. Maybe that's how Kerry survived Vietman, when he had real bullets to deal with.

I know, Sinclair's actions seem beyond unfair. But let's think about where our energies are best directed. Let's keep the focus on the liar in the oval office.

Josh Marshall has a thoughtful piece on Iraq up here. http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_09_26.php#003532

But he is wrong when he says, "Unfortunately, I don't think we're in a position to just pull up stakes and leave the place. We're in a position something like that a surgeon might face if he started an operation only to realize once he'd cut the patient open that the operation should never have been attempted. But now the patient's gone critical and he's got to stabilize him and close him up without having him die on the operating table."

While an analogy in which Iraq is a sick patient and the U.S. is a skilled surgeon is highly questionable to begin with, to be somewhat accurate, it should go like this.

We're in a position a surgeon might face if he started an operation only to realize every organ and piece of flesh he touched became infected with virulent bacteria, and every time he tried to clean it up, he only spread the infection and made it worse. He realizes, after a while, the only thing he can do is step away and hope someone else can save the patient's life.

Painting Kerry into a Corner: He's the same as Bush on Iraq

As Iraq becomes a bigger and bigger problem for Bush, coordinated stories are appearing all over the media (NY Times, LA Times, ABC and elsewhere) saying Kerry's policy on Iraq is really no different from Bush's.  Steve M. at No More Mr. Nice Blog has it nailed:

http://nomoremister.blogspot.com/2004/09/is-there-echo-in-here-despite-all.html

You can bet the theme that Kerry and Bush really don't disagree on Iraq is going to get louder and louder.  There are two objectives to this latest push:

1. To let Bush (finally) acknowledge the obvious: that things are a mess in Iraq.  But Kerry doesn't really have any better ideas.
2. To force Kerry to differentiate himself from Bush on a policy level, so the media can then pin the "anti-war" label on him and say he is another George McGovern. (Diane Sawyer tried this yesterday on ABC.)

As a bonus, they also hope to drive a wedge in the Dems by getting Kucinich supporters riled up.

How do we respond?  First, we don't get sucked in!  Don't start demanding that Kerry promise to pull out of Iraq, etc.