BO should avoid this trap of "more talks" by the MSM.  He should stop criticizing US government for Iranian intransigence.  

Was it the American (Bush's) fault that Iran test-fired some missiles today?  NO
Was it American (Bush's) fault that Iran refused to back down on its nuclear weapon program?  NO

Now that people in the know are sure about confrontation against Iran, it's time for BO to start highlighting Iranian intransigence like the nuclear program itself, harassment of US ships in the Gulf, today's missiles, and Iranian provocative rhetoric.

Instead of blaming Bush for everything wrong with Iran; the Mullahs bears the blame for Iranian situation.

I'm not a Bush apologist, but I don't want BO to become trapped into an Iranian apologist.  

The Mullahs of Iran hates America and everything we stands for; so enough with this "BLAME BUSH FOR IRANIAN MISTAKE" trap.

Make no mistake about it, US or Israel will take out Iranian Nuke facilities before this November.  Like I wrote in one of my prior diary:
Attack on Iranian nuclear facilities in right now inevitable and would happen between September 5 and October 15, 2008.  

Despite the precipitous plunge in his popularity and growing criticism of his competency, character, and style, George W. Bush is not really that much different from other presidents with respect to his hegemonic ambitions or his proclivity to use force to achieve foreign policy objectives.  Continuing historical patterns, President Bush and all presidents since World War II have committed horrendous crimes against humanity in order to protect and advance American interests under the guise of liberating people from under the jackboot of brutal dictators or communist subversives, bringing democracy to totalitarian states, improving the lives of those who are suffering and eradicating terrorism.

The gaping discrepancy between the stated goals of American foreign policy and its praxis is best exemplified by the apogee of war crimes: genocide.  In its pursuit of these lofty goals, the United States has committed genocide in Iraq.  Intervention resulting in genocide at the very minimum proves that American government's professed motives for foreign policy decisions are altogether specious.

The press is only beginning to pay attention to Sy Hersh's articles in the New Yorker detailing the secret moves against Iran being carried out by the Bush Administration, and, more specifically, by the Cheney office's influence over that Administration.

Yale Professor David Bromwich wrote in the Huffington Post:

In late 2007, after winning an election whose central issue was a more prudent and rational policy in the Middle East, congressional Democrats, obedient to the wishes of a Presidential Finding, signed away $400 million for secret operations against Iran. A more craven act of submission would be hard to imagine; and they did this in the glow of victory, in direct contradiction of their mandate. What were they signing for? Sabotage, assassination, covert support for political clients and "destabilization" generally are predictable parts of such a design; but the Democrats, in the months between their capitulation and Hersh's article, made no mention of dissatisfactions at having been cut off from oversight. The truth seems to be that in this area, as in so many others, only the Office of the Vice President oversees the Office of the President.

I hope to spread this far and wide. NO. MORE. WAR. From the website Stop AIPAC This resolution demands that President Bush "initiate an international effort" to impose a land, sea, and air blockade on Iran to prevent it from importing gasoline and to inspect all cargo entering or leaving Iran. Such a blockade imposed without United Nations authority (which the resolution does not call for) would be seen as an act of war. Congressional sources say the House could vote on the resolution, H.Con.Res. 362 (see full resolution here), as early as next week (June 23-June 27). As of June 20, it already has 169 cosponsors in the House. Current list of cosponsors here. See bottom of page for latest status. What you can do after the flip.

How can Pelosi and Reid be so weak? Call your Congressman right now! They are about to pass another Bush War Funding bill which includes a FISA provision that will give telecommunications companies immunity from lawsuits. Do the Democrats know that Bush has a 29% approval rating and that only 17% of Americans feel we are on the wrong track?

More to follow as I get more details.

Senator John McCain tells us that that the war in Iraq is "necessary and just", and hey, good news: Bush's surge is a success! Will it work for the next 100 years? Let's take a glance at May of this year to see how well everything is working so far, eh?

I just Stumbled! upon a video by a journalist for the Nation which had some disturbing things to say about our candidates and their position on private contractors in Iraq.

View it in the extended entry and then tell me what you think.

 
In the 1800s immigrants from Germany and other mid-European countries flocked to cities like Cincinnatti, Detroit, Milwaukee and St. Louis.  They built many things including built great breweries, like Blatz, Miller, Schlitz, Pabst, Falstaff and a thousand lesser ones.  The greatest brewery of them all was Anheuser-Busch in St. Louis.  I went to high school just 10 blocks from the 100 square block Busch brewery complex in St. Louis.  If the breeze was just right, the smell of hops would blow in and engulf our classroom.  It was a reassuring smell.  It meant union jobs at solid middle class wages with great benefits that had been won thanks to strong unions and a paternalistic management.  Anheuser-Busch, then & now, was the cornerstone of St. Louis.