Clinton vs. Pentagon continues

Posted: Friday, July 20, 2007 4:27 PM by Mark Murray
Filed Under: Democrats, Security

From NBC's Lauren Appelbaum

The latest in the controversy over that Pentagon letter to Hillary Clinton... Clinton and John Kerry held a conference call with reporters this afternoon to announce legislation that requires the Pentagon to brief -- classified if necessary -- the Congress with contingency plans for redeploying troops from Iraq. Clinton said she was forced to draw up the legislation because she felt the issue was being politicized instead of receiving the answers from Secretary Gates she felt she deserved. In fact, she called Under Secretary of Defense Eric Edelman's response in the letter "offensive and totally inappropriate."

"I sent a serious letter on a matter of national security to the Secretary of Defense, and in return received a political response," she said. "I wrote yesterday to Secretary Gates renewing my call on the Bush Administration to immediately provide a redeployment strategy that will keep our brave men and women safe as they leave Iraq -- instead of adhering to a political strategy to attack those of us like Senator Kerry and myself who rightfully question their competence and preparedness after years of mistakes and misjudgments."

Kerry added his opinion, stating the country needs to plan for issues both in Iraq and on the home front, reminding reporters of Katrina. He also said a contingency plan is not something unreasonable to expect. "If the Pentagon can draw up plans to bomb Iran and do so on 24 hours notice by the president," he said, "then the least they can do is have a plan under any and all circumstances, and Hillary and I want to emphasize that, on any and all circumstances, a plan to redeploy American troops."

EMAIL THIS

Comments

I wouldn't be surprised if clinton arranged this little brouhaha in order to get some publicity and pump up her creds for the left. she has made no headway with us and so, desparate she would resort to this. Plus, she has seen Obama in the news the past 2 days and cannot stand not being the one with her face plastered over our televisions. eeewww

diane (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 4:40 PM)

It is normal to have contengency plans for many possible sceneros, altho bush has said many times he only has one plan. Clinton asking for such a plan is both intellegent and a duty.

mikeeg,abdn,wa (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 4:47 PM)

Wow I couldn't agree with you more diane. That Hillary, she's a real Uniter.

Dave, Tn (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 4:49 PM)

She and Kerry both should have thought about this before they so recklessly decided to authorize Bush to go in.....I wonder exactly how much thought and reason did she actually put into that decision.

Lyn, Silver Spring, MD (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 4:50 PM)

Diane - there is a reason people in the real world don't take the leftwing of the Democratic party seriously. You just provided a classic example of it.

Joey Davis, Atlanta, GA (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 4:52 PM)

''Redeploy''them where,Kerry? Diego Garcia? Or maybe Shea Stadium.

Lee Holmes (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 4:54 PM)

I'm sure she did arrange this, and as a veteran who has been to war, I appreciate her effort. Our people, especially the soldiers who are risking their lives deserve the answers to the questions being asked. Diane, you need to stop looking at this as a ploy and start recognizing when the truth is being sought.

ANUTKRAKER, TX (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 4:54 PM)

Lee,

How about redeploying out of the cities to the oil fields where this war is really about. It would be nice if at least one politician recognized this.

Remember - He who controls the oil, controls the world economy for years to come!!!!!!

ANUTKRAKER, TX (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 5:01 PM)

OVERPLAYED! TOTAL PLUBICITY STUNT !

I believe that the American people are hip to the games coming from both sides of the aisle and Hillary Clinton is a major player. I can't help but notice when I watch these Sunday Talk Shows and listen to "political analysts" talk about Hillary Clinton, all they can talk about is her remarkable ability to say the right things at the right time to convince people that she is the only one qualified to be President. They can only compliment her on her ability to be crafty and cunning in pretending to make promises that she knows she will not keep. This is not a good thing and if the MSM thinks the American people are not hip to that, then I will enjoy watching them try to spin the claim of her inevitability to the American people when she loses , because she will. The American people are listening to what she says. We are hip to her game and we are fully aware of the "questions" that are being asked by the pollsters. So, when they assert that she is the inevitable based on the polling, many of us laugh because we know who's being polled and we know what questions are being asked. These recent stories that are portraying Hillary Clinton as some hard core "Take On The Bush Administration" progressive maverick are being dissected by thinking people and all she is doing is making noise. She would NOT bring the troops home. She would NOT end the war. She would make up an excuse "in a crafty careful way" why she can't bring our troops home. It's an act. I'm not falling for it and despite what the polls say, I don't believe I am alone.

DR (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 5:02 PM)

Contingency Plans are by definition designed and updated, but once made public are expired and new plans must be made. If hillary doesn't understand that as a basic principle she is not the smartest woman alive and certainly does not need to be POTUS.

Mike (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 5:13 PM)

I've read the letter, and it isn't outrageous at all. She's so friggin' transparent.

But I fear she's made a mistake here...signing on with surrender-monkey Kerry is bad juju.

Ng (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 5:41 PM)

As a member of Senate Armed servises committee Hillary has every right to ask questions about troop redeployement, it is the white house and defense department who are politicizing the issue. One other note I think it will be a delightful change to have a women in the white house, and I think Hillary Clinton is the perfect choice.

Josh williams, Ann Arbor, Michigan (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 5:53 PM)

Josh williams, Ann Arbor, Michigan (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 5:55 PM)

Hillary Clinton isn't worth the air coming out of her mouth. She needs to quit wasting her partys time and support a candidate that can upset the Republicans. The war in Iraq is just that, A WAR, We can win it or lose it. The choice is ours. I don't think pulling out is the answer for such an unstable area. I don't think staying is an option either. Let the Islamic Extremist run it is what were saying if we leave. A very powerfull military and time is on our side. Something stable will come along eventually. Remember, Freedom comes at a cost.

Bob S.,Flint,MI. (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 6:19 PM)

I'm always surprised at the heated stands people take against Hilary. There is simply nothing good that can be said about an administration that has killed our kids, spent our money, stolen our civil rights and involved our nation in a meaningless war with tens of thousands of victims. How in the world can we believe them now? Rock on, Hilary!

O. Elder, Columbus, ohio (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 6:20 PM)

Joey Davis: 'people in the real world don't take the leftwing of the Democratic party seriously. You just provided a classic example of it.' Is criticizing Hillary something that discredits political viewpoints ? I'm a progressive, I don't like Hillary, She's a self serving opportunist. She voted for war, when a majority of Senate Democrats voted against it. A vast majority of House Democrats voted against the war.
Everybody knew that there no WMDs un Iraq, the UN inspection teams, France, Germany, the CIA and most people in the US.
Hillary supported war for political reasons. D

id you know she supported an anti flag burning law ? Pretty brave, huh ? Do you support that, Joey ?
She's hedging on a woman's right to choose ? Do you supoport that, too ?
She affects a southern drawl when speaking to black audiences. Is that lame, Joey ??
Gee, Joey did I discredit myself ??

Sierra, San Francisco (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 6:51 PM)

"Kerry added his opinion"... blah blah blah does the man ever have anything substantial to contribute?

Taylor, PHX (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 7:12 PM)

Yesterday I got caught up in the Hill frenzy, mostly because I recognized the part Edelman played, along with Cheney, Wolfowitz and company in crafting the disaster we know as the Iraq war.

Today, prompted by First Read, I actually read the Edelman letter and found nothing more than the standard GDub talking point that anyone who discusses withdrawl options to his 'stay the surge' is aiding the enemy. Hill can only claim victim-hood because it was a response to her letter.

Seems to me, the rest is calculated Clinton campaign theater to give her anti-war cred ... in other words, it's much ado about nothing new.

Judy Anderson, Madison, WI (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 8:07 PM)

Senator Clinton is entirely correct to query the Pentagon's readiness to securely withdraw troops from Iraq. As member of the Senate Armed Services Committee it is her duty and her moral obligation to ensure that the same military stratagists who demonstrated imcompetence in the occupation of Iraq do their best to ensure force protection when redeployment eventually becomes necessary.

Does Edelman, or the Secretary of Defense, believe we will never redeploy out of Iraq? Or that recognizing that we may have to draw down troops in response to shifting global priorities could somehow aide and abet the enemy? Sheer poppycock, and unworthy of the sacrifice our troops have already made in furthering what can only be described as a protracted and poorly planned use of military assets to achieve a purely political outcome in Iraq.

Dodge, Silver Spring, MD (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 8:18 PM)

Hillary Clinton, presidential candidate, felt the need to draft legislation because Eric Endelman, some relatively unknown under secretary of defense, is politicizing the issue of the private letter Endelman sent Clinton, which Clinton sent to the AP.

This is so absurd its laughable.

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 8:25 PM)

"She would NOT bring the troops home. She would NOT end the war. She would make up an excuse "in a crafty careful way" why she can't bring our troops home. It's an act. I'm not falling for it and despite what the polls say, I don't believe I am alone.
DR
"
Sounds like Hillarious Clinton wants to be the next Richard Nixon. She has one advantage, her reputation for honesty is predisastered, no one would believe she is not a crook.

Nixon was a major disapointment for me, He did find a way to withdraw our troops with honor and a workable plan to prevent the North Vietnamese from making a successful invasion, but when he got caught in that dumb @$$ Watergate afair he blew it and let the Democrats get the upperhand and they legislated defeat long after our troops had left.

I remember hearing about something called the "War College" where all possible scenarios are studied in depth.
The Pentagon has every possible exit strategy already mapped out and subject to frequent revision to keep pace with current events.

Boardcasting such plans so that our enemies can plan counter measures is just plain stupid, and thats exactly what the Democrats are demanding.
They seem to be terrified of a US victory while a Republican is in office, thus the hundreds of leaks which have drawn no attention at all under the Plame Game smokescreen.

Wayne, TN (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 9:04 PM)

All this chatter reminds me of the search for the mathematic result after dividing the altitude (in feet) in Denver by the square root of the mean temperature in central Missouri (during duck-hunting season).

We have a president (un-capitalized by design) heading to his week-end retreat at Camp David where he will be subjected to a colonoscopy.

During his brief period of examination, the power of the presidency will be transferred to the "real" president.

Yet, there is hope that in the scheduled procedure on Saturday that cranial damage will be avoided. That is a difficult assignment for a doctor examining a patient whose head had been in his ass for at least 7 years.

Don, Chicago, IL (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 9:48 PM)

I am mystified by those who criticize Hillary Clinton for challenging the Pentagon about troop redeployment strategies. Military leaders owe a duty to our troops and our nation to thoughtfully plan for all contingencies -- to do less should be criminal and treasonist. Once again the Bush Administration questions the patriotism and motives of anyone who would DARE question their ability. Read your constitution ladies and gentlemen, Congress (representatives and senators) is supposed to ask tough questions of the administration. And the administration is supposed to provide answers.

Maybe I am not quite cynical enough for our current environment. I judged Sen. Clinton's letter, and the reasonable questions it asked, as a senator on the armed services committee trying to do her job. I believe that while our leaders disagree about how to fix the mess that we are in, they all, Democrat and Republican want to see the war come to the best end possible with the least loss of life possible (American, allied and Iraqi), and that those who suggest that every motive is political are jaded in a way that I hope I never become.

I also believe that some people will never be pleased, be they left wing nut jobs or right wing fascists. The left wingers vilify Hillary for not being quick enough to condemn the war and accuse her of crass politics when she speaks out against it. The right wingers abandon McCain when he supports the president that they say they love. It makes little, if any sense. What I do draw from it is that the American people are demoralized on many fronts. I wonder if there is anyone who could unite such a fractured populous. Oops...one could mistake our rankor for that of the Iraqis.

Dale, Birmingham, AL (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 10:41 PM)

This is terrible that a member of the Senate Arms Committee will not be met with respect at a request to see plans for a troop withdrawal (which will happen one day). This is a blatant play of politics from the Bush Admin's war room.
This is a disgrace of our government.
I hope Senator Clinton gets that briefing ASAP!

Ryan Jones, Oak Hill, WV (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 11:22 PM)

Kerry?!? He still around?

Pop Martin (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 11:25 PM)

Sierra

#1. Is criticizing Hillary something that discredits political viewpoints? No, but stupid conspiracy theories do. There is no evidence Hillary arranged this as was suggested above. Zero. Nada.

#2 You said: "I don't like Hillary, She's a self serving opportunist."

Really? Examples?

"She voted for war, when a majority of Senate Democrats voted against it."

#3. No, my dear. Over half of Senate Dems voted for H.J.Res. 114 - 28 Democrats in all.

"A vast majority of House Democrats voted against the war."

#4. Actually, only 64% did... a majority, but hardly a vast majority.

"Everybody knew that there no WMDs un Iraq, the UN inspection teams, France, Germany, the CIA and most people in the US."

#5. Howard Dean believed they were there...

"Did you know she supported an anti flag burning law?"

#6. Yeah, and so did I. The law would have specified you couldn't burn a flag on someone's private property or to intimidate someone. Did you know "progressive" Dennis Kucinich supported a flag burning constitutional amendment TWICE?

"Do you support that, Joey?"

Yes, Sierra, you should have no right to come onto my property and burn a flag.

"She's hedging on a woman's right to choose?"

#7. No, she isn't. Her position of safe, rare, and legal is as it always has been.

"She affects a southern drawl when speaking to black audiences."

#8. Again, you're wrong, dear. She was quoting a hymm that had the dialect written into the verses.

So, you asked if you discredited yourself? Yes you did - in 8 instances you either provided factually inaccurate information or a broad generality void of evidence.

Joey Davis, Atlanta, GA (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 11:25 PM)

I dont understand how people are claiming Clinton did this...how ignorant are you? She replied to her own letter? AND got Robert Gates to confirm that the letter came from his office?
SOUNDS LIKE ROCK SOLID EVIDENCE!!
Be quiet and let a member from the Senate Arms Committee do HER job!

Ryan Jones (Sent Friday, July 20, 2007 11:30 PM)

Anutkraker:By the ''oil fields''we infer that it is still Iraq we are talking?

Lee Holmes (Sent Saturday, July 21, 2007 1:49 AM)

Joey Davis, Atlanta, GA (Sent Saturday, July 21, 2007 8:26 AM)

OK, LET'S NOT PLAN FOR A DAM THING. JUST LET THE S--T FLY.YES ANOTHER BRIGHT RIGHT WING REPUBLICAN PLAN, MISSION ACCOMPLISHED !

WELL DA' (Sent Saturday, July 21, 2007 12:01 PM)

BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH

Taylor, PHX (Sent Saturday, July 21, 2007 1:32 PM)

Hillary, Obama or Edwards (or even Gore) are all good candidates for president. Gore and Hillary have the edge on experience, and Bubba would be a huge force in a new Clinton White House, although I think he could be used effectively no matter which democrat wins. The Clintons or Gore I think have the distinct advantage of being able to reset the government efficiently and could undo the damage wrought by Bush very quickly. Although, I also see the need for a fresh perspective in there. All this is shaping up for an interesting democratic convention, one that should inspire and interest young voters as well. On the GOP side it's going to be a fight for the party platform; all these morality hypocrits like Vitter are really screwing up things for the ultra-conservatives and religious zealots that have been running the party, and it may be time for more middle of the road approach, but that does not seem to be the republican way any more.

Jim, Santa Cruz (Sent Saturday, July 21, 2007 1:59 PM)

<i>A very powerfull military and time is on our side.</i>

How'd that work for the Soviets in Afghanistan?
The U.S. in Vietnam?
France in Algeria?

Corey Hart Philadelphia (Sent Saturday, July 21, 2007 3:10 PM)

Bush supporters have zero credability left and should be required to just STFU for the next 8 years. They have screwed up every single inititive they have have attempted and they have neither paid for their mistakes or learned from them. At what point do they lose the right to even voice their opinion? Answer: Right now.

Roy Franks, St. Louis, MO (Sent Saturday, July 21, 2007 3:39 PM)

I've always wondered why a protestor should expect to be allowed to burn a flag in public.
I can gaurantee that if you set fire to a cardboard box or a newspaper on the street of any major city some cop will arrest you as a public nuisance and a firebug. So why allow them to burn flags in any but the perscribed manner?

Wayne, TN (Sent Saturday, July 21, 2007 5:34 PM)

Any and ALL Senators and Congress People on Armed Services or Appropriations Committees have a responsibility to act as Board of Directors for the Pentagon. The partyis irrelevent, and the communications from the Pentagon should be polite and respond in specifics to the request. Clinton, although runing for President, still has her "day job" on the Senate Armed Services Committee and is entitled to the information she requested as are all other memebers of the committee. How very pathetic, that the Department that gets the lion share of our tax dollars would rather play politics, then respond appropriately. Hopefully Gates fires Eric Edelman, who shows he isn't worthy of his position and then ensures that ALL Pentagon Employees are familiar with the Hatch Act. As a voter and tasxpayer, I want to know my Government corporation is functioning well. Politics needs to be left outside the door when it comes to oversight and running of Government operations.

Grandma M (Sent Saturday, July 21, 2007 6:07 PM)

The war college has already come out with a report several months ago that said the invasion of Iraq was a mistake and folly. The U.S. cannot have a victory in a civil war. What part of that do you not understand. The militias make up the insurgency and they are made up of different factions of Iraqis. You create more terrorists than you can kill.The problem sir, is that you have a president and a REPUBLICAN party in control that cares more about the people of Iraq than this nation's own people.

What would you consider victory? Two less car bombs a day? How about 50 dead bodies a day instead of 150? I for one do not want to see another dead AMERICAN boy or girl over there come home in a body bag. We did the heavy lifting, now we get out and let them sort their own politics out unless republicans are now willing to stand up for an indefinite, extended stay say 10-15 years. Yes it will be brutal, but that is the choice your president has left them. As far as redeployment, hmmm, let's see, Afghanastan, Kuiwait, Qutar, to name a few with rapid response teams to take on Al Qeida as the original mission should have been intended, but then one year deployment and one or more years home.

leon houston (Sent Saturday, July 21, 2007 6:36 PM)

HOW MANY MORE AMERICAN SOLDIERS MUST BE KILLED BEFORE WE GET OUT AND LET IRAQIS SOLVE THEIR OWN PROBLEMS

JOE MASON, ATLANTA, GA. (Sent Sunday, July 22, 2007 12:52 AM)

The depth of contempt for oversight and the absolute necessity of secrecy is a trait of, dare I say, totalitarian regimes, top to bottom. Clinton pulled the string and the cabal exposed itself. Oops.

http://www.light-to-dark.com/neo_con_trifecta.html

A Murdoch/Dobson-fed bible belt awaits it's next shock and awe moment from those it chose to follow to armageddon. It won't be the last time atheists and charlatans managed the sheep for the vote.

What Hillary did should show to everyone that extremism always overreaches. And at present the most extreme subversives this nation has ever faced have a domestic origin. The enemy is not over there but sprinkled throughout our government.

I believe Clinton's confrontation will be very instructive to those enthralled with power in the same way ordinary Germans were in 1932.

It's showtime!

Stephen Pitt, Moreno Valley, CA (Sent Sunday, July 22, 2007 1:45 AM)

Oh my god some people obviously don't want to take their head out of the sand !! To think that she did that to herself is just .. wow... beyond believable.

Chris, Baltimore (Sent Sunday, July 22, 2007 1:57 AM)

Ryan, two points.

First, I suggest you read the letter if you haven't already. If you have, you must have had a different take on it than I did. I don't see it as an "attack" on her and it was never intended for public release.

Second, Clinton sent an excerpt from the one latter paragraph that could be spun into an attack on her. The media bit. Then, hours later, she tells us she feels the need to draft legislation because the Pentagon has politicized the issue.

I do think this will probably give her some short-term gains with the Democratic base, but hurt her in the long term. The media is feeling used, I'm guessing. I'm sure Olberman is. And it just adds to that perception that she's all stagecraft and meaningless bluster, at least among those not firmy in her camp.

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA (Sent Sunday, July 22, 2007 10:13 AM)

I just watched Meet The Press and I am more discouraged than ever by how the media judges politicians. Woodward and Brooks, et al, are playing the violins over our "stalwart" President/Vice President, like the last seven years have been a Greek tragedy, as in, who could have predicted what would have happened in Iraq? Who? Me! I was never convinced by Powell's presentation to the UN, yet these millionaire pundits were, and continue to be, apologists for this administration. I don't care if the press feels snookered by Hillary Clinton, they have spent the last seven years snookered by the Bushites, and there really is no excuse for their stupidity. (Sorry, First Read, I think you guys are just doing the best job you can. I am just utterly depressed Bush is still our President and will never be held accountable for his screw ups.)

Amy B Portland, Me (Sent Sunday, July 22, 2007 6:04 PM)

This is the best you libs have???? Hillary Clinton???? Would someone please enlighten me on how she has the experience to lead our country. What great accomplishment has she done to prove to the world that she is a leader, a uniter of all people and so forth and so on. The only thing she has done in her Senate career is leave no postal station unnamed and getting some land turned into a national park in the carribean. She and her stupid mornon husband are the biggest jokes in politics lately. And John Kerry???? Kerry who voted for the 87 million before he voted against the 87 million? A man who was not even liked in the Navy??? That John Kerry??? If he was so hot and so great, he sure had his butt handed him on a platter by President Bush! He better just sit in the Senate and try to keep Ted (burp) Kennedy out of the whisky.

jerry/corpus christi texas (Sent Sunday, July 22, 2007 7:44 PM)

Oberman is way too smart to be sucked in by the media---or the republicans.So am I---------It seems the democrats are eating their young again---will they never learn.If everyone would just be quiet you could hear the molesters,the drug dealers,the johns(in prostitution)thieves,ceos ,evangilists fall by the wayside.And these are just the guys running the republican campaigns.

HMT (Sent Sunday, July 22, 2007 10:10 PM)

Don, Chigago- did Bush REALLY go to Camp David for that colonoscopy? I didn't know that- I think he should have gone to a VA holspital nearby, where he could enjoy the best conditions available!

Buzz (Sent Monday, July 23, 2007 8:04 AM)

looks like the wheels may fall off the hillary train sooner than I expected, once people examine her more closely they will see that she is just another problem in washington, not an answer, and why anyone would care what john kerry has to say is beyond me, hillary needs to get thumped quickly so the dems can focus on nominating a decent candidate, one that can win the general election

MK,MO (Sent Monday, July 23, 2007 9:16 AM)

No, Jerry- Hillary is NOT the best we have. We have a turnip, an old, rusty, rim off a '58 Chevy, and a couple of old fishing rods with 2 or 3 eyes missing. Any one would be better than what we've had to put up with the last several years.

And- will YOU tell US just what qualificatitons BUSH had when HE ran the first time? He wasn't even sure what North Korea was all about, and if he 'should be concerned about them'. Read 'State of Denial'- pg 6: "I don't have any idea about foreign affairs," Governor Bush told Rice. "This isn't what I do". Goddamn it, Jerry- don't crawl back into the woodwork now, but answer us- how much better prepared and qualified was he than Hillary (or a fishing pole with a couple of eyes missing)?

Buzz (Sent Monday, July 23, 2007 9:47 AM)

DALE AND RYAN
I am glad to hear some intelligent response to the LETTER crap. I can not beleive the ignorance of people about the job congress has in the government.
To respond to a Senator as if jerry of cc/Tx wanted information on troop status is unconscionable.

HP Boston (Sent Monday, July 23, 2007 11:37 AM)

The Neo Con and Theo Con infiltrated Pentagon needs a good long look.

http://www.light-to-dark.com/trust_me.html

There are far too many armageddonist generals in places they have no business being. It's up to Gates to move them out or secure them in jobs where their potential harm is reduced. But the most troubling feature of the Pentagon is it's hijacking by unAmerican ideologues.

If Gates has trouble visualizing the catastrophic consequences of preemption, perhaps we need someone able to comprehend the meaning of genocide.

http://www.light-to-dark.com/preemption.html

His underlings certainly don't.

.

Stephen Pitt, Moreno Valley, CA (Sent Wednesday, July 25, 2007 8:40 AM)

SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

Your name, city and state (John Doe, Seattle, Wash.):

Your e-mail address (jdoe@msnbc.com):

Your website (it's okay if you don't have one):

Remember me? (We'll keep it private) Remember me?

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=280767