ABOUT FIRST READ

First Read is an analysis of the day's political news, from the NBC News political unit. First Read is updated throughout the day, so check back often.

Chuck Todd, NBC Political Director

Mark Murray, NBC Deputy Political Director

Domenico Montanaro, NBC News Political Reporter



Key excerpts from the NIE report

Posted: Thursday, August 23, 2007 12:21 PM by Mark Murray
Filed Under:

From NBC's Ken Strickland
NBC News has obtained the National Intelligence Estimate report on Iraq, which is entitled:
"Prospects for Iraq's Stability: Some Security Progress but Political Reconciliation Elusive." Here are some key excerpts...

-- "There have been measurable but uneven improvements in Iraq's security situation since our last NIE on Iraq in January 2007... However, the level of violence, including attacks on and casualties among civilians, remains high; Iraq's sectarian groups remain unreconciled; al-Qa'ida in Iraq (AQI) retains the ability of conduct high-profile attack; and to date, Iraqi political leaders remain unable to govern effectively. There have been modest improvements in economic output, budget execution, and government finances but fundamental structural problems continue to prevent sustained progress in economic growth and living conditions."

-- "We assess, the extent that Coalition forces continue to conduct robust counterinsurgency operations and mentor and support the Iraqi Security Forces (ISF), that Iraq's security will continue to improve modestly during the next 6 to 12 months but that levels of insurgent and sectarian violence will remain high and the Iraqi Government will continue to struggle to achieve national-level political reconciliation and improved governance."

-- "Political and security trajectories in Iraq continue to be driven primarily by Shia insecurity about retaining political dominance, widespread Sunni unwillingness to accept a diminished political status, factional rivalries within the sectarian communities resulting in armed conflict, and the actions of extremists such as AQI and the elements of the Sadrist Jaysh al-Mahdi (JAM) militia that try to fuel sectarian violence."

-- "The Intelligence Community (IC) assesses that the Iraqi government will become more precarious over the next six to 12 months because of criticism by other member of the major Shia coalition (the Unified Iraqi Alliance, UIA), Grand Ayatollah Sistani, and other Sunni and Kurdish parties."

-- "We assess that changing the mission of Coalition forces from primarily counterinsurgency and stabilization role to a primary combat support role for Iraqi forces and counterterrorist operation to prevent AQI from establishing a safehaven would erode security gains achieved thus far."

MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments

Ok guys, read this.
Now the Republicans has gotten together with a group or organization to put up millions of dollars to run ads in 20 states supporting the war in Irag, stating that if we pull out that it`s surrender ( We are running)Duh!!.....You all know why they are doing this, because of the report that is due next month.
They are calling the DEMS cowards because they want to bring our tgroops home ( well most of the DEMS, excluding Clinton.)
They are trying to persude us Americans that the best thing to do is for the troops to stay put and die for the crap that they say they are or shall I say have been fighting for. WMD`s, Saddam Hussiem, Democracy. Theres no such thing as victory as long as their is no sectarian and political reconciliation between the different sects
WAKE UP its a CIVIL WAR!!

I agree, let them pull the troops back to protect the borders and let them fight it out themselves and while they are doing that the troops can just pullout altogether, BUSH NEEDS TO BRING THEM ALL HOME NOW!!!

Translation of the NIE report: A modicum of process against militants on the ground but no government capable of running a nation now or in the next year.

Bush will keep this futility going right through the end of his presidency so that his successor, Democrat or Republican, gets to to be the one in charge when the sky comes falling in. This is what our soldiers are dying for now.

Bush is not only the worst 2-term president in American history but also criminal in his disregard for anything resembling reality. When he leaves office, his next reality should be a prison cell.
Hey, anybody see that CIA report released this past week?  Can't seem to find anything about it here, but I understand the NY Times had a few comments about it today.  

There's one comment in particular that describes George Tenet's frustration with the administration in ignoring his entreaties to take Bin Laden seriously. In 1998.





Richard, Washington State (Sent Thursday, August 23, 2007 2:58 PM)

Your implication, your contention and your reading comprehension must all be called into question on this one.

The quote is from today's NYT editorial and is NOT critical of the Clinton administration;

"The C.I.A. inspector general’s report on the agency’s failures before Sept. 11 was devastating — but not because it showed that America’s spies missed the rise of Al Qaeda. George Tenet, then the director of central intelligence, rang the Qaeda alarm. He sent a memo to the entire intelligence community saying that he wanted no effort spared in the “war” with Osama bin Laden. He took on the president’s closest advisers to agitate for a strike on a Qaeda base in Afghanistan.

The disturbing thing was that this all happened under President Bill Clinton. When George W. Bush won the White House, Mr. Tenet seems to have shifted his priorities. The C.I.A. chief suddenly seemed consumed with hanging on to his job."

Nowhere does anything imply that Tenet's warnings were ignored by the Clinton WH, to the contrary, Richard Clarke, former Counterterrorism Czar under Bill Clinton testified to exactly the opposite;
From the 9/11 commission report;

On December 4, 1998, for example, the Clinton administration received a President’s Daily Brief entitled “Bin Ladin Preparing to Hijack US Aircraft and Other Attacks.” Here’s how the Clinton administration reacted, according to the 9/11 Commission report:

   The same day, [Counterterrorism Czar Richard] Clarke convened a meeting of his CSG [Counterterrorism Security Group] to discuss both the hijacking concern and the antiaircraft missile threat. To address the hijacking warning, the group agreed that New York airports should go to maximum security starting that weekend. They agreed to boost security at other East coast airports. The CIA agreed to distribute versions of the report to the FBI and FAA to pass to the New York Police Department and the airlines. The FAA issued a security directive on December 8, with specific requirements for more intensive air carrier screening of passengers and more oversight of the screening process, at all three New York area airports. [pg. 128-30]

http://thinkprogress.org/2006/09/26/rice-clinton-terrorism/

So, whatever it is you were trying to insinuate, you should check your facts, and maybe your glasses, before you go off half-cocked the next time.


Van
The President showed an appaling lack of historical knowledge and context when he misguidedly drew parallels between Iraq and Vietnam.  His absurd view that pulling out of Vietnam was a mistake and has had long term consequences demonstrates not only ingnorance, but also desperation in that he is trying to find any sort of excuse for our forces to continue in Iraq.  We need a plan to withdraw, and a firm timetable in which to do it.  The United States needs to re-affirm the ideals of democracy, and that is an inherent capacity for doing what is good and right.  This occupation (yes folks, it's not a war, we toppled the government, we won, it's an occupation now) has none of these ideals: it is not good, it is not right, and it is time Washington admitted to the mistake.  The US finally admitted to the mistake of going to war in Vietnam, and it only took about 10 years...it's tough to learn from history when, like the President, you are busy revising it.
Hey, I only vote Republican, so I promise to neutralize Susan's vote in 2008.  Maybe even Tom's if I can vote in a Democrat controlled county like Palm Beach and maybe get my vote counted twice.  

Go Barack!
The only word or phrase I can think of after reading this part of this report by all these geniuses is   DUHHH!!!!
J. Merle:

No.
sorry ----Bush is only trying to salvage some honor for himself.He does not give a twit for the republicans,the democrats,the troops or the Iraqis.A self centerd smug narcistic thug.
Floridians know all too well about the eight corrupt years  of Jeb or I should say the non Zombies, progressives, Independants, Moderates, and those basically living south of Orlando. A state wide admendment was passed by we the people to mandate classroom size in our public schools;however; Jeb was caught on tape stating he could care less he was going to continue his agenda which was only giving money to private schools for rich parents to go to cathlic schools only. One other example is that Broward county (Ft. Lauderdale) voters went to the polls and voted in casino gambling in 4 parimutuals;however; the arrogant SOB said he was against it period. We had to wait until he left to implement. Terri Schaivio...it goes on and on. The Bush were obviously raised as spoiled and arrogant children becoming powerful leaders who thrived on power for power's sake with absolutely no accountability and demanded loyalty or else.
Ollie,
Re: the Bush report card.  
It seems to me you graded on the curve.  Those Fs were not merely failing grades, they were the lowest in the class, i.e., "worst president ever."
You were all too generous on the A+ you gave him for lying.  Just because it is a pathological addiction on his part doesn't mean he does it well. Actually, almost no one believes a word this fool has to say... you call that A+ work?
After all we've done to them, we certainly need to assist the Iraqi people as much as possible. But no one believes we're helping anyone but Big Oil with what we're doing now. Let's think hard about the troubled people of Iraq, and what's really best for them. There may be wonderful solutions that no one's even considered, but it must be their solution. If we're honest with ourselves, we must admit that our own interests are too selfish -- and corrupt -- to have any positive influence. Once we're truly ready to help Iraq, rather than dismantle and rob it blind, we can lay the foundations for real peace and democracy in the long term.
The case against Hillary -

...23 Senators saw clearly enough NOT to authorize the vote...Al Gore spoke out against it and saw what a mistake it was.

...Obama, even only as a State Senator, could predict this in 2002 and said:  "....I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a US occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of al-Qaeda.  I am not opposed to all wars. I’m opposed to dumb wars...."

So why is it that Hillary with all her "experience" couldn't figure that out and a guy like Obama perfectly predicted the outcome?

And finally, Hillary refuses to acknowledge the fact that she made a mistake in her vote.  In her own words, "...“If the most important thing to any of you is choosing someone who did not cast that vote or who has said his vote was a mistake, then there are others to choose from...”

She refuses to apologize and admit that her vote was a mistake - because her pollster, Mark Penn told her not to admit it - even though, Edwards, Biden Dodd et al say that they made a mistake...

...that is why Clinton does not deserve support.  

She is a panderer who has bad judgment.
Vik... so?  
Gail - Please point to where Clinton has said she will not bring troops home.  Phased withdrawal, timetable for withdrawal, etc. does not count, unless you want to count Obama and others as not wanting the troops home either because they have been calling for the same thing.

Irresponsibility got us into this mess, but we need to get out of it responsibly.  
The war in Iraq became an internal religious war after Sadam's army was defeated. Even the Pope was afraid to tell the truth, he quoted someone over 100 years ago. The Moslem religion has nothing new but evil murder of all different. Read the book "Laughing Jesus" and you will see why Moslems not only murder non-moslems but each other. Mohammad was a mass murderer of a purely self-centered temperment.  Why are we afraid to state the truth?
Withdraw and let evil slaughter evil but the innocent are murdered also. What a lack of love in the Moslem religion.
Simple, don't waste money, don't waste equipment,
don't waste soldiers, don't get between evil religious sects, Leave ASAP! AND GET BEN!
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20411171/site/newsweek/

Great article on how Bush got it all wrong about Vietnam in his speech.
Bush will never (as in "until hell freezes over in Iraq") get Bin-laden.  There is a reason for that.  Can you guess what that reason might be?
US politicians just don't seem to learn from the past. USSR was bogged down in Afganistan. We supplied weapons to Ben to bomb them. The Russians left and now we are there with Ben bombing us. Afganistan was more than we could chew but Iraq was crazy beyond Vietnam. Buddists and Communist are not crazy or stupid but US politicians seem to be along with being greedy to make money on senseless wars.
STOP THE MADNESS! GET OUT BETWEEN INSANE RELIGIOUS
SECTS. OUR BILLIONS COULD DO GOOD ELSEWHERE. WE ARE TOLD WE ARE NOT WANTED THERE BY THE LEADERS OF IRAQ. I DO NOT STAY WHERE I AM NOT WANTED UNLESS IT IS MY HOME AND MY COUNTRY. IRAQ IS NOT!!!
Okie doke ie.... hillaryclinton.com
Well Jim, the David Broders of this world are calmly informing us that the nation is coming to a wonderful consensus, an agreement that maybe sometime we need to pull out, but not right now.
Of course this is the sensible, rational way for David Broder, et al, to write because they get paid for that kind of breathtaking insight.  
So it looks like just a while longer before we actually leave.  We must wait until we have achieved peace with honor.
Until then we will achieve peace with horror. That is the way our sages and "political clerisy" think for us. You know what I mean?
It's so amazing how even you people can play politics when it comes to the lives of our sons! You know the war was based on lies and still all everyone does is jammer about it. We need to take action, one more life is one more life too much!

Why do they want our sons in Iraq? Yes, to safe guard the bases, but also to safe guard the Vatican sized US Embassy (which mind you has electric and running water a luxery Iraq has been without for a very long time) also to force the 75% oil revenue benchmark that Iraq will not agree too!

We all agree that our country needs to be more secure, who could do that better than our troops! I can't think of any other more brave and honourable to protect us!

Yes, Iraq will have their civil war it does not matter if we are there or not. If we reduce troops and leave a lower number there, we are leaving them as sitting ducks in uniform.

WA question for you who would they be training? Militia, insurgents? Please tell me! With 190,000 weapons missing and not accounted for who will our sons be training?

It is all or nothing and it's time to bring all our troops home. Iraq has already been lashing out at us, they do not want us there and they will not agree to these benchmarks! Dragging this out is insanity, we should never have been there in the first place!

Yes, it is time to write your congressional representatives and make your voices heard. Tell them you want our troops out of Iraq and will not accept a gradual draw down. A full withdrawal is the only answer anything less puts our soldiers in more danger ...
Nobody parses the statements of a retard. Yet we do it daily with Boy George and Dicko. What does this say about us as a nation? Retarded? Desperate? Unable to admit we are a conquered people?
We have 5 years of doing the equivalent of brain surgery with a chain saw in Iraq.  We are still trying to achieve "victory" as if this was a high school football game.  As Cololonel Jacobs, a medal of honor winner with two tours in Vietnam stated this week, Bush's speech writers comparing Vietnam with Iraq haven't bothered to check any of the facts.  We now have a group of special interest Republicans funding a campaign ad to continue the war by continuing to mislead the public.  What we need to know is the extent to which they are profiting for their loyalty to a group of Vietnam era draft dodgers.  And lastly, the Maliki/Shiite govt is playing us for suckers, frustrating any reconciliation until the Americans leave.  Then they will subdue or slaughter the Sunnis, backed by Siite Iran and Iran's new partners - Russia and China.  But if the Shiites slaughter the Sunnis, it will remove the threat of a Sunni/Al Quaeda link in Iraq.
We have 5 years of doing the equivalent of brain surgery with a chain saw in Iraq.  We are still trying to achieve "victory" as if this was a high school football game.  As Cololonel Jacobs, a medal of honor winner with two tours in Vietnam stated this week, Bush's speech writers comparing Vietnam with Iraq haven't bothered to check any of the facts.  We now have a group of special interest Republicans funding a campaign ad to continue the war by continuing to mislead the public.  What we need to know is the extent to which they are profiting for their loyalty to a group of Vietnam era draft dodgers.  And lastly, the Maliki/Shiite govt is playing us for suckers, frustrating any reconciliation until the Americans leave.  Then they will subdue or slaughter the Sunnis, backed by Siite Iran and Iran's new partners - Russia and China.  But if the Shiites slaughter the Sunnis, it will remove the threat of a Sunni/Al Quaeda link in Iraq.
We have 5 years of doing the equivalent of brain surgery with a chain saw in Iraq.  We are still trying to achieve "victory" as if this was a high school football game.  As Cololonel Jacobs, a medal of honor winner with two tours in Vietnam stated this week, Bush's speech writers comparing Vietnam with Iraq haven't bothered to check any of the facts.  We now have a group of special interest Republicans funding a campaign ad to continue the war by continuing to mislead the public.  What we need to know is the extent to which they are profiting for their loyalty to a group of Vietnam era draft dodgers.  And lastly, the Maliki/Shiite govt is playing us for suckers, frustrating any reconciliation until the Americans leave.  Then they will subdue or slaughter the Sunnis, backed by Siite Iran and Iran's new partners - Russia and China.  But if the Shiites slaughter the Sunnis, it will remove the threat of a Sunni/Al Quaeda link in Iraq.
We're just protecting our country from future threats to us. Al Qaida-terrorists;Syria-terrorist country; Iran-terrorist country; North Korea-terrorist country; Cuba-communists; Venezuela. When we finish in Iraq we have a lot more countries to free. But are we protecting ourselves or antaganizing countries that we don't see as having a way of life we approve of. We can't save the world. Let's try to solve our own problems in our own country and only help those countries who ask for our help, not ones we are trying to force ourselves on.
It's a jaded, crooked, dishonest congress, but it's the only kind we'll ever have, as long as only the greedy/rich can even afford to run for high office, and business giants are permitted to write their own greed-based laws. All we need is one more so-called leader like the one we have now and the sellout would be complete.
Well, it's starting to look like BuSh is going to be able to B-S- his way out of responsibility for this war, just like he's managed to weasel his way out of responsibility for everything he's bungled over he past six years; we can fully expect yet another stall tactic, come September, and so on and so on... on.....
This is my first visit to the comments section. I was amazed to see the large number of comments critical of our President. You left wingers have forgotten that Iraq is the front against Islamic extremists. You never consider the consequences of leaving before Iraq is stable. Your hate has blinded your objectivity. You can not stand the thought of winning this war because it would only vindicate President Bush. You are the only hope the terrorists have. They can not win in battle. Islamic extremists have captured the hearts of the liberal left. Go get a Koran and start memorizing it you bunch of morons.      
".....J. Merle:

No.
Richard, Washington State....."

That's right Richard, why should you care, eh?
You're not there fighting, and none of your kids are there either,
In fact I'd be willing to bet you don't even know anyone who's gone to Iraq, do you?
Typical COWARDLY republiCANT garbage!
*****************************************************
GET OUR PEOPLE OUT OF IRAQ NOW!
Hey Keith Derby,
Nice to hear from you!
Carrie misreads history. Our forefathers sprang from a historic tradition based on religious, if not political, commonality. Iraq is lines drawn on a map without regard to who was contained therein and has a history of acsencion by assasination. It was held together at the point of Sadam's guns and we are trying to do the same thing.
J. Merle:

I care a great deal.  You're a presumptuous idiot to conclude otherwise.  I'm different than you in how I look at things which is something you'll just have to accept.  I don't just fall into lockstep with you just because you think you have a lock on truth, virtue and righteous indignation.

No, I'm not in Iraq and neither are my kids.  They, like other adult men and women (including those who join the military) make their own decisions and like millions of others, including children of Democrats, did not choose to volunteer.  So, what?

This past Sunday in church I sat behind an Iraq war vet, a purple heart recipient.  He was a classmate of one of my sons and I know his family.  They are COWARDLY republiCANT garbage, too.  That young man, if he wasn't as classy as I know him to be, would despise you.

The man I work in the same office with, a Vietnam vet(who is also COWARDLY republiCANT garbage)with a bronze star and two purple hearts, recently presided over the funeral of a young local man whose marriage ceremony he performed in his capacity as a deacon in our church.

In fact, Merle, isn't it likely that a majority of those serving in Iraq are COWARDLY republiCANT garbage?

So, I've answered your questions as civilly and truthfully as I can.

But I won't be writing my congressman as you demand because I don't agree with you, and in fact, I have no respect for you.

You J. Merle, are a PUSILLANIMOUS piece of demoCRAP vermin and a disgrace to the good Democrats I count as my friends and neighbors, despite our reasoned and CIVIL disagreement on politics.
Richard,
Nice to hear from you!
Van:

Let me explain.  It seems that most discussions about the myriad circumstances that led up to the "failures" that kept us from preventing 9/11 and other prior terrorist attacks attributed to Bin Laden and/or Al Qaida, usually end up with one side or another blaming the failures on the other's administration or president. Most divorced people are more reasonable about recognizing why their marriage failed.

I believe that 9/11 was the fault of Bin Laden and the terrorists.  I believe that events, decisions, actions(or inaction) politics, personal beliefs, political expediency, complacency, incompetence, bureaucracy, territorialism, agency infighting, presidential missteps, military missteps and intelligence missteps combined with the human factor and conspired to create the conditions under which the murderers could be successful.  

As mentioned already, the tendency of our country seems mostly toward placing blame, almost always on the current leadership or prior leadership for political reasons, than solving problems.

What I was saying, and I certainly can see why it wasn't evident in a one sentence throw-away, is that all of the aforementioned factors developed over a long period of time and shouldn't be laid at the feet of a Democrat or Republican or a Clinton or a Bush.  

My brief, and rhetorical, commen simply meant to convey that. I was also talking about the report itself, not the New York Times article.  I don't use the NYT as a source because I don't trust them to be impartial.  You could feel the same way about any of mine.

I don't blame Clinton or Bush for 9/11.  Bin Laden and his murdering compatriots (talk about dittoheads, huh?) were solely responsible and certainly successful in their own eyes. They wanted to commit cold-blooded murder and found a spectacular, one-time way to do it.

That we failed to stop them (assuming we had pro-active opportunities to do so) can be accounted for by years, maybe decades, of past actions from both Republican and Democrat administrations.  They are all accountable for a portion of whatever failures made the 9/11 murderers' task easier.

Your documentary support, as well as many other sources, actually come together when read objectively and considered over a span of time demonstrates just that.  

I'm not blaming 9/11 on Clinton for political purposes, or like some people (I'm not implying that you are one of them)who hate Bush so much that they think the world began on January 22, 2001.  

The CIA report simply shows that conditions that were not conducive to effective CIA actions existed for some time.

Mostly I'm dismayed over the past several years of political "discourse" that seeks to find either Clinton or Bush at fault for the actions of the 9/11 murderers.  The murderers certainly didn't care which President was in office in 1993, 2000, or September of 2001.

Certainly I can see why my one or two lines were interpreted as "blaming Bill Clinton".  But there's also nothing in the CIA report to suggest that previous administrations contributed nothing to whatever vulnerabilities made us susceptible.  

The first 8 months of the Bush administration were no exception, but neither did they represent total culpability for circumstances long in the making.

I'd like to think we could all agree on that and do away with an atmosphere that prompts knee-jerk one liners like mine that are immediately interpreted as placing blame in one little politically motivated pigeon hole.  

I'm not hopeful, though, so I expect my natural tendencies toward sarcasm will continue to be in evidence when responding to the general tone of most of the folks who post here.

And finally, Van, I have yet to see anything you have supplied as documentary support that I haven't seen and read before.  Like you and many others I choose individually by virtue of whatever forces have formed me, to see things from my own perspective while digesting virtually the same facts. So, your documentary support, while helpful, doesn't really prove anything.  It is, like you seem to be fond of saying, simply "ammunition".  

And I thought the Republicans were into war metaphors.

I know there are those of you who don't believe Republicans think for themselves, but if that were true we'd all be Democrats, wouldn't we?





Dear Richard,

In answer to your last swipe at van: yes to the superficialis and no the profundus.  

Think fast, Richard... time's up!

You know you are a Republican when you automatically assume big words you don't know are pornographic.  

Caught you didn't I?
You know you are a Republican when you think Abraham Lincoln would be one now.
You know you are a Republican when you compare George Bush (either or both) to: Truman, FDR, Lincoln, Gandhi or Jesus.
You know you are a Republican when you can actually imagine Mike Huckabee as President of the United States of America.

Finally... you know you are a republican when you LOL at those email forwards floating around in the Internet ether which portray Hillary Clinton as: a witch, a bitch, a prostitute, the Antichrist, the victim of torture, murder, mutilation and/or all of the above.

...OK, only two more, and then... no matter how you beg, no more...

You know you are a Republican if you think Senator Warner of Virginia is unpatriotic for advocating an end to the debacle of Iraq.

You know you are a Republican if you think there is anything at all left to "win" in Iraq.

After all these clues, if you do not know you are a Republican, perhaps you are at that dark place at the end of the great tunnel where the sun don't ever shine.
You know you're not a comedian when your material is stale, the bathroom humor is unoriginal, the overall thieme sucks and it's not funny.

But you do indeed know you're a Democrat.
Who was kidding, Dick?
Mark:  Ditto
Dick: Now that is funny!

Didn't the republican philosopher Limbaugh coin that term and start a whole movement, as it were?

No, Mark, he didn't.  I remember using that term as far back as my pre-adolescent days which pre-date Limbaugh's appearance on the scene by many years.  It was often used interchangeably with "Xerox" and "copy".  The movement was in full gear depositing it's effluent on liberal targets well before the introduction of the "ditto" as used on his program.


It was actually Limbaugh's audience that borrowed the term and put it to use, with the prime objective of saving time while conveying the utmost in admiration for the host.  It's code, Mark.
 
He's also credited with coining the term "Feminazi", but he really appropriated it from some college professor somewhere.  He has never claimed to have coined it, though others erroneously maintain so.

Happy to have a chance to clear that up.  Any other questions?  Your knowledge storehouse seems a bit light on Limbaugh.

Finally, Mark, that little subtle transition to calling me "Dick" is just too clever!  Must have been a subliminable suggestion from some of the other brains on this blog.  Apparently Dick has more appeal to you.

Perhaps I could start signing "Rick" and you could have the same effect with just one more letter!
ick,
Thanks for being there.  Every night I come home from the office and there you are... holding on to the last word. It makes life worth the living, don't it?

The Limbaugh stuff is pretty arcane for me, so once again you are way right, I don't get it.  Spent a little time in Sikeston, MO (just down the road from "Cape") back in the 60s, and yeah, I ran into him.  Never would have predicted that anyone would ever listen to him about anything. In fact... well this isn't about facts anyway, so I'll just say that he was not a real popular guy... but good for him.  Ditto you.

Do much appreciate the educational tips though.  This "code" sounds interesting.  Maybe that's why your posts read like some obscure aboriginal dialect.  Wish I knew more about Neanderthals... but with your help I am beginning to catch on.

Anyway, I have to get back to work tonight right after a late dinner.  Maybe we can talk again tomorrow.  Thanks for your kindness ick.

vaya con diablo,
MT  (have fun with that...)
ick,

are you still there?


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):

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=330012

First Read e-mail alerts


Sign up for First Read alerts
The first place for key political news and analysis

Syndicate This Site

Add First Read to your news reader:
live.com xml
myyahoo msn
bloglines newsgator
google