And now for the suckiest part of the job, covering for Obama and his Orwellian word games. Obama, ending the war on terror phrase replaces it with "Defeating terrorists" with war. Obama word games are getting pretty tired. Pretty sure the other day i read this from the headlines of Yahoo. Here is the swamp's take on it.

http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2009/03/obama_to_terrorists_we_will_de.html

"Obama told an audience of foreign diplomats and U.S. officials that, while "there will be difficult days ahead," the United States and its allies must step up efforts against al Qaeda militants who have taken haven in Pakistan's border regions and are even now "actively planning attacks" on America.

Pakistan's western border region "is now the most dangerous place in the world" for Americans, he said."

He said that the security threat from the militants represented an international security challenge "of the highest order."

He said his message to the "terrorists...is the same: We will defeat you."

Everyone pay attention. "The war with Eurasia is over, and the war with Eastasia has begun." -Orwell, '1984'

Gotta love Hilly. "He's stopped using the phrase" (true) "and that speaks for itself". lol. As in, no comment.

Great pics!

I had to get that out first! Notice her use of the passive voice and third person plural in her statements on this issue. She is distancing herself linguistically from this newspeak. I have read three reports this morning on the subject. Nowhere is she using 1st person plural to include herself. Check this out:

"The administration has stopped using the phrase and I think that speaks for itself," Clinton said.

The administration.

"I haven't heard it used. I haven't gotten any directive about using it or not using it, it's just not being used," Clinton said.

It's just not being used - passive voice. No agent.

"Gotta love Hilly."

*Absolutely no resistance whatsoever - NONE!*

You people are on it when it comes to Hillary parsing the rhetoric. That's when her "inner lawyer" really comes out. "The Administration" is no longer using that phrase -- whoever you think that refers to, that's who it refers to. Yeah. Love it.

Dutch foreign minister isn't too bad-looking himself, as long as we're talking appearance!

PATH TO MIDDLE EAST PEACE - THROUGH IRAN

A strategy for repairing U.S. – Iran relations.

http://pacificgatepost.blogspot.com/2009/02/iran-solution-to-middle-east.html

This will have the positive effect of reducing strife in Iraq and in Palestine.

I am glad Hillary publicly recognized what others have been noting- that the legally-vague phrase, 'War on Terror', is likely not going to be used going forward.

The main problem with the 'War on Terror' is/was that the Bush admin. were being completely disingenuous in using it- terrorism is an ideological method, it is not a group, it is not a nation state and it is not an organization. In addition, unlike other wars presidents have declared, there is no real end to it.

Thus, by squandering to himself larger and larger amounts of executive authority with very limited judicial or congressional review or oversight in the name of fighting 'The War on Terror' (where there is much less accountability due to presidential war powers), Bush was essentially giving he and Dick Cheney almost unlimited power, with no end in sight- power that would/could be wielded largely in secret and without the knowledge of the public due to security concerns. And no president should have that much power- not Bush, not Obama.

So as far as I'm concerned, hats off to Hillary and R.I.P "war on terror."

Hillary has managed to mend the formerly seemingly irreparable rift made by the Bush neocon neanderthals!
It is unfathomable, however, that her Great Leader of the Western World has sent 21,000 troops to Afganistan and countless billions of taxpayer dollars to do what? Guard the oil pipelines from Afganistan's Caspian Basin to Pakistan? This is an 8-billion dollar project and, of course, the Chinese and Russians don't like the American and internationally financed pipeline in "their region". But wouldn't it be better if U.S., Russia, China and Iran worked together on the pipeline with firm conditions re profits? If anyone could manage this, it would be Hillary. Certainly not Obama whose campaign millions were poured in by the interests that dictate to him the current pouring of billions of dollars and thousands of young men and women to fight a phony war intended to protect the oil pipeline interests. Unless the Great Leader wishes to do this for the sake of little Afgani girls attending Feminism 101 classes in Kabul! And with his misogynist campaign now part of history (and the Women's Media Centre can be consulted) I doubt very much that that is Mr. Obama's intention in promoting a "war" in Afganistan-Pakistan that will make the Iraqui misadventures of Dubya look like a Sunday School picnic. If only Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton were elected President...she'd have found the "middle ground" and the "conciliatory and consensual" way of doing business. That was her strategic trademark. Too bad someone motivated solely by premature ambitions is dictating strategy in this hill of beans we live in....