A Spork in the Drawer

John And Cindy McCain - Plagiarists At Large

Via Election Central, this can't be called an accident:

This past Sunday, Lauren Handel, an eagle-eyed attorney from New York, was searching for a specific recipe from Giada DeLaurentis, a chef on the Food Network. Yet whenever she Googled the different ingredients in the recipe, the oddest thing happened: not only did the Food Network's site come up, as expected, but so did John McCain's campaign site.

On a section of McCain's site called "Cindy's Recipes," you can find seven recipes attributed to Cindy McCain, each with the heading "McCain Family Recipe." Ms. Handel quickly realized that some of the "McCain Family Recipes," were in fact, word-for-word copies of recipes on the Food Network site.

At least three of the "McCain Family Recipes" appear to be lifted directly from the Food Network, while at least one is a Rachael Ray recipe with minor changes.

Perhaps Cindy's excuse will be that she's popping pills again.

Meanwhile, by way of Think Progress, it would appear that Mr. Experience has no clue about what St. Petreus's job is:

Speaking Monday at the annual meeting of the Associated Press, McCain was asked whether he, if elected, would shift combat troops from Iraq to Afghanistan to intensify the search for al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden.

“I would not do that unless Gen. [David] Petraeus said that he felt that the situation called for that,” McCain said, referring to the top U.S. commander in Iraq.

Petraeus, however, made clear last week that he has nothing to do with the decision...Decisions about Afghanistan would be made by others, he said.

So now we can add the military to the long list of things about which McCain knows nothing.

3AM? More like 3 minutes to midnight.

.

The Pictures Say It All

He Who Must Not Be Questioned with a convicted criminal and alleged Iranian spy:

.

Curiouser And Curiouser

The Greenwald/Boylan imbroglio takes another turn. Greg Mitchell:

E&P contacted Boylan for a clarification about the email. Late Monday night he (or someone claiming to be him) replied: "I am denying writing and sending it. I know from past experience with Mr. Greenwald that any email exchange with him would be posted to his site as well as there is no need to discuss anything with him. I would only contact him in response to anything he would directly send to me as he did in this case. I have not contacted Mr. Greenwald since this summer" -- until Greenwald asked him to confirm the Sunday email, when "I told him it was not mine and I did not send it."

[...]

Knowing that I had a brief exchange of emails with Boylan last spring, I went back and found them -- with the Boylan in them sounding an awful lot like the Boylan in the disputed email to Greenwald.

Personally, I think Boylan is lying. The irony is that Boylan (if it was him) was disputing Glenn's writings on the politicization of the military and Boylan's e-mail (if it was him) was an entirely political complaint.

Perhaps more seriously, if the e-mail wasn't sent by Boylan that would mean the military has a very serious security problem.

Somebody might want to look into this.

.

Clutching At Straws

Squeaky Wheels:

When Biden thought he had a gotcha -- contradictions between Petraeus's report on Iraqi violence and the less favorable one by the Government Accountability Office -- Petraeus calmly pointed out that the GAO had to cut its data-gathering five weeks short to meet reporting requirements to Congress. And since those most recent five weeks had been particularly productive for the coalition, the GAO numbers were not only outdated but misleading.

Yes, that 30 days made all the difference. And it's curious that Chuckles fails to mention how Petraeus arrived at his conclusions. Oh, that's right, it's because Petraeus is being dodgy about his methodology. Well, maybe not so curious.

Krauthammer puts me in mind of a stereotypical mad scientist who cackles maniacally as his laboratory burns down around him. And like that mad scientist, Chuckles doesn't end as the ruler of the world or a god but as a pathetic little figure soon forgotten.

.

Spare Us

Is Our Lord and Savior Gen. David Petraeus going to make like Ike and run for president? One report says so:

The US commander in Iraq, General David Petraeus, expressed long-term interest in running for the US presidency when he was stationed in Baghdad, according to a senior Iraqi official who knew him at that time.

[...]

"I asked him if he was planning to run in 2008 and he said, 'No, that would be too soon'," Mr Khadim, who now lives in London, said.

General Petraeus has a reputation in the US Army for being a man of great ambition. If he succeeds in reversing America's apparent failure in Iraq, he would be a natural candidate for the White House in the presidential election in 2012.

[...]

Mr Khadim was a senior adviser in the Iraqi Interior Ministry in 2004-05 when Iyad Allawi was prime minister.

"My office was in the Adnan Palace in the Green Zone, which was close to General Petraeus's office," Mr Khadim recalls. He had meetings with the general because the Interior Ministry was involved in vetting the loyalty of Iraqis recruited as army officers. Mr Khadim was critical of the general's choice of Iraqis to work with him.

As Josh cautions, we don't know if Khadim has an axe or two to grind so caveat lector.

.

When PowerPoint™ Owns The World

Snark or not? You decide!

Petraeus showed members of Congress a slide -- the last of 13 he presented -- that projected U.S. forces staying in Iraq for an indeterminate time. It did not attach dates indicating any set timetable for withdrawal. Rather, Petraeus's spokesman said, the envisioned drawdown to 35,000 to 50,000 troops would be "conditions based."

No one engaged him on this point, trying to get him to flesh out the slide and explain its assumptions. The bottom-line question -- how long until the last U.S. troops will return from Iraq -- was never asked. "Overall, I haven't seen such impressive charts since I worked in the Pentagon when McNamara ran the place," commented retired Army Col. Charles Krohn, referring to Robert McNamara's tenure in the 1960s. Krohn served in the Vietnam War and as a civilian in Iraq.

I'm going to assume that Col. Krohn is being sarcastic. Only George would be stupid enough to cite Robert McNamara in a positive fashion.

I believe this is the slide being referred to:

Utterly meaningless. But pretty to look at which, I suppose, is the point.

(Slide stolen from Matt Yglesias.)

.

Shorter Petraeus And Crocker

Everything's coming up roses!

It's a shame that the same can't be said these guys:

Nine American soldiers died in Iraq on Monday — all but one killed in vehicle accidents in and around Baghdad, the military said.

.

Memo To Democrats

The war/occupation is still unopopular:

While a third of those surveyed say the "surge" of U.S. troops this year has made them more confident the United States will accomplish its goals, a majority calls the invasion a mistake and predicts the war will be lost.

A record 60% say the United States should set a timetable to withdraw forces "and stick to that timetable regardless of what is going on in Iraq." [Emphasis added.]

Something to think about during the White House's Our Lord and Savior Gen. Petraeus' dog and pony show that begins today.

Full poll results here.

.

Surprise!

You know that long-awaited, sure-to-tell-the-truth report on the situation in Iraq from Lord and Savior Gen. David Petraeus? The one that's going to determine the course of the war and occupation? That one?

There isn't going to be a report at all!

BushCo™ does it again!

.

Mighty Big Of Him

Petraeus Open to Pullout of 1 Brigade

1 Brigade = 3,500 to 4,500 troops thus leaving more than 165,000 in Iraq.

And even then:

The pullouts would be contingent on the ability of U.S. and Iraqi forces to sustain what the administration heralds as recent gains in security and to make further gains in stabilizing Iraq.

So that piddling number of troops will be withdrawn only if non-existent gains are sustained.

The doublespeak and obfuscation make my brain hurt.

And will they subtract the seven dead today from the number withdrawn?

.

So Much For That

Since Congress and the punditocracy has vested everything - but everything - on September's report by Jesus Gen. David Petraeus this must be a disappointment:

Senior congressional aides said yesterday that the White House has proposed limiting the much-anticipated appearance on Capitol Hill next month of Gen. David H. Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan C. Crocker to a private congressional briefing, suggesting instead that the Bush administration's progress report on the Iraq war should be delivered to Congress by the secretaries of state and defense.

Instead, everyone will have to listen to spinning from Condi and Bob Gates.

This latest, combined with yesterday's revelation that the report will be written by the White House, should inform everybody that it will be a whitewash. However, it will be likely that these inconvenient truths will be elided and we'll hear nothing but "stay the course!"

Unless the "news" media do their jobs.

Sorry, I made myself laugh with that last sentence.

.

Another (Non) Surprise

Something to think about as we await the coming of Jesus Gen. David Petraeus:

Despite Bush's repeated statements that the report will reflect evaluations by Petraeus and Ryan Crocker, the U.S. ambassador to Iraq, administration officials said it would actually be written by the White House, with inputs from officials throughout the government.

The LATimes has seen fit to bury this little gem in the 28th. paragraph.

Given that every politician and pundit in existence is banking on God's Petraeus' report this is a somewhat important revelation, no?

.