SHARE

Our boys in Afghanistan.If, like confused old ass-clown Richard Cohen at the Washington Post, you’ve never heard of the “WikiLeaks” or the “Internet,” this year’s biggest news story maybe didn’t really hit home. And if there’s a natural constituency of confused old ass-clowns outside the Washington Post‘s op-ed page, it’s the U.S. Capitol. That’s why the House decided 308-114 in a rare bipartisan vote to dump another $59 billion of U.S. debt on the lost wars in Afghanistan and Iraq — 108 Democrats and 12 Republicans had the spine to say No to the latest extra check to the Pentagon and its allies in Pakistan, the Taliban.

But what does Joe Lieberman, America’s most awful senator, have to say about the Wikileaks? Joe Lieberman condemns Wikileaks, whatever that is, for releasing information that could delay or call into question the wholesale slaughter of Muslim people wherever they happen to live, in Muslimghaniraqistan:

“The disclosure of tens of thousands of classified documents on the Afghanistan war is profoundly irresponsible and harmful to our national security …. Wikileaks is not an objective news organization but an organization with an ideological agenda that is implacably hostile to our military and the most basic requirements of our national security. Americans and our allies should be wary of drawing conclusions based on materials selectively leaked by Wikileaks, as it seeks to sap support for the Afghan war among the American people and our European allies.”

Of course, Lieberman’s worry is not whether or not the damning information in the tens of thousands of secret communications is accurate — like many decrepit old armchair bombers of the Muslims, Lieberman has dismissed the Wikileaks revelations because they allegedly “add nothing to the public understanding of the war in Afghanistan.” The people still insisting we need to further bankrupt America by dumping billions of dollars in bombs on third-world countries are only worried about public support.

But if there’s any lesson from the leak of the Pentagon Papers four decades ago, it’s that these things only have traction when people are already sick of the wars in question. Vietnam escalated through the 1960s, starting from a point of Cold War Hysteria that’s roughly equivalent to the 2001 national freakout America suffered after the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Oh, and Truck Nutz or whatever! [New York Times]

$
Donate with CCDonate with CC
  • Oblios Cap

    Why, that must be a picture of Santorum’s campaign team.

  • norbizness

    These wars are like crackhead Samuel L. Jackson begging his parents for cash in Jungle Fever.

  • Geogre

    Oh, but we already know that there’s no news, except for who the leaker is and how stupid he is, and, anyway, let’s talk about the Pentagon Papers and how this isn’t them.

    The NYT story on the appropriations vote is worse than you report, actually. The Democrats voting against it were doing so, mostly, because it had been stripped of education funds and domestic spending. Only a few were voting for dove reasons.

    Besides, hasn’t W. convinced us by now that the battlefield is anywhere, and therefore we must militarize everywhere and only war is peace?

  • Johnny Zhivago

    [re=627174]Geogre[/re]: Mission accomplished!!

  • Panquake

    How else are we supposed to have any leverage on any other country whatsoever if we can’t demonstrate that we can literally bomb a country back into the Stone Age?

  • bureaucrap

    Too d*&n depressing to be funny.

  • JMP

    In other words, Lieberman wants to prosecute wikileaks for thoughtcrime as it’s undermined the war we’ve always had with Eastasia.

  • Terry

    [re=627170]Oblios Cap[/re]:

    No, it’s Lindsay Graham’s.

  • just pixels

    In a free society — even one that keeps bunches of secrets — there are lots of things that “harm our national security”. Expressing anti-war opinions, writing about service members’ activities on Facebook, not paying taxes (those “IRS settlements” on teevee), using imported oil, donating to international charities.

    If we want to sacrifice everything that makes America cool, fun and important, sacrifice it on the altar of “security” — then put it all on the table. Trial by jury (oops, already gone if the gov’t sez you’re an “enemy combatant”), writ of habbeus corpus (oops, same deal), freedom of religion (oops, except for mosques), freedom of expression (oops, c.f. Lieberman’s remarks), privacy (oops, warrantless searches, phone taps), guns. Actually guns seems to be the most likely avenue for a terrorist attack — just pop over to Virginia & pick up a few semiautos — but everyone just looks the other way.

  • HedonismBot

    What, you mean the Republicans didn’t all vote against it simply because Obama asked for it? They are slipping.

  • Mild Midwesterner

    Good news! Northrop Grumman, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and Haliburton stocks are all killing it on the NYSE today! Recession over!

  • 13ollocks To The Rules

    Man, that looks like the Funnest Jamboree Ever. Which one’s the Scoutmaster?

  • dex

    seriously, middle eastern quagmires – this is the LAST $59 billion you’re getting. for real, because congress has, like, TOTALLY had it up to here.

  • V572625694

    “Wikileaks is not an objective news organization…” Proving once again that facts have a liberal bias.

    [re=627178]Panquake[/re]: In all fairness, we had a big head start in taking Afghanistan back to the Stone Age. That makes it all the more essential that we start on Iran, beautiful rich country with an ancient culture. All aboard the Rubbletown Express!

  • chascates

    A more civilized society would avoid foreign misadventures and simply burn $59 billion dollars in an incinerator.

  • JMP

    [re=627185]HedonismBot[/re]: You’d think they would all vote against it because it increases the deficit, which the Republicans all started suddenly caring about in January 2009.

  • proudgrampa

    That is depressing.

    I was only going to have a couple of drinks today. But now I’m probably going to finish the bottle.

    Damn you, Wonkette! My alcoholism is your fault!

  • weejee

    Two of the Soviet of Washington’s communist Housesitters, C’Addle’s Jim McDermott and C’Addle north suburb’s Jay Inslee, voted noes and there were not riots. In fact, there was even sunshine, imagine!!

  • HedonismBot

    [re=627196]JMP[/re]: There is nothing surprising, however, about the Dems inability to hold their caucus together.
    Speaking only for myself, I HATE it when my caucus falls apart.

  • Mr Blifil

    I suppose you prefer the Taliban becoming the world’s heroin dealer. I know they already are but c’mon YOU DON’T JUST COME OUT AND SAY IT LIKE THAT’S OK!

  • Mad Brahms

    Richard Cohen is still the world’s worst writer, and an execrable torture apologist, but I have to say, his column on the memos actually sounds, well, pretty accurate, especially the part about making open in spectacular form what the Obama administration knew but couldn’t publicly admit. Yes, his ignorance of what WikiLeaks is is embarrassing, but this is one of his less mockable columns.

  • Lazy Media

    If there’s any lesson from Vietnam that applies, it’s that people only REALLY care about wars if they’re afraid they might get killed in them. The people who actually go to Afghanistan, and their families, are tired and pissed off, but they’re only about 2 percent of the population. And the death rate (if not the overall casualty rate) is so low, nobody’s all that het up about it.

    If it wasn’t expensive and/or the government wasn’t broke, you’d hardly hear any mention of Afghanistan outside military circles.

    Oh, btw, it’s not just America doing this. All the NATO countries (except France, and they’re barely IN NATO) are down, if reluctantly and stingily.

  • nappyduggs

    Why can’t Congress read?

    And, like proudgrampy, I haz the alcoholizmz with stories like this one. It’s not your fault per se, but you have a nasty habit of enabling me. Tsk, tsk, Wonket.

  • norbizness

    [re=627195]chascates[/re]:

    Bart: I’ll take up smoking and give that up.

    Homer: Good for you, son! Quitting smoking is one of the hardest things you’ll ever have to do. Have a dollar.

    Lisa: But he didn’t do anything!

    Homer: Didn’t he, Lisa? Didn’t he?

  • Naked Bunny with a Whip

    Fortunately, they were able at the last minute to strip provisions that would have helped pay for teachers and to give students college loans. Because the country is broke, people!

  • Hart88

    So the GOP goes apeshit about extending unemployment benefits without a subsequent decrease in discretionary spending, but another $59 billion for the war(s)? Not a peep.

  • Bernie Madeoff

    Episode 467: “Schlock and Blah”

  • tribbzthesquidz

    [re=627211]proudgrampa[/re]: Hear hear!

  • lawrenceofthedesert

    Huge diff between Viet Nam and Afghanistan? Most of us serving during Nam were draftees, while today’s GI’s were snookered into enlisting. Nevertheless, as bad as this war is, let’s not take it out on the kids. Spend some big money keeping the kids as safe as possible while looking for a face-saving way to sidle out of a war that the Iraqi government doesn’t seem very eager to fight, except for the fortifications around the politicians’ bank accounts. Hard to win a war when one side doesn’t want to fight, as we found out in Nam. Bin Laden is no Ho Chi Minh (who fought all the imperialists who tried to control his country for 40 years), but a thug hiding behind a Koran. Trouble is, Talabani is not exactly Simon Bolivar, either. Bush and Cheney did a wonderful Laurel & Hardy job of getting us into another fine mess — Cheney for obvious reasons of war profiteering, Bush out of sheer, unbridled ignorance. Let’s not sacrifice too many US kids getting out.

  • osama bin drinkin

    Ken’s commentary about the wars is one of my favorite things about this site, but I’ve always had a question about it? Not tryin to be a bonerkiller here but, wasn’t Ken kind of on the terror hysteria train himself back in 01, what with the warblogging and all? Even if he was I’m not sayin it reflects poorly or whatever cuz we were all pretty freaked but… I guess I just always wanted to read some sort of “looking back on it, well…” type post about the whole warblogging time.

  • GOPCrusher

    “Wikileaks is not an objective news organization but an organization with an ideological agenda that is implacably hostile to our military and the most basic requirements of our national security.”

    Change “Wikileaks” to Biggovernment or Fox News and change “military” to President and the sentence makes sense.

  • Hooray For Anything

    [re=627185]HedonismBot[/re]: Maybe from now on the Democrats should just add “bomb Iran” after the title of a bill in order to get the Republicans to go along with it, you know, like how as a joke you’re supposed to say “in bed” after reading a fortune in a fortune cookie. For instance, you could call the Health Care Bill the “Entitled The Patient Protection and Affordable Care and Bomb Iran Act” of Financial Reform “Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection and Bomb Iran Act.”

  • Neilist

    I disagree with you Liberal Communist Pinko SCUM about Joe Lieberman.

    The sooner the U.S. launches a nuclear strike to take out the rogue nuclear state in the Middle East, the better. This nation of religious fanatics/racists has been running a nuclear weapons program outside of IAEA controls for YEARS. And it illegally sold nuclear weapons technology to a corrupt, oppressive African regime.

    Yes, clearly, this outlaw nation must be stopped.

    Bomb Israel IMMEDIATELY!!!!!

    What?

    Iran?

    Really?

    Oh, never mind then.

  • Neilist

    [re=627316]lawrenceofthedesert[/re]: I’d be more comfortable “worrying about our kids in Afghanistan” once they start fragging their officers. Or at least, those of field grade and higher.

    Amazing how merely throwing a hand grenade into an O Club or two can contribute to troop morale, small unit integrity, and a lower overall casualty rate (because all of the “aggressive patrolling” gets done at the bar in the EM Club, or back in your hooch, etc.) . . . .

  • Charlie Bucket

    I like how Lieberman says he doesn’t like the wikileaks business because it “seeks to sap support for the war…” – I like it especially since the only people left supporting this war wouldn’t change their opinion on it if dozens of wikileaks vids came out that showed the army bombing orphanages on purpose repeatedly.

  • JesusButter

    That picture gets me every time.

Previous articleYear of the Woman Continues, In Oklahoma, Because of Two Women
Next articleSure, White House, Just Ignore JACK WHITE and Focus On the ‘Jonas Bros.’