Now, I try to stress that I won’t blanket-sweep conservatives on this site. I make jabs, I poke fun, but I don’t say “conservatives are this.” So I will say with great restraint, that there is a section of the red side of our country that is out of their goddamn minds. To wit, a radio host “suggests” we should tattoo crescents on Muslims in the USA, callers agree with him.

The first caller to the station in Washington said that Klein must be “off his rocker.” The second congratulated him and added: “Not only do you tattoo them in the middle of their forehead but you ship them out of this country … they are here to kill us.”

Another said that tattoos, armbands and other identifying markers such as crescent marks on driver’s licenses, passports and birth certificates did not go far enough. “What good is identifying them?” he asked. “You have to set up encampments like during World War Two with the Japanese and Germans.”

Damn. Now, the coup de grace: the host was testing his audience.

“Because basically what you just did was show me how the German people allowed what happened to the Jews to happen … We need to separate them, we need to tattoo their arms, we need to make them wear the yellow Star of David, we need to put them in concentration camps, we basically just need to kill them all because they are dangerous.”

Hell with this “Godwin’s Law” bullshit, the parallels are getting so blatant that it’s hurting my soul. Why do the terrorists hate us? This is why the terrorists hate us. My god, there are people within the United States that agree that Muslims in the US should be treated as Jews were in Germany. How sick have people gotten?

A-buh? I’m not sure what to think of this, truthfully, so just take a look for yourself. It seems that right before Rummy resigned, he sent out a memo describing the need for changes in Iraq, including the possibility of lowering troop levels.

“In my view it is time for a major adjustment,” wrote Mr. Rumsfeld, who has been a symbol of a dogged stay-the-course policy. “Clearly, what U.S. forces are currently doing in Iraq is not working well enough or fast enough.”

Nor did Mr. Rumsfeld seem confident that the administration would readily develop an effective alternative. To limit the political fallout from shifting course he suggested the administration consider a campaign to lower public expectations.

Here’s the part that really floors me:

One option Mr. Rumsfeld offered calls for modest troop withdrawals “so Iraqis know they have to pull up their socks, step up and take responsibility for their country.”

Another option calls for redeploying American troops from “vulnerable positions” in Baghdad and other cities to safer areas in Iraq or Kuwait, where they would act as a “quick reaction force.” That idea is similar to a plan suggested by Representative John P. Murtha, a Pennsylvania Democrat, a plan that the White House has soundly rebuffed.

Wow. So our Secretary of Defense was advocating the same “defeatocrat” policies that got Murtha swift-boated.

The peculiar part is that this was all after the election. So what’s the deal? Did they keep all this quiet during the campaign season to avoid sounding weak, and was Rummy’s ever-growing pessimism with his boss’s steadfastness the reason he was ousted? I can’t wait to see how this one turns out.

Yet another goes down. The man very, very closely tied with the Iraq War and Donald Rumsfeld in particular is going to stand down at the end of this year.

Stephen Cambone, the U.S. Defense Department’s top intelligence official and a close aide to outgoing Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, will resign on December 31, the Pentagon said on Friday.

Cambone has served as a senior aide to Rumsfeld since the start of the Bush administration in January 2001, and has held his current post, undersecretary for intelligence, since March 2003.

Now Cambone isn’t just some guy that happened to work with Rummy. He was, allegedly, intricately tied in with all sorts of illicit matters surrounding Iraq. For one, the wiping of Iraq War plans when 9/11 occurred. Read the notes for yourself, they’re uh… fun. For another, he was clearly involved in the Iraqi prisoner torturing, as his inclusion in Germany’s war crimes suit illustrates.

Things are getting a little nutty in DC. I have to admit I’m more than a little perplexed.

Just in case you were wondering. See, Bush likes to tell us that he’s open to a new direction, but he seems to really enjoy rejecting suggestions and reaffirming his support for what he’s already done.

“I know there’s a lot of speculation that these reports in Washington mean there’s going to be some kind of graceful exit out of Iraq,” the president said during a joint news conference with Mr. Maliki, referring to the panel’s reports that are expected next week. “We’re going to stay in Iraq to get the job done so long as the government wants us there.”

Mr. Bush also said he and Mr. Maliki would oppose any plan to break up the country, which is riven by sectarian violence. The two appeared together after an hourlong breakfast meeting with aides at the Four Seasons Hotel here that was followed by a 45-minute one-on-one session.

Basically there are four options in Iraq: leave, stay there and don’t change anything, up the troop levels and put the country on lockdown, or split it up. I suppose the split it up part would also fall victim to “less/equal/more troops”, but gimme a break here. Six seemed a bit much.

Anyway, Bush is adamant that he’s not even going to consider two of those options. Not on the table. It’s like talking with a child who’s trying to decide what ice cream to get but only wants you to reaffirm the decision he’s already made.

I also find it more than a little revealing that Bush said he won’t accept a “graceful withdrawal”. Apparently the only way we’re leaving is either in flames or with our tails tucked between our legs. More indicative:

The president and the prime minister did not say specifically how they intend to speed the transfer of responsibility for security from American to Iraqi forces, and they did not announce any milestones or set goals by which to measure progress.

Things like this sadden me and make me shake my head. How can we be expected to see progress if you won’t tell us what progress even looks like? Or don’t you believe Iraq will be able to meet these milestones if you set them up?

I keep saying it. We’re teaching Iraq to ride its bike. If we never let go, if we don’t start taking our hands away, they’ll never learn. What we’re seeing now is not only a desire to keep a tight hold on, but to put the training wheels back on.