Barack Obama's debate strategy of portraying the Bush administration as a complete failure is running into one big problem: Bush's Iraq policy appears to be succeeding. How embarrassing! Well, at least the Democrats can try to make sure that no one finds out about this.

During his foreign trip, Obama tried to take advantage of Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's statement that America should work out a withdrawal plan for Iraq. Obama triumphantly declared that now is the time for Iraqis to work out their own destiny. Obama failed to mention, however, that if he had been president, Iraq would still be ruled by Saddam Hussein. The only destiny that Obama would have consigned Iraq to is oppression, torture, and mass graves.

To understand what is going on in Iraq, we must distinguish between two approaches: the Bush doctrine and the Reagan doctrine. Unlike the Bush doctrine--which seemed to require invasion and occupation--the Reagan doctrine was one of assisted non-intervention. Reagan believed that people in foreign countries should fight for their own freedom. We do not fight for them. But if they are willing to fight, we are willing to help. And so in Afghanistan, in Nicaragua, in Angola and to some extent in Ethiopia, Reagan supported rebels who sought liberation from Marxist tyranny. For intance, Reagan supplied Stinger missiles to the Afghani mujaheedin who were fighting to repel the Soviet invasion of that country. Reagan did not, however, send large numbers of American troops to Afghanistan.

Now in Bush's defense it should be said that the Reagan doctrine could not have worked in Iraq. Unlike in Afghanistan, which the mujaheedin turned into a Soviet "bleeding wound," there was no Iraqi resistance that could substantially threaten Saddam Hussein. Bush's choice was either for America to get rid of Hussein, or to leave Hussein in power. But from the beginning the administration understood that, even in Iraq, over time the Bush doctrine must metamorphose into the Reagan doctrine.

It has taken longer than expected. But that's because Saddam's Baathist minority--let's call them the Saddamites--ran not only the government but the entire society. So it has been quite a process to train a Shia elected government to learn to govern a nation in which they were victimized for a quarter century. Slowly, however, the Iraqis have been rising to the task, assisted by able U.S. forces under the competent leadership of General Petraeus.

So now, finally, Iraqis are getting to the position where they can defend their own country and fight for their own freedom. This is what "success" means in Iraq: not the end of the insurgency, or the end of terrorism, but a situation in which Iraqis take the helm and America moves into a supporting role. Of course America is going to get out of Iraq. The only question is whether we will leave recklessly, precipituously, with the risk of escalating violence and chaos and perhaps even a return of the Saddamites. This seems to be the approach the Obama Democrats want. The other option is to leave cautiously, deliberately, in a way that leaves Iraq a self-governing society, the only pro-American Muslim democracy in the Middle East.

Postscript: Due to internal re-organization at AOL, it seems that this and other blogs are going to be suspended effective the end of this month. The blogs we have posted will still be online, but no new blogs will be posted. What a pity, especially as the election debate is heating up. I have enjoyed doing this blog and I want to thank my readers--yes, even the Dineshophobic atheists--for checking in and posting comments. (Sometimes I wonder if some of you atheists who post several times a day have regular jobs.)

AOL has informed me that the company is hiring a new blog manager and I will be negotiating the resumption of this blog--perhaps in a new format--with that person. This however could take a month or two. In the meantime look for my columns each Monday on Townhall.com and also consult my website dineshdsouza.com for forthcoming speaking events and updates.

After her questionable interview with ABC's Charlie Gibson, Sarah Palin and the McCain camp decided to take a hiatus from the media. But Palin finally decided do an interview with Katie Couric. After watching the interview, people discovered exactly why she took a hiatus in the first place...she has no idea what she's talking about. Cenk Uygur makes the argument in the clip below:

Watch TYT

Watch TYT!

The Republican Party has created an economy so terrible that America nearly entered the second Great Depression. Barack Obama could be using the poor economy as a strategy to help him win the presidential election. Instead he plays nice. What is his reasoning behind this, especially when John McCain has no problem attacking him?



Watch TYT

President Bush hasn't said much about the economic crisis the country is currently facing...until now:


Watch TYT.

Vice Presidential hopeful Sarah Palin is currently undergoing an ethics investigation for allegedly firing Alaska's Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan last summer for not giving into pressures to terminate Mike Wooten's position as a state trooper. The scandal dubbed "troopergate," accuses Palin of wanting to destroy Wooten's career due to his involvement in a bitter custody battle with her sister.

But Palin's past has shown that she has engaged in more cases of vindictive behavior, and the clip below will point out the details.

Watch TYT.

George Bush has nationalized more private companies than Hugo Chavez! In fact, Bush just utilized 85 billion dollars worth of tax payer money to bail out AIG. And how ironic is it that the ONLY insurance that has not been nationalized is health insurance? Watch the clip for more:



Watch TYT.

Chris Matthews from MSNBC's Hardball attempts to correct the wrongs of a McCain adviser, and he does a great job clearing up rumors other mainstream anchors completely ignored. It's about time someone focuses on who really caused the country's economic meltdown.

Watch TYT.

The Justice Department has established new rules that violate your right to privacy even more than the FISA Bill. Take a look at what the FBI can do without the approval of a bureau supervisor:


Watch TYT.

While interviewing with Charlie Gibson, Sarah Palin was asked about her thoughts on the Bush Doctrine. Her answer revealed exactly how qualified she is to be the next Vice President of the United States. Take a look:


Watch TYT.

The Young Turks will be conducting special live coverage of the Republican National Convention beginning on Monday. TYT will be hitting up Minneapolis to provide you with the following:

A live show from from 4pm to 6pm CT/6pm to 8pm ET, which can be heard on XM Satellite Radio 167.

Live interviews throughout at the day on www.theyoungturks.com.

Play-by-play analysis of all major speeches.

Remember to tune in beginning on Monday if you want a fun, animated, and edgy coverage of the convention. The show will be live from Minneapolis all week long.

The issue of illegal immigration continues to be a never-ending tangled web of complexity that has remained on the minds of politicians for decades. Several attempts at immigration regulation, and countless proposed policies have failed to yield favorable results. However, with more than 12 million undocumented immigrants currently living in the United States, leaders in Washington think they have come up with the best answer: Voluntary Deportation!

The Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency (ICE) will encourage all illegal immigrants to leave the country voluntarily, and the incentive to do so is basically nothing. All self-deporting immigrants would be granted a few weeks to pack their belongings and leave the country without spending any time in detention facilities.

There will be a formal announcement of the program next week.

Ali Noorani, Executive Director of the National Immigration Forum, released the following statement in response to the ICE program:

"Just when you thought the Bush Administration would ride quietly into the sunset, along comes another harebrained scheme that can't have been carefully thought out. We are not going to deport our way out of our current deportation mess, nor is it likely that most, or even many of the estimated 12 million undocumented immigrants here will choose to leave on their own."

I have to admit I agree with Noorani. Does the Bush Administration truly believe undocumented immigrants without criminal records would turn themselves into immigration authorities to go back to a country they ran away from? More importantly, why would they do so with no real incentive? The closest thing the Bush Administration has achieved in terms of "voluntary deportation" is creating an economy so terrible that many are probably thinking about leaving regardless of the new ICE program.


Watch TYT. NOW!

Ask a group of teachers what they think about Bush's "No Child Left Behind" initiative and odds are they'll tell you it's hurt their school and their enjoyment of the job.

Political reporter Kim Mance interviewed a number of educators across the country about how the policy has changed American education, and the results are not pretty. In this informative article for Babble.com, Mance writes:

The many teachers I spoke with for this article unanimously agreed that NCLB's emphasis on testing makes their job harder, more stressful and more frustrating. The major problem? Creating one standard for all children is impossible. The teachers spoke of the limited individual attention they could give students due to the narrow objectives of the all-important federal test scores.

Drudge just called our attention to this remarkable Political Punch item, which says that a White House employee meant to send a Reuters story about the Iraqi Prime Minister supporting Obama's withdrawal plan to an internal distribution list, but instead sent it to the gazillions of reporters on the White House press list.

The emailed article's subject is not exactly what the White House wants to promote: the Iraqi Prime Minister told Der Spiegel, "U.S. presidential candidate Barack Obama talks about 16 months [as a withdrawal timetable]. That, we think, would be the right timeframe for a withdrawal, with the possibility of slight changes."

Maliki also reportedly expressed frustration with the Bush administration's failure to create a timetable.