Though most Americans thought we were rid of this blustering fool after the 1972 landslide presidential victory against him, McGovern has stayed in the news since then, though only marginally. Now however, he has his name in the news once again, as he plans to meet with a now democratically controlled congress - and specifically, the "Congressional Progressive Caucus," to discuss policy.

This also coincides with the release of his new book, in which he compares Iraq to Vietnam, and gives a "strategy" for immediate withdrawl, the kind of thing that would make John Murtha types pround.

"I think the Democratic leadership is wise enough to know that if they're going to follow the message that election sent, they're going to have to take steps to bring the war to a conclusion," he said today, speaking about the meeting with Democrats.

The message from the election? The message from the election was "we're mad at Republicans because they didn't deliver." I doubt very many people voted Democrat because they're really enthused about democratic candidates, or extremely excited about a particular democrat. It is mostly just frustration with Republicans, that they've had a total hold on the Senate and House, and the Presidency for at least 4 years, and have been unable to get the things done that they said they would.

McGovern shows us his expert foreign policy analysis when he says Vietnam and Iraq are both "foolish enterprises," and that the current threat the US faces from terrorism is a result of the invasion of Iraq, and did not exist beforehand. Apparently the goon totally forgot about 9/11, which certainly shows that there was indeed a terrorist threat well before the invasion of Iraq.

Maybe Mr. McGovern forgot about the Iranian revolution and hostage crisis (odd, since during his tenure in office it is one of the few things he got right, when he advocated the use of military force against the hostage takers). This happend in 1979, and was definitely a threat of terrorism before the invasion of Iraq.

Perhaps he forgot about the wars Israel has been fighting since... Moses. Perhaps he has forgotten about all the terrorism that took place in the mideast during the 70's, 80's, and 90's. The Olympic bombings, the USS Cole. The Beirut bombings in 1982. Did McGovern just forget about all these?

It is an absolutely ridiculous statement to say that the threat the US faces from terrorism today is a result of our invasion of Iraq, and that it did not exist beforehand. It did exist beforehand, the only difference is that it was well concealed. Now, the islamofascists have no choice but to attack us, because we are right at their doorstep. Iraq is a counterattack by the islamofascists, because they know that if they lose, we will come after them and destroy them until they cease to exist. The threat was still there beforehand, it's just more obvious now.

"Never let the new class of Democrats forget that they're there in considerable part because of the war the American public has now turned against," he said. Despite this statement being relatively unclear, it is also a gross misrepresentation of what happened in this election.

A majority of voters didn't come out against the war in Iraq, as McGovern and the far-left wing of the democratic party would believe. They voted against Republican handling of it. Lets face it, Republicans have worked us into a hole in Iraq. They did not understand how to wage total war, and because of that, they took a minor beating at the polls this Tuesday. This is not to say the Democrats will handle it any better. They'll handle it much worse. But the American people decided to give the Democrats a chance to prove themselves - and will soon realize what a mistake it was.

George McGovern is an idiot now, and he was an idiot in the 60's when he was against the war in Vietnam. His analysis of US foreign policy starts on the foundation that the US is always wrong, and that any action we take therefore is extremely suspect, and probably just unjust and unlawful. That is why he was against the Vietnam war (before it was "cool" to do so). This is also why he is against the Iraq war (and was before it was "cool" to do so).

His analysis of US foreign policy and current world affairs is fundamentally flawed, and fundamentally wrong. When he talks about it, he makes himself look like a further example of an idiot. Furthermore, by speaking to the Congressional "Progressive" Caucus, he is reinforcing the belief of many Americans that the Democrats are a party of cut-and-runners. Though this is a good thing for the Republican party, and for Conservatives (provided the Republicans can stick to their conservative message and get their butts in gear), it is a bad thing for Democrats (and I would think Democrats are looking to win elections, but I could be wrong).