If Sen. Barack Obama becomes President Obama in November, all the change in the world, even all the king’s men and horses and US peoples may not be able to correct the horror.
Although a smorgasbord of shredded Americana faces the next commander-in-chief, Iraq is like the unmovable object being hit by an unstoppable force.

After lying about the run-up to the war, Decider George wants to keep the US bogged down and dying in Iraq forever.

• A secret deal being negotiated in Baghdad would perpetuate the American military occupation of Iraq indefinitely, regardless of the outcome of the US presidential election in November.
  The terms of the impending deal, details of which have been leaked to The Independent, are likely to have an explosive political effect in Iraq.
  Iraqi officials fear that the accord, under which US troops would occupy permanent bases, conduct military operations, arrest Iraqis and enjoy immunity from Iraqi law, will destabilise Iraq’s position in the Middle East and lay the basis for unending conflict in their country.
  …
  America currently has 151,000 troops in Iraq and, even after projected withdrawals next month, troop levels will stand at more than 142,000 – 10 000 more than when the military “surge” began in January 2007.
  Under the terms of the new treaty, the Americans would retain the long-term use of more than 50 bases in Iraq. American negotiators are also demanding immunity from Iraqi law for US troops and contractors, and a free hand to carry out arrests and conduct military activities in Iraq without consulting the Baghdad government.
  …
  The US is adamantly against the new security agreement being put to a referendum in Iraq, suspecting that it would be voted down.
  The influential Shia cleric Muqtada al-Sadr has called on his followers to demonstrate every Friday against the impending agreement on the grounds that it compromises Iraqi independence.
  The Iraqi government wants to delay the actual signing of the agreement but the office of Vice-President Dick Cheney has been trying to force it through.
  The US ambassador in Baghdad, Ryan Crocker, has spent weeks trying to secure the accord.
  — Patrick Cockburn, independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east, (6/5/08)

This report more to the point:

• Under the agreement, Iraqi security institutions such as Defence, Interior and National Security ministries, as well as armament contracts, will be under American supervision for ten years.
  The agreement is also likely to give American forces permanent military bases in the country, as well as the right to move against any country considered to be a threat against world stability or acting against Iraqi or American interests.
  — gulfnews.com/region/Iraq, (6/3/05: Updated 6/5/08)

Yesterday, the US House of Representatives Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on International Organizations, Human Rights, and Oversight held a hearing on the subject, “The Future of U.S.-Iraqi Relations: The Perspective of the Iraqi Parliament,” and invited a couple of Iraq’s own legislative representatives to comment.
During a question-and-answer with Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX), one of the Iraqis, Nadeem Al-Jaberi, said the US occupation is very unpopular with “roughly 70 percent of Iraqis favor a withdrawal…”
In another session, the other Iraqi rep, Khalaf Al-Ulayyan, conceded the entire US/Iraq experience was not a very good idea:

• Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) asked a simple-enough question: did the two Iraqi parliamentarians think the U.S. should have invaded? He seemed unprepared for the answer.
  “I would prefer if it didn’t happen, because it led to the destruction of the country,” al-Ulayyan said. “The U.S. got rid of one person. It put in hundreds of persons that are worse than Saddam Hussein. Unfortunately, now Iran is going into Iraq, and this is under the umbrella of the United States.”
  Asked if the U.S. should withdraw, a somewhat-exasperated Jaberi said, “The presence of foreign forces at this time may not be very useful in Iraq… it will be a source of instability in both Iraq and the region.”
  — Spencer Ackerman, washingtonindependent.com/view/iraqi5, (6/4/08)

Rep. William Delahunt, (D-MA), and chair of the subcommittee, released excerpts from a letter given to him by the two Iraqis on conditions for the security pact/agreement:

• The proposed pact has become increasingly controversial in Iraq, where there have been protests against it. It has also drawn criticism from Democrats on the presidential election campaign trail in the United States, who say President George W. Bush is trying to dictate war policy after he leaves office.
  “The majority of Iraqi representatives strongly reject any military-security, economic, commercial, agricultural, investment or political agreement with the United States that is not linked to clear mechanisms that obligate the occupying American military forces to fully withdraw from Iraq,” the letter to the leaders of Congress said.
  — Reuters, rawstory.com/news/mochila, (6/4/08)

And President Obama, how would thou handle this?
Or even worse (if that’s possible), this?

• US President George W. Bush and Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert agreed Wednesday that Iran was a “threat” to peace that needs to be confronted, as they kicked off talks at the White House.
  “Iran is an existential threat to peace, and it’s very important for the world to take the Iranian threat seriously, which the United States does,” said Bush, while Olmert called Tehran “the main threat to all of us.”
  — Agence France-Presse, rawstory.com/news/afp, (6/4/08)

Here are two old sonofabitches, up to their nation’s neck in lying, thievery and incompetence, plotting to bring even more death and destruction.
Olmert is about to get reamed out of office over allegations he unlawfully obtained vast sums of money from a US financier, and just this week, a couple of his key supporters popped him the finger.
One of those, the Israeli defense minister, called for Olmert to quit.
And Decider George?

• Sixty-seven percent disapprove of the job Bush is doing – the highest such figure in CBS News polls since he assumed office.
  Only Presidents Nixon (24 percent) and Truman (22 percent) have seen polls showing job approval ratings lower than 25 percent during their presidencies, according to Gallup Polls. President Carter’s all-time low was 26 percent.
  — cbsnews.com/stories/2008/06/04/opinion/polls, (6/4/08)

President Obama would indeed suffer an enormous inheritance tax.