Sister Toldjah posted this and it was too funny.  The old ones are the best. Wait for the punchline….

TGIF everyone!

Aside from his participation in that dreadful Reagon movie, I have never had too much issue with Mr Streisand.  He has enough trouble just being married to her afterall.

But he was on the View and decided to spew his nutbag moonbat conspiracy theory about 911:

Actor James Brolin Latest Celebrity To Publicly Doubt 9/11

By the way, being the "latest" of anything in Hollywierd is hardly a boon.  Britney was the latest Hollywood starlet to flash her pubs.  Big deal.  Idiots run in packs.

Actor James Brolin, the husband of Barbara Streisand, has today become the latest celebrity figure to publicly question the official story behind 9/11, after he encouraged viewers of a top rated ABC talk show to check out a 9/11 truth website.

Brolin appeared as a guest on The View Wednesday morning and according to e mails we have been receiving in numbers, towards the end of the show the actor questioned 9/11 and urged the audience to check out the website 911weknow.com, which is a website that purports to expose how the twin towers and Building 7, which wasn’t hit by a plane, were brought down via controlled demolition.

Yea, those phoney airplanes and all that.  All those honey deaths.  Those phoney bodies were really convincing.

Yea, those phoney airplanes and all that.  All those honey deaths.  Those phoney bodies were really convincing.

Fools.  Idiots and fools.  He and Rosie must have gotten along great.

H/T Hot Air

The ‘Net has been abuzz with reactions of the ISG report.  The report eagerly awaited by the left as proof of Bush’s failure has had some surprising critics though.

Pretty bad when Slate questions the report:

This Is What We’ve Been Waiting For?

Here’s a question that the Baker-Hamilton committee report didn’t completely address: What happens if its new approach doesn’t work?

Because all signs show that it will not. The examples are almost endless, especially when it comes to the much-hyped "regional approach" to the Iraq conflict. "The United States cannot achieve its goals in the Middle East unless it deals directly with the Arab-Israeli conflict," the committee states. This is not a surprising or new approach by American policy-makers (or advisers, or committee members). In fact, it was the policy of all American administrations until the Bush administration turned it on its head and decided that the Arab-Israeli conflict was not the cause of the core problem of the Middle East, but rather one of its results.

…

But troubles emerge as soon as you delve into the practical recommendations regarding the "renewed and sustained commitment by the United States to a comprehensive Arab-Israeli peace on all fronts"—the most important of the committee’s recommendations, other than those dealing directly with managing the troops in Iraq.

More than anything else, these proposals are no more than a reiteration of the old James Baker formula for peace. A formula—just take a look at the region—that was not entirely successful in achieving its goals of peace and stability for Israel and its Arab neighbors. "Henry Kissinger says the war in Iraq is unwinnable," joked Jay Leno a couple of nights ago. "And if anybody knows how not to win a war, it’s Henry Kissinger." 

That nicely sums up the report.  The report seeks to make Iraq all about Israel and Iran more then about Al Qaeda.

Captain Ed notes: