I give Rummy 2 more weeks

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 41
    giantgiant Posts: 6,041member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by SDW2001

    It's probably the best option for the administration.



    It's supposed to be the best option for the country, not the administration.
  • Reply 22 of 41
    faust9faust9 Posts: 1,335member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Jubelum





    I think you're the only one who got it.
  • Reply 23 of 41
    the cool gutthe cool gut Posts: 1,714member
    I would assume that it depends on how the polling goes. Of course the first reaction is for Bush and Cheney to suck Ashcroft's dick - but if 1 month from now this issue is still dragging Bush's numbers down - he'll get canned ( or leave for whatever medical reason)



    Bush is f*cked either way.
  • Reply 24 of 41
    faust9faust9 Posts: 1,335member
  • Reply 25 of 41
    midwintermidwinter Posts: 10,060member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by faust9

    PS. Look what the left wing Economist has as its cover this week.

    [/B]



    I don't think of the Economist as left wing. It strikes me as centrist, even moderately conservative.
  • Reply 26 of 41
    faust9faust9 Posts: 1,335member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by midwinter

    I don't think of the Economist as left wing. It strikes me as centrist, even moderately conservative.



    Yeah, I was being sarcastic. The Economist is farily conservative.
  • Reply 27 of 41
    giantgiant Posts: 6,041member
    I wonder if the 'conservatives' here get the economist. Probably not.



    There are a lot of pretty pictures for them, though.
  • Reply 28 of 41
    midwintermidwinter Posts: 10,060member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by faust9

    Yeah, I was being sarcastic. The Economist is farily conservative.





    Doh! Sorry. It's been a long day.
  • Reply 29 of 41
    screedscreed Posts: 1,077member
    Whoopsy...



    (From Atrios) JAG lawyers: Prisoner Warnings ignored



    Quote:

    If we ? 'we' being the uniformed lawyers ? had been listened to, and what we said put into practice, then these abuses would not have occurred," said Rear Admiral Don Guter (ret.), the Navy Judge Advocate General from 2000 to 2002.



    Specifically, JAG officers say they have been marginalized by Douglas Feith, undersecretary of defense for policy, and William Haynes II, the Pentagon's general counsel, whom President Bush has nominated for a judgeship on the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.



    So it goes at least as high as Dough Feith.



    Add to what faust9 posted from CNN (that Rummy initiated the policy and made it clandestine), I think we can measure his tenure in "days not months."



    Screed
  • Reply 30 of 41
    giantgiant Posts: 6,041member
  • Reply 31 of 41
    argentoargento Posts: 483member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by giant

    I wonder if the 'conservatives' here get the economist. Probably not.



    There are a lot of pretty pictures for them, though.




    That was a retarded thing to say.
  • Reply 32 of 41
    giantgiant Posts: 6,041member
    Considering how hard this admin must looking for dirt on Hersh, he's got to be one of the cleanest guys on the planet.



    I don't know what to make of the rumsfeld situation. I thought he was out of the heat, but Hersh is just bombarding them with stories.
  • Reply 33 of 41
    dmzdmz Posts: 5,775member
    Unfortunatly, Clinton remastered the old Jeffersonian tactic of "ignore ANY criticism and it will go away". It worked for Bubba, I think you may see Bushco give that a whirl. Given American attention spans and the recovering economy. Bush could be sodomizing interns with Cigars in the Oval Office and no one would care.



    But then sometimes a lightsitck is just a lightstick.



    Bushco has come under UNPRECIDENTED, coordinated attacks in the media, press and has even had to deal with several legitimate incidents---but he is still slightly ahead of Kerry.



    Rummy isn't going anywhere.
  • Reply 34 of 41
    screedscreed Posts: 1,077member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by dmz

    Unfortunatly, Clinton remastered the old Jeffersonian tactic of "ignore ANY criticism and it will go away". It worked for Bubba, I think you may see Bushco give that a whirl. Given American attention spans and the recovering economy. Bush could be sodomizing interns with Cigars in the Oval Office and no one would care.



    Well the intern(s) would care... just a bit.



    Quote:



    But then sometimes a lightsitck is just a lightstick.




    What's that?



    Quote:



    Bushco has come under UNPRECIDENTED, coordinated attacks in the media, press and has even had to deal with several legitimate incidents---but he is still slightly ahead of Kerry.



    Rummy isn't going anywhere.




    Unprecedented for his term, yes. As for the polls, it depends on which poll you look at. CNN had Bush's job approval in the low 40s.



    Screed
  • Reply 35 of 41
    gilschgilsch Posts: 1,995member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by tonton And you are still dumb enough to think we shouldn't be so hard on Bush?



    That's a rhetorical question right? Interchange "dumb" with "party fanatic"depending on subject.
  • Reply 36 of 41
    faust9faust9 Posts: 1,335member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by tonton

    You guyz honestly can't tell wrong from more wrong.



    Clinton was bashed because he lied about sex to save his relationship with his wife.



    Bush has been bashed because of lies or the deliberate ignorance of doubts that have led to a war, death, destruction, diplomatic suicide of the US, and a severe threat of economic disaster.



    And you are still dumb enough to think we shouldn't be so hard on Bush?




    WHAT!?! Are you saying there are degrees of right and wrong. That stealing a pack of gum isn't on par with stealing the treasury? Are you saying a little extra-marital trist is not on par with rushing to war for ideological reasons? I can't believe it. I simply can't. We are a black and white nation don't ya know? Things are either right or wrong no middle ground. You're with us or against us. You're for the presidents policies whole heartedly or you're a terrorist lover. You must be a taliban recruiter to say such things. I'm on to you. I have your number. I'm watching you...
  • Reply 37 of 41
    dmzdmz Posts: 5,775member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by tonton

    You guyz honestly can't tell wrong from more wrong.



    Clinton was bashed because he lied about sex to save his relationship with his wife.



    Bush has been bashed because of lies or the deliberate ignorance of doubts that have led to a war, death, destruction, diplomatic suicide of the US, and a severe threat of economic disaster.



    And you are still dumb enough to think we shouldn't be so hard on Bush?




    This is not a Clinton/Bush comparison. Clinton was simply intelligent enough to effect great PR strategy when the heat was on---and it worked. Multiple times---from Troopergate to Tyson chicken.
  • Reply 38 of 41
    faust9faust9 Posts: 1,335member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by dmz

    this is not a Clinton/Bush comparison. Clinton was simply intelligent enough to effect great PR strategy when the heat was on---and it worked. Multiple times.



    This thread isn't about Clinton. Why bring him up. Get over the big bad Clinton already. He's not in office. He isn't hiding under your bed. He wont stick pins into an America VooDoo doll anymore. He's gone. He wont be president anymore. Get over Clinton.
  • Reply 39 of 41
    dmzdmz Posts: 5,775member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by faust9

    This thread isn't about Clinton. Why bring him up. Get over the big bad Clinton already. He's not in office. He isn't hiding under your bed. He wont stick pins into an America VooDoo doll anymore. He's gone. He wont be president anymore. Get over Clinton.





    Okay FINE!!



    FIIIIIINNNNNNE!!!





    Can I still rag on Jefferson?
  • Reply 40 of 41
    faust9faust9 Posts: 1,335member
    A good editorial about the discredited Donald Runsfeld.



    http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=...8-064124-9605r



    Tomorrow we'll see the beginning (well we wont se it but it will commence) of the first of the private fall guys. What they did was wrong. What is being done to them is also wrong, and I don't expect any of the "six" individuals to cow down and let the weight of Rumsfelds failures rest squarely on their shoulders. High ranking officers don't like watching their careers go down the drain by taking the blame for the failures of others. I expect the commanders and others higher up the food chain will start letting memo's and verbal directives be leaked to the media. So and so told me this was A-OK. Seymour Hersch is leading the pack of anti-Rumsfeld media and I'll bet dollars to doughnuts that another New Yorker article will grace us this coming week.



    The failed Iraq policy is weighing down Bush more each day. Rumsfeld will be canned soon (very soon) to try and shore up the bleeding polls. Rumsfeld will be the scape goat IMO. Soon, very soon.
Sign In or Register to comment.