Mickey Posted December 16, 2004 Posted December 16, 2004 Trent freaking Lott wants Rumsfeld out within the year. I can't believe my ears. Next you'll be telling me that Syria is on the UN Security Council. I suspect there must be something to like about Rummy that I have missed. If Trent Lott doesn't like him, chances are he has some redeeming qualities. Really, why is Rumsfeld the scapegoat of his own party all of a sudden? Are these pols starting to hear some grumbling from their constituents about the war? What is going on here? Misca, I am starting to feel sorry for Rumsfeld.
erynthered Posted December 16, 2004 Posted December 16, 2004 Trent freaking Lott wants Rumsfeld out within the year. I can't believe my ears. Next you'll be telling me that Syria is on the UN Security Council. I suspect there must be something to like about Rummy that I have missed. If Trent Lott doesn't like him, chances are he has some redeeming qualities. Really, why is Rumsfeld the scapegoat of his own party all of a sudden? Are these pols starting to hear some grumbling from their constituents about the war? What is going on here? Misca, I am starting to feel sorry for Rumsfeld. 163254[/snapback] So now Lott is credible, for you? Link?
DC Tom Posted December 17, 2004 Posted December 17, 2004 So now Lott is credible, for you? Link? 163372[/snapback] I think Mickey's attitude towards him is more akin to the blind squirrel theory.
Mickey Posted December 17, 2004 Author Posted December 17, 2004 So now Lott is credible, for you? Link? 163372[/snapback] Lott says Rumsfeld should go Credible in a reverse way. If he doesn't care for Rumsfeld, then Rummy must not be all bad.
erynthered Posted December 17, 2004 Posted December 17, 2004 Lott says Rumsfeld should go Credible in a reverse way. 163464[/snapback] Did someone hijack your sign in name? Credible in a reverse way? I suppose a jury would fall on their knees for that one. That was funny. Stay away from those bouncy avatars.
_BiB_ Posted December 17, 2004 Posted December 17, 2004 Rummy and the Wolf are going to have to pried out of there with crow bars. A lot of feathers have been ruffled over the past four years, and a lot more are going to get plucked. It's not the war that's at issue, is transformations within DoD.
blzrul Posted December 17, 2004 Posted December 17, 2004 Well according to the cons I heard interviewed this morning the issue is not merely Rummy's incompetence but arrogance. That from the right. No new revelations to the left however. He won't go before the "elections" 1/30.
_BiB_ Posted December 17, 2004 Posted December 17, 2004 Rumsfeld is arrogant, but not incompetent. There are a lot of transformational efforts going on changing the structure and operations of the DoD, for the better, and it's spilling a lot of rice bowls.
Buftex Posted December 17, 2004 Posted December 17, 2004 Partisan politics at their finest. None of these guys (Lott, McCain) would dare make any of these comments during the campaign season. Lott, who cares. McCain, I have lost a ton of respect for him. I thought he had a lot more integrity than he has displayed the last few months. It was one thing to support Bush (who tried to disgrace him in 2000), but another to so publicly kiss his ass during the campaign, all the while questioning his competence, and his staff. Now, they are all angling for 2008! Just imagine how much criticism McCain will get (some of it fair, some of it not) for talking out of bothe sides of his mouth (ala John Kerry), should he try to run for president in 2008.
Mickey Posted December 17, 2004 Author Posted December 17, 2004 Partisan politics at their finest. None of these guys (Lott, McCain) would dare make any of these comments during the campaign season. Lott, who cares. McCain, I have lost a ton of respect for him. I thought he had a lot more integrity than he has displayed the last few months. It was one thing to support Bush (who tried to disgrace him in 2000), but another to so publicly kiss his ass during the campaign, all the while questioning his competence, and his staff. Now, they are all angling for 2008! Just imagine how much criticism McCain will get (some of it fair, some of it not) for talking out of bothe sides of his mouth (ala John Kerry), should he try to run for president in 2008. 164249[/snapback] Yeah, he was for the President but against all of his decisions, his policies and his advisers. Other than those details, he was pro-Bush all the way.
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted December 17, 2004 Posted December 17, 2004 Yeah, he was for the President but against all of his decisions, his policies and his advisers. Other than those details, he was pro-Bush all the way. 164332[/snapback] Which is why McCain will never win the Republican nomination. I wish Colin Powell would run. How could the Dimocrats sell that THEY are the party of African Americans when the Repubs would put an African-American up for the nomination? It would be veeeery interesting to see Move On spin that little doozy.
DC Tom Posted December 17, 2004 Posted December 17, 2004 Which is why McCain will never win the Republican nomination. I wish Colin Powell would run. How could the Dimocrats sell that THEY are the party of African Americans when the Repubs would put an African-American up for the nomination? It would be veeeery interesting to see Move On spin that little doozy. 164437[/snapback] I think the argument would be cast along the lines of Colin Powell not being a "real" African American, but an "Uncle Tom"...
John Adams Posted December 17, 2004 Posted December 17, 2004 Which is why McCain will never win the Republican nomination. I wish Colin Powell would run. How could the Dimocrats sell that THEY are the party of African Americans when the Repubs would put an African-American up for the nomination? It would be veeeery interesting to see Move On spin that little doozy. 164437[/snapback] If he ran, the Dems would just keep playing that silly affair where he showed "evidence" of Iraqi WMD to the UN. I was so ashamed for him that day.
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted December 17, 2004 Posted December 17, 2004 If he ran, the Dems would just keep playing that silly affair where he showed "evidence" of Iraqi WMD to the UN. I was so ashamed for him that day. 164606[/snapback] The Dims could do that, and they'd lose on it. Why? The same intel burned the Brits and the rest of the world for that matter. Or, if you think like I do, the WMDs are in Syria.
_BiB_ Posted December 17, 2004 Posted December 17, 2004 If he ran, the Dems would just keep playing that silly affair where he showed "evidence" of Iraqi WMD to the UN. I was so ashamed for him that day. 164606[/snapback] I think they could play that one down. He was just the messenger. Doesn't matter-Powell will never, ever, run. Condi Rice is African american too, and might be the only shot at beating Hillary.
PastaJoe Posted December 17, 2004 Posted December 17, 2004 It will be very difficult to have a mixed race ticket. Like Chris Rock said, if you had a black VP, there'd be a brother out there who would be willing to do what it takes to make him president, and he'd end up being a king in prison. Same thing if you had a black Prez, then it would be the skinheads doing it.
_BiB_ Posted December 17, 2004 Posted December 17, 2004 I don't think it's any secret that Hillary is going to get the Democratic nod. The Clinton's control the money, and 80% of the party. If Condoleeza Rice can do something noteworthy enough for people to consider her qualified, she's the only logical Republican choice to trump not only the female candidate, but any race issues the Dems might want to bring to the table as well. As far as a woman president, no one would have a choice. You're getting one. Powell will not run, nor be on the ticket because if he does, his wife will walk. Fortunately, he is a good man that has his priorities in order.
Mickey Posted December 17, 2004 Author Posted December 17, 2004 Which is why McCain will never win the Republican nomination. I wish Colin Powell would run. How could the Dimocrats sell that THEY are the party of African Americans when the Repubs would put an African-American up for the nomination? It would be veeeery interesting to see Move On spin that little doozy. 164437[/snapback] Why do you think Powell would get the nomination? He was also pretty clearly not on board with many of Bush's policies and simply played the good soldier until he could honorably get the eff out of that administration which he did at the first opportunity. Let me understand this logic, you can't be the party of African Americans unless you run one for President? Hmmm. I am going to go out on a limb here and say that if any party can be the one to claim that it is the party of African Americans, it would be the party that African Americans overwhelmingly support, in numbers that are so one sided it is embarassing, regardless of the color of the skin of their candidate. That would make sense wouldn't it, that the party they support is "their" party? See? I am just full of crazy, whacky ideas. We christ hating, troop disrespecting pagans are like that.
Mickey Posted December 17, 2004 Author Posted December 17, 2004 I think they could play that one down. He was just the messenger. Doesn't matter-Powell will never, ever, run. Condi Rice is African american too, and might be the only shot at beating Hillary. 164717[/snapback] Misca, why are you guys so worried about Hillary? Unbeatable? I don't think she could win diddly and I actually like her.
Buftex Posted December 17, 2004 Posted December 17, 2004 I don't think it's any secret that Hillary is going to get the Democratic nod. The Clinton's control the money, and 80% of the party. If Condoleeza Rice can do something noteworthy enough for people to consider her qualified, she's the only logical Republican choice to trump not only the female candidate, but any race issues the Dems might want to bring to the table as well. As far as a woman president, no one would have a choice. You're getting one. Powell will not run, nor be on the ticket because if he does, his wife will walk. Fortunately, he is a good man that has his priorities in order. 164791[/snapback] I seriously doubt that Hillary will be the next Democratic nominee, as the right keeps insisting. Also, all this "if Powell were the nominee, the Dims would have a hard time trumping up the race card, or if Condi does anything worthwhile she would be able to shut up all those who say the Repos' are racist and sexist" is laugh out loud hilarious. Until Rice or Powell are actually nominated (and nothing Condi has done so far makes her a worthy candidate, other than the tiresome cliche about her playing classical music, and wanting to be the NFL commissioner some day), you have no argument. "When" or "if" rarely count as much!
Recommended Posts