Seattle Times headline: "Burns, Allen concede, sealing Dems Senate victory"
Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at November 09, 2006 01:41 PM | Email This
Talking, whining, carping, criticizing and complaining how badly someone else leads is a far different thing from standing up and being the leader.
The dems now have 729 days (leap year 2008) to prove how well they can lead... or not lead.
They won and now it's theirs to keep or to lose.
ps... do you suppose the GOP learned how to manipulate the filibuster or the threat of filibuster?
Nice work George.
Posted by: Unk on November 9, 2006 02:05 PMI still don't know why Rumsfield is thought poorly of.
Posted by: swatter on November 9, 2006 02:29 PM"There is no question but that they would be welcomed... Go back to Afghanistan, the people were in the streets playing music, cheering, flying kites, and doing all the things that the Taliban and the al-Qaeda would not let them do."
Rumsfield - Feb 20th, 2003
"the area... that coalition forces control... happens not to be the area where weapons of mass destruction were dispersed. We know where they are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat."
Rumsfield - Mar 30th, 2003
"Donald Rumsfeld is the most ruthless man I have ever met... and I mean that as a compliment."
Henry Kissinger
Note to self. Next time a Democrat loses by a few thousand votes Statewide do they concede or hire lawyers and count until they win.
Posted by: Marc on November 9, 2006 03:02 PMThe other 75% doesn't have a clue who Nancy Pelosi is. Neither would you if Rush, Sean, and Medhead hadn't spent the last 4 months demonizing her.
Time for you to get your head out of your rump and find out what's really going on instead of listening to your two talk radio stations.
Posted by: Unkl Witz on November 9, 2006 03:17 PMOnce again, you show yourself to be exceedingly ignorant, and stuck in 2003. Those problems were solved by 2004. I guess you would have complained about density of Sherman Tank armor in WWII as well. More new battlefield advancements have been developed and deployed in this conflict than any previous conflict.
Posted by: Cato, Schmato on November 9, 2006 03:51 PMThis is a war on terror. The enemy is sneaky (much like our Revolutionary Army against the Brits in the 1700s). Our army is not mobile, so it hunky, funky and downright slow moving and slow to adapt (much like the Brits in the 1700s).
I understand Rummy was trying to make our military more mobile and quicker to adapt, but he was being thwarted by the dinos (dinosaurs) in his military. I never realized it till a few months ago, but some or most of his generals grew up in the post-Vietnam days. They were used to the old way of doing business. If Rummy didn't have such problems with his generals (i.e. they couldn't think outside the box, nor were they trained to) I think things could have been better.
But, it takes time to adapt to changed conditions and I think the troops are great. In my mind, the actual US casualties are miniscule to what you would think they would be. Rummy and his dinos should be applauded for the work they do and did, even though they were slow to adapt.
Posted by: swatter on November 9, 2006 04:46 PMYes, it is a war on terror. I think he was thwarted by people with much more experience than he has running military operations.
Basically they blame him for:
1. The escalating problems that the US is facing in Iraq.
2. The current "Stop Loss" policy.
3. Lowered the standards for military recruits.
4. Being the person who instituted and continued the failing US policy in Iraq.
In my mind, the actual US casualties are miniscule to what you would think they would be.
2839 troops killed, 34,687 injured is minuscule?
Those are smoting offenses
Now under James Baker the Madrid false peace maker we are going to try to throw Israel under the bus (won't work buy the way).
We are definately going to get smote.
Posted by: Jericho on November 9, 2006 07:52 PMSo Unk what value do you have under your belief system? You are just 1 in 6.2 billion current sets of DNA. Any statistician will tell you that value is so small it is effectively nil. That is why tyrants don't mind killing the individual even by the thousands or millions.
However, under my belief system you are so valuable that God sent His only begotten Son to die for you. Infinite value is what you have. Now, whether you choose to accept that value and fill that void in your heart is up to you. A gift has no value unless it is opened and used.
Posted by: Jericho on November 9, 2006 08:26 PMNo void in my heart J, sorry to hear you have one.
Posted by: Unk on November 9, 2006 08:44 PMOh Ragnar I really hope for the benefit of OUR country that the Republican leadership(including the President & new SecDef) doesn't feel this way. Remember where that buck stops.
and this is seems obvious to me:
#22 "What the hell is a "war on terror"? Is that like a war on poverty? or a war on drugs? Terror is a tactic, not a country, nor a culture, nor an ethnic population, nor even an ideology. ..."
or a war on ignorance whereby attacking a selected undeveloped country will reduce ignorance? I guess perhaps it would... also ignores CAUSES of ignorance.
In my mind, the actual US casualties are miniscule to what you would think they would be.
2839 troops killed, 34,687 injured is minuscule?"
I can't disagree with the magazine comment, nor can you disagree with mine, so I will answer 1-4.
1. Escalating problems? Was it Rummy who pulls the dog off alSadr when they had the chance to run him out of town? Is he responsible for Iran? And if you 'really' talk to Iraqis and not the newspaper media, most of Iraq is doing better than it ever had. Same with more soldiers.
2. Want a draft? You already know what John Kerry, Rick Larsen and most of the Democrats think of the military. I don't like the idea, myself, of the National Guard spending so much time over there.
3. Those are pretty high standards to begin with, but what do you mean standards? Are they taking felons now? Or is this educational requirements?
What is it- 90% of the military are in support roles?
4. See 1 above. Also, I don't think we can brand it a 'failed' policy because we still have a chance. When the Democrats call for a pullout now that they are in power, then we can call it a 'failure'. This election brought out the nails and hammer on the coffin; it is a matter of time before we hammer the nails home and run home.
5. Yes, every death and injury is troubling, but the numbers are miniscule considering all that has happened. Adapt, adapt, adapt. It is difficult when the other side takes pleasure and encouragement from the out of power political party that calls for 'cut and run' and they aren't afraid to kill their own people.
On the notion that 3000 lost lives are somehow of miniscule scope, I am appalled. Every life is precious to some mother, father, brother, sister, friend, etc. Moreover, it is my reasoned opinion that these lost lives didn't have to be lost. Iraq was a strategic error made by a bunch of chicken hawks who lacked the courage to risk their own lives but had no problem risking those of others (and I explicitly include our cowboy President among the chicken hearted).
It is my fervent wish that President Bush is able to compromise his subborn ignorance and work with moderates in the other party to get us out of this unjustified, and unjustifiable, fiasco without too much more damage to our long term national security interests. The best thing about the recent election is that it allows us to revisit other policy alternatives than 'stay the course' and 'cut and run.'
Oh, and PC #18, in my many wanderings across the blogsphere, and in a lifetime of conversations across the political spectrum, I have found no evidence that the right has any claim to being better read or more thoughtful than the left. If anything, and to my repeated chagrin, just the opposite is more likely true.
Posted by: MJ on November 10, 2006 03:59 PMhttp://www.snopes.com/rumors/pershing.htm
Posted by: CandrewB on November 10, 2006 06:41 PM