Wonderful news on the day after the election — Donald Rumsfeld is gone! A couple or three years late, but it’s done.
Does this mean that the president is ready to stop his stubborn stance of "I’m never wrong" and "personal loyalty trumps the national interest?"
It would seem so. And that would be the best news of all. This sends a signal to the country, to the troops, to our erstwhile allies, and most importantly to the enemy, that the United States is ready to get serious, finally.
At least, I hope and pray so.
Related Posts
Good news indeed!! With 300,000 trained Iraqi soldiers (according to Congressman Joe Wilson), it’s time that we acknowledge our job is nearly complete and that the Iraqi army is now capable of standing up so we can stand down. Rumsfeld’s departure, along with the U.S. elections makes the timing perfect.
My plan for victory is simple. Pick an Iraqi province and announce a time table that the Iraq army must provide 100% of it’s security. At the end of that time we remove our troops, regardless of the situation as it exists, then move on to the next province. As an incentive we can suggest a comprehensive solution to the sectarian violence that would allow for 3 autonomous states (Sunni, Shiite and Kurd). Bring neighboring countries into the discussions and involve the UN. Everybody wins.
Too many Democrats don’t care about our job being complete in the war on terrorism. They just want that defense money to be spent on handouts for themselves. To hell with the future. They are betting the holocaust won’t hit while they are looting the treasury.
The NYT is having a free access week to their
Times Select content.Freidman has a pretty good piece today about our choices in Iraq and he doesn’t sound too gung-ho about them.
With the exception of Great Britain, European nations have demonstrated their lack of the will do what is necessary to defeat our enemy. Moreover they’ve demonstrated that they will turn against us anytime it suits their individual interests, either for monetary (oil-for-food) or national gain. To depend on them is foolish. The UN is ridiculously and hopelessly inept, ineffectual and corrupt, again we’d be fools to depend upon them. The track we were on, I think, was the right one…determine to win and do it alone if necessary. Rumsfeld was the perfect Defense Secretary to do exactly that under these circumstances. However, the american people have spoken, and I believe they’ve made a tremendous mistake. Now the President has determined to give them Donald Rumsfeld as a token of victory. This is a sad day. The President has made a terrible error also. Time will tell. Ed
Democrates looting the Treaury? I thought Haliburton had already done that.
Bill, I find myself wondering what Friedman would have written yesterday (which is when he wrote that) if he’d known how fast Rumsfeld would be gone…
Brad,I don’t think our choices have changed just because Rumsfeld is gone.Too little,too late,the damage has been done and it is irreparable.
Rumsfeld was the perfect Defense Secretary to do exactly that under these circumstances. However, the american people have spoken, and I believe they’ve made a tremendous mistake. – Ed
Do you believe the war has gone well? Do you think it’s improving? EVERYONE except W, Cheney, and Don think not. The mistake made was, as bill suggests, waiting so long for the Donster to go.
Brad, I don’t see how this war is winnable at this point.
Randy, it is certainly winnable if you just nominate a retread Iran/Contra criminal to run it. Why didn’t we think of that?
Preston,You beat me to the punch,but here,from “Wonkette:The D.C.Gossip”
How twisted is this country? An Iran-Contra crook and ex-CIA chief is immediately greeted as a sane, grown-up yet “fresh” replacement for the delusional old Donald Rumsfeld.
Even more fun, Gates’ nemesis Daniel Ortega was elected president of Nicaragua on Monday. You may remember Ortega as the Sandinista leader who fought off the Contras in a long bloody “civil war” in large part engineered by … Oliver North, William Casey and deputy CIA director Robert M. Gates, among others. North, a convicted felon and official fall guy for Iran-Contra, was in Nicaragua last week campaigning against Ortega.
History doesn’t just repeat itself; it repeats itself with the same exact people.
Daniel Ortega and his brother were puppets of Castro and the USSR, who double-crossed the other groups after they collaborated to topple the Nicaraguan dictator Somoza. They proceeded to confiscate ranches and businesses, live high like Castro while the peasants starved, and tried to exterminate the indigenous natives in order to steal their land to clear it for coffee plantations.
Democrats treated them like celebrities when they came to visit the UN.
Anti-American then, anti-American now.
“and tried to exterminate the indigenous natives in order to steal their land to clear it for coffee plantations.” Sounds familiar…
Didn’t something like that minus the coffee happen once upon a time here in the good ole U.S. of A?
Lots of primitive people have been robbed and exterminated by more technologically advanced peoples. Mexico, Central and South America have endured a lot of that from the Spanish and Portugese. That doesn’t mean it’s now okay for the communists to get their turn.
Reagan realized that.
Socialists don’t care whom they trample in order to acquire more material wealth, and the Democratic Party is full of socialists.
Newsflash Lee– the Republicans lost at the national level. Get over it. Your voice is no longer relevent at the national level. Go tell Andre what you think… he might care, but I don’t.
Randy, we must win. If, as you think, we are doomed to fail, what in your view is our future going to look like? Burkas and prayer rugs? Do I think the war is going well? Yes, as a matter of fact I do. The mainstream, heirloom media (of which Brad is part and parcel) has done its’ level best to so distort and contort any news reported about the war (in order to dishearten americans and weaken their will to win…or vote for republicans) that we never get the real picture. Further, do you not have any historical perspective whatsoever? I am glad folk like you and the other cut-and-runners weren’t around in WWII. In that war we lost sometimes thousands of men a day, but we knew then that losing wasn’t an option, and we determined to win whatever the cost. Sadly, people today are young enough and self-absorbed enough and unthreatened enough that there is no real resolve to win at any cost. Sometimes I wish we were fighting the war here and not there…the american psyche would change and we could become relentless, remorseless, fearless and totally committed. Those today who lose loved ones or have loved ones deployed in harms’ way have a real sense that there is a no-sh*t war going on…the rest of us seem to be willing to dither and and argue around the margins like you do. I think this is one of the greatest dangers we face. Complacency within. Ed
Rumsfeld waits until the election is over to leave????? People have been frustrated with him, with the war, for months…and NOW he leaves?
If I was a Republican who just lost my seat because of the war etc. I would literally be furious about this! How many Republicans might still be around if this had happened 3 months ago??????
WOW….
Chris, I agree, but for different reasons. I don’t think Rummy should have been sacked period, but given that this was something we now know was being discussed for sometime among the President and his men, why not finesse this and do it early on, rather than now when it clearly has great potential to affect troop morale negatively? By finesse, I mean it could have been done 4 months ago and made to look more natural, like a retirement or something. What’s been done in the last 24 hours just looks like a cave, and it is certainly not going to send the right message to women and men that are getting shot at tonight. IN any case, I got the idea from todays’ news conference that the President sees his role in light of the election results to give in to the loonytoon left on a lot of things that were strict non-negotiables as little as 72 hours ago. Ed
Ed, yes, you could be right. The Iraq war could be going great, and the American people could just be hallucinating when they think that we have lost 2839 soldiers.
Or, you could just be stupid.
Of course, for you the war IS going great, because you don’t contribute to it in any way, you don’t make any sacrifices for it, you don’t pay for it, you don’t do anything except sit on your sofa accusing others of being cowards because they don’t want to lose any more of our soldiers.
A willingness for OTHER people to die doesn’t make you brave.
Ed, believing that we “must win the war” and the reality of this actually happening may very well be mutually exclusive.
Turning a blind eye to this while knee-capping my patriotism because I dare suggest the war is not going well is the rhetoric and rationale which resulted in the big fat crow W ate today (while kicking The Donald to the curb).
Blaming the mainstream media for the problems in Iraq has proven ineffective and misguided. The GENERALS are reporting on their own how poorly the war is going. Cheney retracted his remark that the insurgents are “in their last throes”. W admitted “things are not going as well as I would like” – this coming from a bulldog who took 5 years to admit a single mistake. The acts of violence and US deaths has increased significantly.
BTW Ed, would you please explain who we are battling? This is a war against whom? Think before you answer this…
The Cut-and-Run crowd is certainly present here, already demanding surrender and a speedy diversion of defense spending into their troughs. Oink, oink.
It’s a safe bet what the national Democrats will do on every issue:
* Stay the course in Iraq. They want to reduce military spending, but they know a pullout is ridiculous. After all, they started this war in 1998.
* Try to enlarge the deficit spending. John Kerry’s 2004 platform called for $1.7 TRILLION in extra spending, and no Democrats have dropped any support for it since then.
* Homeland Security will remain. After all, it was first proposed by Clinton and the Democrats and only passed in a rush after Sept 11.
* Lots of show legislation that will not pass, to show the radical base that they are trying:
– Amnesty for illegal aliens
– Spending for stem cell research
– Homosexual marriage legislation
– Gun control
– Groveling to North Korea and Red China
Brad, I’m happy for you that Lieberman won. But your analysis that the Connecticut race means Americans think we’re going to go on to “win” this war is, I think, way off the mark and represents wishful thinking on your part. It ignores the many House seats and other Senate seats won by Democrats who, while not necessarily advocating instant withdrawal from Iraq, still by and large endorsed a much quicker pace of bringing American troops home. You’re conveniently forgetting that. Certainly the idea of ADDING troops to “win” the war is completely off the table now. And most all the Democrats who unseated Republicans embrace the majority American view that it was a mistake to intervene militarily in Iraq. But the reality of an impending responsibility as the majority in Congress will temper the “withdraw immediately” impulse of a few Democrats, in favor of truly understanding the Powell “you break it, you own it” Doctrine that we have to find some kind of middle way out.
The Gates appointment (his old CIA-contra war associations notwithstanding) and the bated breath with which everyone of both parties seems to be awaiting the Baker-Hamilton report is fascinating, in that it really speaks to the decline of the neocons and the return of the pragmatist, Scowcroft/Baker/George HW Bush wing of the Republican party.
The era of brazen distortion of facts, and bold assertion of inaccurate premises to advance desired goals (exemplified by “Ed” above, who seems to think that if we hadn’t “done” Iraq, we’d all be wearing burkas…as if Iraqis had ever attacked us) is over. We certainly won’t withdraw from Iraq the day after congressional inaugurations. But things will go in that direction, and there will be no “winning” the war in Iraq as you, Brad, once envisioned. However, we will “win” in the sense that we will deal with this mistake in the best ways left to us, bringing American troops home sooner rather than later, saving American lives, and reallocating our resources towards real and more immediate threats.
You could write an opera on this storyline…the son who becomes leader (and inherently does not have the strength of character nor the intelligence of the father) seeks desperately to carve out his own niche by not following his father’s path. Gets his way for awhile. Boldness is revealed instead to be obstinacy, foolhardiness. Once embraced by the people, they turn their backs on him once they start to ask for what reason their sons and daughters are dying. Sheepishly has to bring back the courtiers to the father, the grownups, to help fix the mess he has made.
Ed writes:
“Do I think the war is going well? Yes, as a matter of fact I do.”
Ed, I’ll ask you the same question I asked Lee. First, let me set the record straigt, the war is going very badly. And Rummy is largely to blame. American deaths are up, injuries are up. Sectarian violence is up. Government corruption is up. Contractor corruption is up. Electricity availability is down. Clean water is down. Construction projects are stalled. Our allies are leaving in droves. So it is clear things are not going well. In fact, the main stream media is actually minimizing just how awful it is.
So given that ALL the evidence suggests the war is going badly why do you believe it’s going well? Are you on drugs? Are you hallucinating? Do you believe it’s going badly but just enjoy pulling liberals’ chain? Do you live in a parallel universe where the war is actually going well? Do you just want to believe it’s going well and can’t accept the truth based on facts?
Too bad it’s 2 years too late but at least it has finally dawned on most Americans that its time for a new direction. We’re probably stuck for the next 2 years in this hopeless quagmire that’s making us less safe but at least there is a glimmer of hope now with the Dems in charge of congress.
bud and his ilk have been crying about “the war going badly” since day one. They cite no facts, just endless allegations. Liberalism is so easy. No intellectual effort required.
Meanwhile, radical Muslims armed by Clinton are burning out all the Jews and Christians in Kosovo, but you don’t hear a word about any of the Democrat adventures going badly.
Lee, ask Joe Wilson, Jim deMint, Lindsay Graham and Bush why Kosovo isn’t fixed. CLinton is long gone man. They are the ones who are relevant to you now.
Kosovo isn’t fixed for the same reason Iraq, Bosnia, Lebanon, Iran, North Korea and the rest of the problems ignored or messed up by Clinton are still not fixed. It’s a lot of work to undo 8 years of neglect.
Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, and North Korea harbor terrorists which were attacking Americans, so we have to clean them out.
Serbia, Kosovo and Bosnia were no direct interest to America, just something Clinton thought he could handle. He couldn’t.
I don’t think I could get through the day without a good laugh and Lee never fails to come through. Everything foreign policy arena has gotten worse over the past six years yet it’s Clinton’s fault. LOL.
Clinton is just one of many bumbling socialist Democrats
Jose Luis Rodriquez Zapatero, leader of the Spanish Socialist Party and victor in the recent national elections, has given his endorsement to John Kerry’s campaign.
http://www.command-post.org/2004/2_archives/cat_kerry.html
Kerry’s campaign for what? That shows how much you and Zapatero know about US politics.
Lee, why are you just constantly on about socialism? Where would you and the rest of the residents of conservative states be if it weren’t for the “socialist” handouts and subsidies that keep your economy from collapsing and keep you from starving to death? What would happen to South Carolina if its economy depended on the initiative and industry of its citizens, rather than handouts collected from taxes paid by residents of states like Massachusetts and California?
I don’t mind that I have to pay extra taxes to keep you from starving. But sheesh, how about a little gratitude?
Preston, are you unaware that John Kerry, lifelong socialist and millionaire gigolo, was the Democrat’s nominee for President in 2004? Even the socialists in Europe knew that!
He is just one of many top Democrats who began their political careers as communist and socialist activists. Socialism is a reactionary, anti-intellectual attitude, so it attracts the dregs.
Your post said Zapatero just endorsed him. It’s 2006 you friggin idiot!
I can’t find the word “just endorsed” in my post. Maybe you have Randy’s Syndrome, where you imagine straw men when you can’t address the reality.
Of course, socialist Democrats would be thrilled to see other socialists supporting their candidates. All enemies of America in one big happy hate-fest.
Lee, “leader of the Spanish Socialist Party and victor in the recent national elections, has given his endorsement to John Kerry’s campaign.” Notice the word “recent”. I believe that I was paraphrasing your quote. Again, it is 2006, not 2004. Move on.
Anyone: who are we fighting in Iraq? Insurgents? Baathists? This is a war against whom?
The cut and run crowd now has the Congress so lets see how they plan to protect the nation from terrorists. Starters – repeal the Patriot Act, end surveillance of terrorists, pay Iran and N. Korea to (wink) NOT develop nuclear, and the list goes on.
You are referring to the COUNTRY Dave? The MAJORITY of voters who do not want to stay the course?
The quagmire that has resulted in Iraq has put NK and Iran in a much safer position to pursue the WMD which Iraq did NOT have.
If you want really recent endorsements of the Democrats by socialists, just look at the cheering by European socialists for this week’s election. There are over 200 of them in the Socialist Caucus of the EU Parliament, cheering for Democrats. Go read some Euro newspapers.
50 years ago, last election, last week – the Democrats are in lockstep with European socialists, and out of step with American values.
Just look at how many Democrats there are in the Socialist Caucus in our Congress, and how many of them are members of the international Democratic Socialist Alliance, a group of politicians from all nations, united to subvert nationalism to a world socialist dictatorship.
Democratic Socialists of America used to host Pelosi’s “Progressive Caucus” website. They cleaned it up after it was discovered by us riff raff in 1999, and removed the WAV files of communist songs and pictures of Castro, but they are still committed socialists of the Democratic Party.
http://www.dsausa.org/dsa.html
Define “win”.
What are the absolute goals that must be
achieved in order to declare victory?
Does winning mean democratic elections?
a constitution that supports freedom of religion? McDonalds and Starbucks in Baghdad?
There is no winning here. Just shifting radicalism from a tyrant to a larger bunch of fanatics. If we left today, the threat to the U.S. would not increase a single fraction of an iota.
We should be fighting terrorists who threaten the U.S., not participating in an internal religious battle.
Lee: “Socialism is a reactionary, anti-intellectual attitude, so it attracts the dregs.”
Church Fathers:
“Thou shalt not turn away from him that is in want, but thou shalt share all things with thy brother, and shalt not say that they are thine own.” — The Didache
“Therefore all things are common; and let not the rich claim more than the rest. To say therefore ‘I have more than I need, why not enjoy?’ is neither human nor proper.”; — St. Clement of Alexandria
“From those things that God gave you, take that which you need, but the rest, which to you are superfluous, are necessary to others. The superfluous goods of the rich are necessary to the poor, and when you possess the superfluous you possess what is not yours.”; — St. Augustine
“If one who takes the clothing off another is a thief, why give any other name to one who can clothe the naked and refuses to do so? The bread that you withhold belongs to the poor; the cape that you hide in your chest belongs to the naked; the shoes rotting in your house belong to those who must go unshod.”; — St. Basil
“The rich have that which belongs to the poor, even though they may have received it as an inheritance, no matter whence their money comes.”; — St. John Chrysostom
“When you give to the poor, you give not of your own, but simply return what is his, for you have usurped that which is common and has been given for the common use of all. The land belongs to all, not to the rich; and yet those who are deprived of its use are many more than those who enjoy it.”; — St. Ambrose.
Amen Mark. This is the part the Christian Right ignores.
I am very hopeful Pelosi and company get the minimum wage increased because of my belief in what you posted.
Randy, Never fear, the Democrats are bringing George McGovern out of mothballs to plan the Iraq surrender strategy. What next, Nancy Pelosi can give Kim Jung an autographed Steve Spurrier football?
You know Randy, I really appreciate you taking time to contribute and many times I happen to agree with your views also. One aspect of the election that especially makes me happy is how so many Evangelicals, former democrats, and young people decided to vote for change. It’s one of the best things that I have ever seen happen to this country. Let’s make sure that the above mentioned folks continue to have a voice. The “Welcome” mat is out!
Dave, raising the minimum wage is contrary to your Christian beliefs?
Your strong interest in the war is surely grounded in a well thought out plan which I’d like to understand.
Exactly what is our plan for winning this war? We are waiting for the Iraqis to stand up? Until they take control of their own country, we are to pay the price of their liberty with more American blood? We will pay this price for the next 10 years if necessary?
You claim Rummey has done a heckuva job. This would indicate you believe the war has gone well. You believe this despite the mounting evidence to the contrary?
Exactly who is this a war against? Insurgents? Baathists? Sadr? You compared this war to the war against Japan so certainly you can outline exactly who the enemy is.
Mark, I hope this election was a vitory for the center and for nonpartisanship. Unfortunately, W is already pushing more of his narrow agenda and Rangel (spelling?) made a stupid comment about Mississippi. Waxman and Biden are also yammering about oversight hearings.
From what I understand, Pelosi is very smart. My hope is she sticks to the constructive issues like minimum wage, cost of college and prescription drugs. I’m also eager to have transparency on the whole secretive energy program. I like the efforts to take care of the poor, the elderly, and the environment. Good Christian ideals that most Christians would appreciate (as well as nonChristians).
Randy, your spelling of “Rangel” is right. And what he said is true, Mississippi does get a lot more out of the federal treasury than they put in. One thing the Republicans made a concerted effort to do is to direct federal spending to Republican states at the expense of Democratic states as much as they could. Now, I understand that places like Mississippi and South Carolina can’t actually survive without federal subsidies, so they’re going to have to continue taking more out than they put in. But there can at least be a rebalancing where possible, like in Homeland Security. Places like New York New Jersey, and California should get a lot more Homeland Security money than they’re getting now, because they have bigger populations, as well as more, and more important, potential targets. Homeland Security should be about homeland security, not a way to funnel money to Republican states.
And let’s face it, who DOES want to live in Mississippi? And put it in context, this came from a guy who must have heard hundreds or thousands of smears against New York over the course of his career, many of which were no doubt from people in Mississippi. Mississippi shouldn’t take federal subsidies, mock and deride the people that are paying for the subsidies, and whine and moan when one of the people they have derided for so long decides to have a little fun himself.
And as for Waxman’s and Biden’s (and Conyers’s) “yammering” about hearings and oversight, that is a Constitutional responsibility of the Congress. There has NEVER been a Congress that exerted less responsibility over the executive than this one, and that is why you get all this crazy stuff coming out of the White House about the Unitary Executive, and the inherent power of the president, and all these signing statements and things. This has to stop, and the American people want it to stop. The American people want investigations into the more egregious wrongdoing of the Bush administration.
The Democrats got 53% of the House vote. 53% is twice the margin Bush claimed as a “mandate” in 2004. The Republicans have managed redistricting to favor themselves, but there was still a Democratic blowout.
This was not a victory for nonpartisanship. How could it be? When one party blows out the other, it’s NOT a victory for nonpartisanship. It’s not a victory for the kind of bitter partisanship the Republicans have engaged in, but it’s a victory for the Democratic agenda.
It is a victory for centrism, because the American center is pretty well aligned with the Democrats. But the center is way, way to the left probably of what anybody from South Carolina thinks of as the center. It’s certainly not a victory for centrism in the sense that the “center” is thought os the point equidistant between two opposing positions.
For example, take the KKK, Warthen, NAACP position on whether black people should be allowed to vote. The Klan takes the position that black people who try to vote should be murdered, the NAACP takes the position that black people have the same voting rights as anybody else, and Warthen takes the position that it is OK to put up innumerable obstacles in the way of collecting and counting the votes of black people that are not put in the way of collecting and counting the votes of white people.
Warthen’s position is not “centrist,” even though it is “between” the KKK and NAACP positions. The NAACP position on this issue is centrist, because it is aligned with what the vast majority of the American people believe, and with the founding ideals of America (as articularted at the time of the founding, although not actually practiced at that time).
Mary, the money diverted to Trent “Dixiecrat” Lott’s state and Rangel making a stupid comment about this state are mutually exclusive.
I don’t care if he heard a million disparaging remarks about NY from Mississippians, a public servant in the US congress shouldn’t say something like that – even if it were true.
It’s especially stupid when they have real issues to deal with. The dems have to establish some credibility with the moderates and independents for the ’08 election. Remarks like that don’t help the dems.
Randy, the Democrats won the cumulative vote in the House by 53% to 48%. They won the cumulative Senate vote by 7 million votes, or about 11%. They did this by blasting out the Republicans in the independent vote. The Democrats HAVE won credibility with the moderates and independents by running on platforms and issues in tune with what the voters wanted.
What are they supposed to do, tell the people that voted for them, no, we won’t investigate the White House like you wanted, we won’t work for more accessible health care, higher wages, a tax structure that requires the wealthy to pay their fair share, because we have to achieve a position midway between what we want and what the Republicans want? No, the Democrats should do what the American people want, and not be misled into thinking that a “moderate” position is always a “middle” position. EVERY pair of viewpoints has a “middle” position between them. That doesn’t make the “middle” position moderate.
The Democrats lost in the past by blurring the differences between themselves and the Republicans. They won this time by drawing clear distinctions between themselves and the Republicans. The Democrats ARE in the mainstream. The Republicans are NOT.
You think the vote was a mandate for the democrats? You’re sounding like W in 04 claiming the vote provided political capital.
I have serious doubts the public wants a rash of subpoenas. Yes, the far left wants to cut W’s butt and there has to be accountability. BUT, investigations into everything the GOP has done is counterproductive.
Selective investigations along with pushing the minimum wage, prescription drugs, college funding, and reconsituting the taxes on the wealthy is the way to go.
And Mary, make no mistake, I take great glee in the great 06 beat down.
I love all this post election analysis. First, mid term elections usually trend to the party out of power. The Democrat takeover was based on a razor thin margin so its not a mandate or a trend for Democrats. In fact, as Brad said, most of the Dems who won were conservative so in some respects Congress is now more conservative or right leaning. The GOP was damaged, just as the Catholic Church was, by a few queers who were outed by the Democrats. I want all queers, who practice their preference, OUT of the Republican party. They are like a ball and chain on a party with high standards. The Iraq war was a real negative given that many many Americans have lost any stomach to defend their liberties. They would rather watch Grey’s Anatomy or Deal/No Deal while the radical Muslims plan to slaughter them as soon as they can. If that doesn’t change, more 9-11s are in the future.
Dave apparently isn’t wearing his WWJD bracelet.
I guess in the King Dave translation of the Bible, the second commandment of loving our neighbor as ourselves has the qualifier: unless they are “queers” “whores” or democrats.
Randy, no one is going to go crazy with investigations; from the way you talk, I would say that the level of investigations that I see happening is about what you want. And all this other stuff you want, I see that as a high priority. But what absolutely stunned me is how far left on the economy and labor-business relations some of these “conservative” Democrats are. You talk about prescription drugs, college funding, re-examination of taxes, minimum wage, all this stuff is going to have a high, high priority. But those aren’t “moderate” positions as hacks like Broder and Warthen define “moderate”. They are mainstream American position, but to the cocktail weenie set, they’re raving left positions.
And I would say that we should, and probably will, go beyond prescription drugs to a look at health care overall.
But the underlying philosphy of Webb, in particular, and a lot of these other people, goes beyond specific economic proposals to an examination of fundamental economic fairness, and how the economy should be strucured to achieve such fairness. That’s the sort of thing the hack press calls “class warfare.” But it isn’t, it’s mainstream. This is what’s on the minds of a lot of people, and paying attention to these issues is what’s going to keep the Democratic party dominant for years into the future, while the Republican Party’s hate-filled screeds are going to keep them more and more marginalized as a southern party.
Dave, the Democrats got 53% of the overall House vote, and won the overall Senate vote by more than 11%. That’s not a razor-thin margin; it’s a blowout.
And Warthen said that most of the Democrats who won are conservative, but Warthen’s stupid and dishonest, and what he said isn’t true. Similarly, you are stupid and dishonest, and your claim that most of the Democrats who won are conservative is equally untrue.
Mark, what point were you trying to make with that conglomeration of religious opinions about money? Try to say it in your own words.
I don’t think anything you posted contradicted the fact that socialism is a reactionary movement trying to turn back progress and individual liberty released by free markets. Capitalism has created huge amounts of wealth funding charities on a scale unimagined by 18th century clerics.
Lee,
I’m going to give you the benefit of the doubt by assuming that you do in fact understand that the Church Fathers were not eighteenth century clerics.
Upon even a cursory inspection of the Gospels, one may find many statements and teachings of Jesus that are consistent with what we now call socialism (not communism) and democracy. Jesus made virtually no statements that are consistent with capitalism. Jesus made many admonitions against the greed and usery that became the basis for capitalism. A form of capitalism (minus scientific divisions of labor) existed during Jesus’ time on earth as well as during the time of the later Church Fathers. The Church Fathers made statements supporting what we now call socialism based on the teachings of Jesus Christ. Capitalism is antithetical to the teachings of Jesus, and therefore to Christianity-it’s that simple.
Lee, we do understand that the modern industrial society is capable of sustaining charity on a very large scale. That’s how the conservative South survives, on the charity of liberals.
And Mark, the Christian right conveniently overlooks that part of His teaching.
Randy, you can love them and pray for them but that doesnt mean you want them in your political camp. The Dems can have all practicing gays and whores, do we have a Deal or No Deal here?
Socialism is incapable of charity on any level, because it teaches that it is not the right of the individual to decide who needs what or how much – that is the province of the almighty State.
While Christians believe that all blessings proceed from God, socialism teaches that all wealth belongs to the State, and that those who call themselves “the state” will confiscate wealth “from each according to his ability” and hand it out “to each according to his need”.
That sorry philosophy is still a lofty goal which no socialist government on any scale has even tried to achieve.
Folks, we need to remember that election results aren’t going to change the way Lee chants the John Birch litany about socialism. Let’s move on past this.
The Democrat takeover was based on a razor thin margin so its not a mandate or a trend for Democrats.
There were 33 senate races this past Tuesday. The score was Dem 22, GOP – 9 and Ind – 2 (both Inds pledge to caucus with the Dems)
In the House, in spite of gerrymandering, the Dems have about a 30 seat margin.
In the Governors races the Dems outnumber the GOP 28 – 22, exactly the reverse of what it was.
This is not a razor thin victory but nearly a landslide.
Will there be a dramatic shift to the left? Probably not. But some things are safe for now. We won’t see private SS accounts. We will begin (finally) a serious dialogue on Iraq. John Bolten probably won’t be confirmed. That may lead to some international help with our various foreign policy disasters. We won’t be talking flag burning or abortion ban constitutional ammendments any time soon. No more destruction of the constitution with over-the-top legislation such as the infamous USA-PATRIOT act.
What really happened on Nov 7 was a sharp rebuke of the outrageous far-right conservative movement that has threatened the very fabric of the nation. And that is a very good thing, well worth celebrating.
Gordy isn’t going to be able to dispute the fact that socialism hates charity, so he might as well seek another thread.
“The Dems can have all practicing gays and whores, do we have a Deal or No Deal here?” – Dave
Any woman having sex out of wedlock fits your definition of a “whore” (interesting how you only apply that standard to woman). Your true colors are radianting for all to see.
Your asinine proposal that America be divided along sexual orientation and practice is a sad reflection on the faith you claim.
Randy, try to address the real arguments made here, instead of the straw men (and women) you have to construct.
Sexual orientation is not a problem for anyone but the disoriented ones. It only becomes a social problem when they act out their abnormal thoughts.
Randy, I agree with Lee, what does sex have to do with it. Although, I have to say that der Slickmeister Clinton qualified in the male whore category. I think he taught the Dem party all about premature withdrawal too, at least that’s what Monica claimed. Maybe that is the Clinton legacy, PW in Mogadishu, with Monica, and now the legacy may be sustained if the Dems get their way on Iraq. Interesting.
Dave, you brought up “whores” and “queers”, which explicitly deals with sex. Somehow you only associate the issue of sex with faith.
You also continue to obsess with Clinton. He’s been out of office for six years. Focus on this new democratic congress and the reconstitution of 41’s staff to save 43. Those are the real issues.
Bill Clinton is the head of the Democratic Party right now. His corrupt administration is idolized as the Second Camelot by Democrats who resent our soldiers receiving the money they wanted handed out to themselves.
Bill Clinton is bad. Bill Clinton is evil! He’s waiting in my closet right now I think, and if I turn out the lights he’ll JUMP OUT AND GET US ALL!
That’s just your skeletons Phil.
We just don’t take people seriously if they make excuses for Bill Clinton’s cocaine abuse, draft dodging, rapes, and taking bribes.
Actually, Lee, we don’t take suckers seriously who actually believe the lies about Clinton that you regurgitate routinely.
I only listed a few of the items to which Bill Clinton has admitted or to which multiple eyewitnesses have sworn under oath. Over 70 Clinton staffers went to prison for accepting bribes for Bill, Hillary or Al Gore.
The good news is that if any of the 70 Clinton staffers are still in jail come 2009 President (Hillary) Clinton can give them a pardon.
You mean SELL them a pardon.
Factual proof, Lee? Names, positions, charges, convictions?
There are not “70 Clinton staffers” in prison “for accepting bribes for Bill, Hillary or Al Gore.”
You’re delusional. Have your meds checked.
Let’s see RTH, there was Bill for his involvement in Whitewater. Uhh, no, he was exonarated on that one. Oh, there was Hillary for her travel office shenaninigans. Uhh, no, there was no evidence of illegalities there. How about Al Gore selling weapons secrets. Uhh, nothing to that as it turned out. There must be someone guilty. I’ve got it. It was Mark Foley, he’s a democrat. Well at least according to Fox News. I guess since he was in congress, a body that works with the administration, and Fox News incorrectly labeled him a democrat and he resigned from office which is almost the same thing as a conviction that’s close enough to count don’t you think? One down, 69 to go.
Clintons were guilty
Clinton was not exonerated for Whitewater. HE fired the prosecutor and appointed a new one, while Hillary hid the papers until the statute of limitations ran out. When the papers surfaced there was enough evidence still in force to send her law partner and Bill’s Lt Governor to prison. Hillary, the smartest woman in the world, claimed recall nothing under oath.
Actually, Billy Dale and the others fired by Hillary in order to install her cronies, sued for wrongful dismissal, and were awarded huge monetary awards for back pay and damage to reputations.
Several of Al Gore’s top aides went to prison for taking illegal bribes from the Red Chinese Army and laundering the money into his election campaign. Gore claimed he didn’t realize he had been speaking at fundraisers.
Bill Clinton paid over $500,000 in fines and legal fees under a plea bargain for his perjury, obstruction of justice, and witness tampering in the Paula Johns sexual harassment lawsuit.
I’ll make this easy for you, Lee.
Start with “1” and list through “35.”
List the person’s name, Clinton administration position, charges, and sentence. Reference your source for the information.
I’m only asking for one half the number of people that you allege.
Given the wingnut obsession with smearing the Clintons, and Gore, my request shouldn’t be too difficult. Unless, of course, you’re just full of crap.
Make it hard on yourself:
Get off your lazy butt and look up the list which I already have, so you are less ignorant and deluded about the corrupt Clinton regime.
If you missed all that news while it was happening, I doubt you have the energy or intellectual curiosity to make the effort now.
I’ll post one a day just to embarass you.
Just to choose ONE example of Lee’s full o’ crap post…
Lee sez:
Clinton was not exonerated for Whitewater. HE fired the prosecutor and appointed a new one […]
Actually three men were appointed to investigate Whitewater: Robert Fiske, Ken Starr and Robert Ray. Fiske, a Republican judge, was appointed Independent Counsel by Clinton AG Janet Reno. Starr was appointed Special Prosecutor by a panel of three judges. I assume that Starr’s successor was approved by another panel of judges.
According to WaPo,
The original Whitewater special prosecutor was Robert B. Fiske Jr., a moderate Republican selected in January 1994 by Attorney General Janet Reno, who had the authority to make the appointment because the independent counsel law had expired.
In August 1994, with the [special prosecutor] law renewed and Fiske under fire from conservatives for being insufficiently aggressive in pursuit of the president, the three-judge panel in charge of appointing independent counsels abruptly replaced him with a conservative activist named Kenneth W. Starr.
[…]
In February 1997, Starr suddenly announced that he would resign as special prosecutor to take a job as a law school dean. He unresigned days later, but his original announcement was interpreted as a sign that his investigation was not going well.
[..]
In October 1999, Starr officially relinquished control of his five-year investigation of Clinton, passing the baton to a top assistant, Robert W. Ray.
=====================
So, as points of fact:
(1) Clinton AG Reno appointed the original Republican Special Counsel, Robert Fiske.
(2) Fiske was replaced by a three judge panel. The panel included partisan Republican judges who have admitted that they were lobbied by reactionary Republican Senators Lauch Faircloth and Jesse Helms to appoint Starr. They appointed fellow partisan rightwinger Starr.
(3) Starr resigned (not “fired”) twice– once he was convinced to return.
(4) Starr’s final resignation led to the appointment of his deputy Robert Ray.
Congrats if you’ve read this far. I went into this tedious detail just to prove how unreliable Lee’s statements are.
Once again, Lee makes allegations/statements and then proves unable to back them up.
Lee, the way it works is that when YOU make charges then YOU have to back them up.
Or, your readers begin to suspect that you’re just full o’ crap.
Lee, I apologize if that’s not the way debate works on your planet.
Above, for example, I chose one of your erroneous statements of “fact” and disproved it citing sources which I accept as reliable (in this instance).
I didn’t take apart the entire original post because most rational readers will long ago have judged your statements more probably wrong than correct.
Here’s another point of interest in your understanding of debate and logic: asking your opponent to “prove a negative” isn’t very convincing.
Good luck on getting your meds corrected.
Robert Fiske was also the attorney for International Paper in the sale of the Whitewater property with the Clintons, and should have refused to serve as in investigator of their crimes.
Clinton’s attorney, David Kendall, negotiated a pre-indictment plea bargain with for Clinton with prosecutor Robert Ray in November 2000, after Gore lost the election and Clinton had no chance of a pardon.
Al Gore’s closest fundraiser, Maria Lynn Hsia, was convicted on 5 counts of solicting illegal campaign contributions from foreigners for Al Gore and laundering the money through shill donors in 1994.
Gore claimed that this was an isolated event, and that he did not know he was attending fundraisers. He was lying, because court documents show Hsia taking Gore to illegal fundraisers with foreigners as early as 1989.
Lee, you alleged “70 Clinton staffers” in prison “for accepting bribes for Bill, Hillary or Al Gore.”
You can’t back it up.
Admit it.
# 2 Jim Guy Tucker
Governor Jim Guy Tucker President Clinton’s successor as Arkansas governor, Tucker resigned after his conviction in May 1996 on mail fraud and conspiracy …
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/1998/05/19/archive/main9813.shtml
#3 Michael Brown
Indicted for conspiracy with his father, Secretary of Commerce Ron Brown, to launder bribes for Hillary Clinton. Offered a soft plea bargain by Janet Reno to avoid a public trial.
#4 Ron Brown was killed in a plane crash after shouting to White House counsel that, “I’m not going to take the fall for Hillary’s fundraising schemes.”
Lee, you reminded me of how the Slickmeister was laughing his head off at the funeral of Ron Brown and when he caught the camera focusing on himself, he suddenly feigned grief and wiped a tear away. hahahahahahahhaha
#5 Sandy Berger pleads guilty to stealing all three copies of a terrorism report to Clinton from the National Archives, and destroying the evidence.
#6 David Rosen
Hillary Clinton Aide Pleads Not Guilty in Fundraising Case
LOS ANGELES (Reuters Jan 24, 2005 ) – A former campaign finance director for Sen. Hillary Clinton pleaded not guilty in a federal court in Los Angeles on Monday to charges of filing false reports during her 2000 run for the U.S. Senate.
Lawyers for David Rosen, 40, told Magistrate Judge Stephen Hillman that they planned to ask to move the case to Washington.
“This wasn’t a matter of judge shopping … we want the case assigned to D.C.,” Rosen’s attorney told the judge.
Each of the four counts of filing false reports with the Federal Election Commission could carry a maximum penalty of up to five years in prison and up to $250,000 in fines.
Rosen, who lives in Chicago, was released and ordered to appear in district court in Los Angeles for a March 22 trial.
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=politicsNews&storyID=7414390
Keep going, Lee.
IF you get to #35 then I’ll start rebutting.
You can’t rebut the facts, whether it is Clinton Crony #1, #35, or #350. The fact that you have been shut up by a short list of convictions, guilty pleas and suspicious violent deaths of other Clinton associates is enough for now.
We can pick it up any time a Clinton apologist wants to resume lying about how he was innocent and just picked on by mean old Republican prosecutors and FBI agents.
Just to recap, Lee.
(1) You claim that “Over 70 Clinton staffers went to prison for accepting bribes for Bill, Hillary or Al Gore.”
(2) You cite six people– one of whom was the Governor of Arkansas and served time for charges unrelated to Whitewater.
(3) You stopped– only 63 short of supporting your statement.
(4) You lose.
And, that’s before I started rebutting.