1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Army Times: Rumsfeld must go

Discussion in 'Anything goes' started by Inky_Wretch, Nov 3, 2006.

  1. Don't be entirely sure on that. A scenario where the Connecticut delegation - Shays and Johnson -- gets overturned and Joe survives strikes me as a strange one, but I wouldn't bet against Imus's favorite ethnic stereotype, though.
    The General Grant comparison may be the unintentionally funniest thing ever posted.
  2. Ben_Hecht

    Ben_Hecht Active Member

    I'm sure. I'm not proposing a bet, but I'd lay $600 to win $100 on it.
  3. Michael_ Gee

    Michael_ Gee Well-Known Member

    1. Leaked Army power point presentation shows we're losing in Iraq at an ever faster pace.
    2. This editorial.

    What we have here, gang, is a cry for help from the US military, one that's been ongoing since John Murtha's call for getting out of Iraq.
    "Please dear American voters, get us out of here. We can't win. No one knows what winning is. Do something."

    Our military feels itself endangered. That's not a good thing. And it leads to the following two scenarios.

    1. Democrats take at least one house of Congress. Pressure goes off military for awhile as center-right establishment looks for face-saving euphemism for "we lost" and tells Bush the sad fact.

    2. Democrats fail. The odds on this bet are now good enough for me to make it. It's like betting "Red Sox lose". So you're once every 10 elections. But I digress
    What does the military do then? They're edging as close as they can to publicly violating their oath to obey civilian leadership without question. If we civilians as a group endorse "stay the course" what is their option.
    These are patriotic, idealistic men and women, and I mean no disrespect to point out self-preservation is the first rule of institutions as well as individuals.

    Let me put it this. If I were Dick Cheney, I wouldn't go quail-hunting with anyone in uniform.
  4. Football_Bat

    Football_Bat Well-Known Member

    They can stop-loss all the E-3's and E-4's they want, but if a shitload of lieutenant colonels, colonels and generals decides to retire, the Army is in a world of hurt.
  5. RedSmithClone

    RedSmithClone Active Member

    Sorry I left the a off of aisle...you are all greeat copy editors. Thanks for fixing my typo.

    Now onto the key point. I think Lieberman will win as well, but my point was if he somehow loses, I think he should be Rummy's replacement.

    I mean the guy who doesn't promote unity between the parties actually bringing in a Democrat to hold such a high place in his cabinet. I mean come on. It's a perfect move for Rove to author. Yeah Lieberman is 95 percent on the side of the left for other issues. But he's on Bush's side when it comes to the War on Terror. It's a perfect fit.
  6. Blitz

    Blitz Active Member

    Great idea
  7. I think Lieberman takes a job with the administration whether he wins or not -- SecDef or even the job at the UN -- then the Ct. governor appoints a GOP senator and Joe has his little revenge on everyone who knows him for the worthless opportunistic schmuck he has always been.
  8. Michael_ Gee

    Michael_ Gee Well-Known Member

    I wouldn't be doing that if I were Joe and the job needed Senate confirmation. He could filibustered right into unemployment.
  9. RedSmithClone

    RedSmithClone Active Member

    Worthless and opportunistic because he doesn't vote the straight party line?
    Funny how Democrats get pissed when their own don't toe the line, but if I Republican does, they have no respect for him or her to think for themselves. I find it fascinating.
  10. No worthless and opportunistic because he took money from the Buckleys to run in the first place and money from Scaife to run this time, and a dozen other reasons.
    I find it fascinating that your last sentence doesn't make any sense.
  11. lono

    lono Active Member

    Wow, this is as radical a political stance as Naughty Nympho editorializing that Clinton must go.
  12. Guy_Incognito

    Guy_Incognito Well-Known Member

    If anyone actually wants him replaced instead of playing politics, they'd shut up for 10 minutes. No cabinet members last 2 full terms, but Bush can't get rid of him while everyone is calling for his head, and he's right. You can't come off that weak. I think the critics know this and are happier with him in there to beat up on rather than actually replacing him & losing a pinata.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page