|
||||||
| FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
Topic Review (Newest First)
|
| Nov 28th, 2006 04:04 PM | |
| mburbank | How about "We won't get fooled again"? And how do you know I don't want to run for President? |
| Nov 28th, 2006 03:33 PM | |
| KevinTheOmnivore | Yeah, he could use "Surrender" as his campaign song. |
| Nov 28th, 2006 03:26 PM | |
| mburbank | Well, I think he may be on to something. |
| Nov 28th, 2006 03:02 PM | |
| KevinTheOmnivore | He wants Bush's job, so not quite. |
| Nov 28th, 2006 02:49 PM | |
| mburbank |
I'll start taking serious note of her performance come January. I just read Hagel's blistering Op Ed. I think he sees the writting on the national wall a whole lot cleaer than a lot of Democrats. I can only assume he is blinded by Bush hatred. |
| Nov 28th, 2006 02:44 PM | |
| KevinTheOmnivore | She made herself look silly over this Murtha thing, and everything I'm hearing is that she has become crazy drunk with power already. Apparently her kids have already been using mommy's name and title as an attempt to get access, but that's what I hear through the grapevine. |
| Nov 28th, 2006 01:02 PM | |
| mburbank |
Well, I don't think W would have come out today and said that any sort of withdrawl was 100% off the table if he didn't know it wasn't going to be in the report. Or who knows, maybe he's no more serious about that then he was about keeping Rummy till the end of his term. I think both sides used the 'lets wait for the report' cynically as a way to didge the whole question of 'what the hell do we do'. If the report offers no new ideas or strategies, I think we'll see someinteresting political changes as pro and anti withdrawlers on both sides of the aisle start brokering deals on all sorts of shit. And while I'm not a strict Pelosi basher, I don't think she can keep her ducks in a row, because D's are pretty hard to line up to begin with, and under the curent circumstances, I don't think anyone could. |
| Nov 28th, 2006 12:30 PM | |
| KevinTheOmnivore |
I guess, in a way, it could still all depend on the Republicans, OR, the ability of Nancy/Steny/Reid/Schumer to keep their troops in line. This is why "let's wait until the Baker Report" is a failed agenda, and it was a cloak and dagger used in order to win in tight races. If the leadership can't present a platform on the issue, aside from what some report says, then me thinks the blue dogs who are not supportive of withdrawal will vote with Republicans (that is, if the GOP actually sticks to their guns on Iraq). Hagel has come out for phased withdrawal. |
| Nov 28th, 2006 10:19 AM | |
| mburbank | I think, especially amidst steady escalating sectaran violence and te begining of a media rejection of Biush's terminology (ie. the use of the words civil war) That you'll see a division amongst Democrats. I think we'll see a colation of Dems that will actively (and fruitlessly) advocate for phased withdrawl. And I think they'll find some Republicans to make common cause with. |
| Nov 28th, 2006 08:52 AM | |
| KevinTheOmnivore |
Baker Report may not suggest withdrawal From Politics1: "According to the New York Times, the highly touted Baker-Hamilton Iraq Study Group just produced a first draft of recommended options that does NOT include any version of a phased withdrawal of US troops from Iraq. All these newly elected congressional Dems -- and the Dem leadership -- kept saying for weeks they wanted to the see the ISG recommendations before formulating a specific Iraq policy. Now they look likely to be stuck with a "new" plan of options that -- essentially -- consists of "stay the course" variants." So, if this report produces no plan for withdrawal, will these anti-war Democrats come up with their own plan, or will they try to adapt stay the course...? |
