The Silence Is Deafening!!

11 replies [Last post]
TOPBROKR's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-08-11

Nothing like an election landslide by mainstream America to silence the Right-wingers.Ba-bye Rummy!Don't let the door hit ya on the way out

BondGuy's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-09-21

TOPBROKR wrote:Nothing like an election landslide by mainstream America to silence the Right-wingers.Ba-bye Rummy!Don't let the door hit ya on the way out
As should be obivous to you, I'm not right wing. But I gotta tell ya, your baiting is getting tiresome.
We welcome any and all contructive content you care to add.
Any informed person knows Rumsfeld to be one tough SOB. And a good man to boot. Today's news is nothing to cheer about. The prez made a line up change that will take a lot of wind out of the democrats sails. Rummy, always the good soldier, took one for the team. Of course he's been acting lightning rod for the team for a few years now. That duty will now flow to Cheney.

troll's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-29

I hate to be the one to break the news, TOPBROKR, but the Democrats won by finding new, moderate-conservative faces and by being intentionally ambiguous about their "new approach" in <?:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />Iraq. They moved to the right, and now have to actually propose things. This should be interesting.

Indyone's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-05-31

TOPBROKR wrote:Nothing like an election landslide by mainstream America to silence the Right-wingers.Ba-bye Rummy!Don't let the door hit ya on the way out
TB, it's far from silent on here...you're just looking in the wrong places...see the following threads under the "General" header...
Diebold
Dow 12,000 - Newbie
Looks like the Dem's are gonna win it...
Rumsfeld has been made a sacrificial lamb, although it's far from clear to me that he's the problem here.  I like him, personally, although I understand tha when things aren't going as planned, you have to try new things sometimes, which is exactly what the administration is doing.  Mistakes are made in every administration, and all that Bush can do is hear the people, learn from them and move on.
I'll go on record as saying that Nancy Pelosi unchecked is a potential disaster fo this country.  Thankfully, I don't see her going unchecked and she's apparently intelligent enough to say the right things, at least for now.  She probably realizes that her personal preferences wouldn't fly even in the face of a fairly significant shift.  Many new Dems elected last night are considerably more conservative than Nancy, which means that the end result will probably be much more moderate in composition that I originally thought.  What I for the life of me can't understand is why a more moderate Dem can't oppose her for speaker.  I just don't know the intricate machinations of Washington politics well enough to answer that.  Perhaps one of our resident pundits can enlighten you, me and other political lightweights. 
My Democratic congressman has indicated serious disagreements with and reservations about Nancy Pelosi, and yet, when the roll is called up yonder, he'll cast his lot for Nancy...I'd bet on it.  He'll sacrifice his personal values for "you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours", and that sickens me.  I voted for his Republican counterpart, even though I was confident he would fall well short, as he did.  I did not want any part in crowning Nancy Pelosi (and Charlie Rangel for that matter).  I like my congressman pretty well, but I'm bracing myself for disappointment when he starts wilting under party pressure.
One thing I'd really like to see...and I don't see much promise on either side of the aisle...is a balanced budget and some spending discipline.  Everyone is talking a good game on this issue today, but I'll believe it when I see it...

AirForce's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-10-12

Chris rock on OJ.... All my friend say, "WE WON, WE WON!!!! WHAT THE F..K DID WE WIN? I DON'T SEE MY OJ PRIZE BY THE DOOR." :)

Hey nothing like a shakeup.

Funny thing is I emailed a dem and he was so pissed off. I don't get it. It's like Republicans are like kewl manybe things can work together and Dems are like this sux Lieberman won. Maybe its a mind set. HATE, HATE & HATE.

FreedomLvr's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-02-10

The Dems didn't really win this one, the Republicans lost it.  People voted for change, and were willing to take their chances.  I just hope it ends up being a positive change, and not just more of the same.

dude's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-11-15

mikebutler222 wrote:
I hate to be the one to break the news, TOPBROKR, but the Democrats won by finding new, moderate-conservative faces and by being intentionally ambiguous about their "new approach" in <?:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />Iraq. They moved to the right, and now have to actually propose things. This should be interesting.

I actually agree that the Democrats didn't win...the Republicans lost.

babbling looney's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-12-02

Many new Dems elected last night are considerably more conservative than Nancy, which means that the end result will probably be much more moderate in composition that I originally thought
And if they want to be re-elected they will  need to maintain the moderate/conservative posture that got them elected in the first place (many of them by the skin of their teeth).  The public as a whole is mostly moderate and libertarian leaning which is why the Republicans got the boot.  The Repbs lost their bearings and started drifting leftward (big spending, huge entitlement programs, earmarks) and wasted time trying to pander to special interests (Terry Schaivo).
Contrary to what the policitos believe, the people are not stupid.  I don't care who is in congress as long as they operate by moderate/conservative principles.  Leave the Second Amendment alone, cut the spending, quit trying to fine tune and meddle in my life....  just take care of business and quit the partisan posturing.  We all know they are mostly narcissist gas bags; at least they could be productive.

troll's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-29

BondGuy wrote:TOPBROKR wrote:Nothing like an election landslide by mainstream America to silence the Right-wingers.Ba-bye Rummy!Don't let the door hit ya on the way out
As should be obivous to you, I'm not right wing. But I gotta tell ya, your baiting is getting tiresome.
We welcome any and all contructive content you care to add.
Any informed person knows Rumsfeld to be one tough SOB. And a good man to boot. Today's news is nothing to cheer about. The prez made a line up change that will take a lot of wind out of the democrats sails. Rummy, always the good soldier, took one for the team. Of course he's been acting lightning rod for the team for a few years now. That duty will now flow to Cheney.Hear hear!Then again, perhaps Gates is the better man for the job given his background?  He certainly should have a better feel for interpreting intel and unconventional "tactics".

troll's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-29

BondGuy wrote:
Any informed person knows Rumsfeld to be one tough SOB. And a good man to boot.
 
Well said, Bondguy. Rumsfeld did some extremely difficult work in reforming the military long before <?:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />Iraq began. He took on the Pentagon turf wars without blinking and had his toughest fights with my old service, the Army. Many a SecDef (and sometimes deservedly) has been crushed by the weight of the organization itself. Any change in the Army effects egos and careers in the Army and sister services, especially the Marines as Army forces get lighter, and the organizational lethargy is amazing.<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
He moved them from a heavy, armor dominated force to a much lighter, fast to respond organization. That wasn’t easy and he made plenty of enemies in uniform doing it. One of his first big battles was killing off the Crusader, a massive heavy artillery system that had loads of careers attached to it. He felt (and rightly) it was equipment designed during the end of the Cold War that didn’t fit this new world.
Much as I love the guys he fought with, Rumsfeld was right on that one. The generals and those with careers attached to that weapons system and the current  force structure were fighting the last war on that one. His story isn’t one dimensional.
 

BrokerRecruit's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-04-19

babbling looney wrote:
Many new Dems elected last night are considerably more conservative than Nancy, which means that the end result will probably be much more moderate in composition that I originally thought
And if they want to be re-elected they will  need to maintain the moderate/conservative posture that got them elected in the first place (many of them by the skin of their teeth).  The public as a whole is mostly moderate and libertarian leaning which is why the Republicans got the boot.  The Repbs lost their bearings and started drifting leftward (big spending, huge entitlement programs, earmarks) and wasted time trying to pander to special interests (Terry Schaivo).
Contrary to what the policitos believe, the people are not stupid.  I don't care who is in congress as long as they operate by moderate/conservative principles.  Leave the Second Amendment alone, cut the spending, quit trying to fine tune and meddle in my life....  just take care of business and quit the partisan posturing.  We all know they are mostly narcissist gas bags; at least they could be productive.

Amen, babs.

AirForce's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-10-12

Rums did so much. The people who bash him know nothing. How many of them have served in anyting close to the military.

Like anything it was his time.

Please or Register to post comments.

Industry Newsletters
Investment Category Sponsor Links

 

Sponsored Introduction Continue on to (or wait seconds) ×