Wow - that's deep into it. hmmmmmm Does give me something to think about though. Wish I was a bit more politically savy than I am.
Rumsfeld Stepping Down
Moderator: S2k Moderators
- vbhoutex
- Storm2k Executive

- Posts: 29128
- Age: 74
- Joined: Wed Oct 09, 2002 11:31 pm
- Location: Cypress, TX
- Contact:
Stephanie wrote:It only looks to me like President Bush did what he had to do after the results of the election. I think that he's almost loyal to his advisors to a fault.
For once you and I agree here. It will be interesting to see how this all works out. I think we need to "get the job done", but the road to the end of that job is not totally clear, nor will it be an easy one no matter how it is handled.
0 likes
- gtalum
- S2K Supporter

- Posts: 4749
- Age: 49
- Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2004 3:48 pm
- Location: Bradenton, FL
- Contact:
j wrote:correct me if I'm wrong. Rumsfeld resigned, Bush accepted it this time. Previous posts are making it sound like because of the election results Bush DID what he had to do.
When a high-level government official "resigns", it generally isn't voluntary. It just helps to avoid a nasty scene. It may not have had anything to do with election results, as Dubya claims he was going to do it either way.
The smart thing would have been to do it beforehand. People voted for change, and that would have been change, perhaps stemming the Republican losses somewhat.
0 likes
- Stephanie
- S2K Supporter

- Posts: 23843
- Age: 63
- Joined: Thu Feb 06, 2003 9:53 am
- Location: Glassboro, NJ
vbhoutex wrote:Stephanie wrote:It only looks to me like President Bush did what he had to do after the results of the election. I think that he's almost loyal to his advisors to a fault.
For once you and I agree here. It will be interesting to see how this all works out. I think we need to "get the job done", but the road to the end of that job is not totally clear, nor will it be an easy one no matter how it is handled.
Absolutely. I don't think that an immediate withdraw is a responsible thing to do on our part but we do need to draw some kind of map and timeline with measurable, attainable goals to make sure that Iraq can govern herself and we can get the heck out of there. I don't doubt that the "map" or goals will be revised either, but we need to at least devise some sort of exit strategy.
I agree gtalum. If Rumsfeld's resignation had been accepted before and it looked like the current Administration was trying to do SOMETHING to end it, the losses for the Republicans would not have been so great, IMHO.
0 likes
Regit wrote:For those who follow politics, this is a bizarre story. It's almost as if the GOP threw the election on purpose.
The more I think about it, the more I wonder if it's true. A solid Republican majority would have looked increasingly corrupt to the public. Additionally, a divided Washington could create the next best thing to Laissez-faire, which helps the economy in the short term (though not in the long term as we learned in the 1920's). A President and his party always get credit for a booming economy.
Is it a total coincidence that the day that the focus should be on the Democrats, the news switches back to something extremely positive coming out of the White House?
If the GOP had stayed in power, the Democrats could possibly have won the White House in 2008 even if they'd run Saddam.
Could the "blue tidal wave" be Karl Rove's ultimate genius play? Something to ponder.
Lol NO! ahahahh
0 likes
- Aquawind
- Category 5

- Posts: 6714
- Age: 62
- Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2003 10:41 pm
- Location: Salisbury, NC
- Contact:
Doesn't look like retirement is going to be much fun for awhile at least..
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article ... ml?cnn=yes
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article ... ml?cnn=yes
0 likes
- Tstormwatcher
- S2K Supporter

- Posts: 3086
- Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 7:31 pm
- Location: New Bern, NC
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 43 guests
