What the hell? Rummy resigns

Allah has the details.

Is this a little concession Bush is offering to the newly-crowned Dems??

Update: Slublog made this point in the comments section at Hot Air:

I think this had to be done, and quickly. I think Bush wants to get Gates confirmed before the new Senate is seated, because the WH knows we’ve lost Congress. Rumsfeld is a lightning rod for criticism, and would have been used as justification to pull funding for the war and for the Dems to pick away at the administration.

I don’t like it, but I can see why they did it.

What do you think?

Prior:

In defense of Donald Rumsfeld

86 Responses to "What the hell? Rummy resigns"

PolCentre says:

November 8, 2006 at 1:22 pm

So it begins: Rumsfeld steps down

It has been announced that Donald Rumsfeld is stepping down as the countrys Secretary of Defense at the Pentagon. It is expected that President Bush will announce his successor later in the day today.
CIA Director from 1991-1993, current President o…
Baklava says:

November 8, 2006 at 1:48 pm

There are two issues that should be erased with Democrats now:

1) Rumsfeld

2) Whether Republicans / Bush has rigged elections (and into the future with Diebold)

Now can we move forward and debate the issues Democrats?
Karl says:

November 8, 2006 at 2:36 pm

As I said there, this is not a tragedy.

The SoD is an instrument of the presidents policies, not a real force of day to day operations. The JCOS and the Pentagon run the war, Rummy just dictated policy.

And by stepping down before the democrats really wound up the call for his firing, Bush maintains control of the replacement and captures the talking points.

The dems are now shouting into the wind, and Bush has the spotlight for a little while.

It was timed right.
NC Cop says:

November 8, 2006 at 2:44 pm

Now can we move forward and debate the issues Democrats?

You already know the answer to that one, Bak.

Pelosi has made too many promises to the likes of Sheehan, Soros, and Moore, etc. It’s what got her to where she is now and she won’t forget that.

Prepare yourself for two years of investigations while N. Korea prepares another nuclear test, Iran continues to develop their own nukes, the war on terror continues, and the border still needs to be secured. Do Americans really think the dems are going to deal with these issues??
Texas Rainmaker » Bush “Significant Announcement” Coming…*Update: Rumsfeld is Out, Robert Gates is In* says:

November 8, 2006 at 2:57 pm

[…] Others: StoptheACLU has video of the press conference. SisterToldjah thinks it’s a concession to incoming Queen. 2 Comments » […]
Sprockett says:

November 8, 2006 at 3:08 pm

I am so sick and tired of conservatives who just roll over in the face of opposition, I seriously think we need a new party in this country. One that holds to conservative principles and ideals, and is not afraid to say so in the face of ANY opposition. Micheal Steel may not have won in Maryland but look what he did do, for the first time the black community came around and realized that republicans really where the emancipation party….

Bush just threw Rummy under the bus, he’s so much like his father, this is just like the famous ‘Read My Lips’ statement. For some reason Bush can fight a war on terror but not one with the opposition party, in that respect he’s just like his father. I think he’s been a wonderful wartime President but his domestic policy outside of tax cuts has been a disaster….

I MISS REAGAN!!!!!

-Paul-
Baklava says:

November 8, 2006 at 3:54 pm

NC wrote, “You already know the answer to that one, Bak”

I’m forever the optimist. I’ll remain hopeful.

NC asked, “Do Americans really think the dems are going to deal with these issues??”

While I care if they do deal with the issues and with good solutions, I will continue to try to persuade others of solutions that I think need to be implemented which are in line with conservative strong defense and individuals being self reliant.

We got our work cut out for us is my point. We must be persuasive. Communicate better. Reach more people.
jim says:

November 8, 2006 at 3:57 pm

God wanted the Democrats to win the Senate and the Congress, and take 4 more state governorships, and wanted George Bush to fire Rumsfeld.

Things happen for a reason. As you said on November 3, “providence will always find the right person at the right time for the right job.”
Big Bang Hunter says:

November 8, 2006 at 5:30 pm

– Lets see how the Dems will handle the Gates confirmation. A number of Dems have already said they don’t see any opposition, and Harry Reid has indicated he’d be agreeable to holding the hearings as soon as possible, meaning the present congressional makeup will decide, rather than waiting for the new seats to be filled. This might be an indication of Dem “caution”, and wanting to look at least like they’re really interested in partisan behavior, now that they’re back in power. We’ll see.

– Bang
Lorica says:

November 8, 2006 at 5:47 pm

LOL Jim!!!! I agree with you, especially if you are talking about the tribulation. God wants to usher in the end times and he is going to use the left to bring it about. What an AWESOME GOD!!!! – Lorica
Karl says:

November 8, 2006 at 5:55 pm

By the way, the word is circulating the Gates was offered the job last weekend.

This was planned ahead of time. I have to hope there was reason behind it.
sanity says:

November 8, 2006 at 6:06 pm

Reminds me of Halliburton.

Removed them from doing the work in Iraq and the Democrats lost one of thier gripe points.
Drewsmom says:

November 8, 2006 at 6:06 pm

I’m sorry to see Rummy go myself.
As far as the election, WE ARE DOOMED.
Tom TB says:

November 8, 2006 at 6:36 pm

I thought the progressive left doesn’t believe in God; unless it’s Allah, then they’re afraid, and suddenly become sympathetic to the “religion of peace”.
Big Bang Hunter says:

November 8, 2006 at 7:01 pm

– And on a related note, as others here have mentioned, isn’t it interesting, that with the exception of the race in Virginia possibly, there seems to be a profound lack of lawyers, and screaming about stolen elections this time around.

– From that I’ll take a wild guess, and say the Dems must have won.

– Bang
NC Cop says:

November 8, 2006 at 8:17 pm

And, hey, what happened to all the voter fraud “concerns” that were going on before the election started?! Oh, that’s right, the dems won so it must have been ok this time.
Lorica says:

November 8, 2006 at 8:19 pm

Along that same line Bang. I just had to go back to November 2004 and the anti-Bush rally that Zombietime has on his website. Yeah there is a huge difference in the mentality and mental stability of those of us on the right over our friends on the left.

http://www.zombietime.com/sf_rally_november_3_2004/

I have to wonder if there is anything going on right now in San Francisco. I would be surprised if there wasn’t. – Lorica
stackja says:

November 8, 2006 at 8:42 pm

The gullible have voted.
Rummy would have spent the next year answering questions from the Dems while the Pentagon was left to run itself. What was the point in him staying?
Both Hillary Clinton and Nancy Pelosi remind me of Madame Defarge, Madame Therese Defarge is the wife of Ernest Defarge and a tireless worker for the French Revolution in the book A Tale of Two Cities by Charles Dickens. In France there was The Reign of Terror and Madame Guillotine. Will USA now face a Reign of Terror as the two madames seek to overthrow the President?
I. M. Neiman says:

November 8, 2006 at 10:04 pm

Sprockett: I was prepared to make similar comments, but you said it all quite clearly.

Bush is a damned coward, he is sending signals that he will roll over for Nancy and the Democrats, no standing his ground, no vetos, just more grabass with liberals. God, it makes me sick!
sanity says:

November 8, 2006 at 10:30 pm

I know I.M. Neiman. I know.

I read this and a few other things after the loss in the House and looks to be Senate, and it really seems like the President is now rolling over to the Dmeocrats..or more apt bending over I suppose.

If he thinks he is goin for good will here, he is a fool. They have been down this road before and the Democrats have always spat in the face or backstabbed at the earliest opportunity.
Lorica says:

November 8, 2006 at 11:02 pm

How is this any different than compromising the whole last 6 years?? The only thing he wouldn’t compromise on is the very thing he should of compromised on and that was Rummy. We here on the right forget that GW has his moderate tendancies. Compromise is the quintessentail essence of a good moderate. GW isn’t rolling over, he is doing what he is his nature. – Lorica
Brian says:

November 9, 2006 at 12:17 am

Jim, that was me that wrote that post, not ST. And I still stand by it. For better of for worse, we’re stuck with the Dems in charge for the next two years. We’ll know what the “reason” is later on, but right now, we have to deal with it.

As for Rummy leaving now, I made the same point on Iowa Voice earlier: I think he’s leaving sooner, rather than later, because if he leaves after Jan. 3, there’s no way Bush puts someone in there that he wants…the Dems would be demanding that he nominate somebody THEY want.

Just remember when Ashcroft was nominated in 2001, and you’ll see my point. And they only had a one-seat, temporary majority! They acted like THEY were the ones who should appoint him, not the President.
sanity says:

November 9, 2006 at 12:58 am

Was just watching Charlie Rose, adn missed the guys name that worked with President Bush, but he stated that Rumsfeld and the President have been going over this for over the last week, and this was not a sudden thing.

Rumsfeld has already tendered his resignation twice so far in this administration and the president refused.

This time, it was said, that it was agreed on by both the President and Rumsfeld that a chance is needed.

I tend to agree that this may not have been last minute change, since there is all sorts of background checks ad communications back and forth between Gates and the Presdients staff, and the President. All that would have taken time.
Chuck says:

November 9, 2006 at 12:58 am

How is Rumsfeld supposed to run DOD when he has to attend hearings every day? He would have major distractions so now he can testify all day and the DOD will go on.
I. M. Neiman says:

November 9, 2006 at 10:57 am

No matter how people on the Left or Right want to spin what happened to Rumsfeld, there is no excuse for stabbing a loyal soldier in the back for political convenience. There is not one iota of evidence that Rumsfeld is guilty of misfeasance, malfeasance or non-feasance of his office as Secretary of Defense. He has managed a massive reorganization of the military, was in charge of a swift victory over the Taliban and Al Queda in Afghanistan, a very fast overthrow of Saddam and a military victory in Iraq – all of this at the President’s bidding. While all of this was going on Rumsfeld had to wage a defensive war against the MSM and the Democrats. All of this he did with honor and without even a hint of any scandal or miscoduct of any kind.

So, what was his reward, a cowardly George W. Bush pushed him overboard for political expediency. That makes G.W. a low life bastard and I don’t give a damn what happens to him over the next couple of year. I hate cowardice and political expediency.
Baklava says:

November 9, 2006 at 11:28 am

Replacing Rumsfeld is not finding him of “misfeasance, malfeasance or non-feasance of his office”.

While I’m sorry to see Rumsfeld go because it won’t solve anything to replace him and he is a very smart guy who has been vilified and his words have been taken out of context against him, I don’t think replacing him is an indicator of his wrong doing but a way to remove an issue.

I wouldn’t characterize Bush as acting cowardly. I think he probably discussed it with Rummy for awhile and the two of them agreed it was probably best. Bush far from cowardly stood up for Rummy for a long time while Democrats made false accusations, the drive-by legacy media made false accusations and put forth stories finding retired generals who don’t like Rummy etc.

I hope you can change your outlook I.M. that you displayed in your last paragraph. While I disagree with the Pres on a variety of issues, I do give a damn about people and him also and hope he keeps moving forward on the very long GWOT.
Big Bang Hunter says:

November 9, 2006 at 2:24 pm

“I hate cowardice and political expediency.”

– Actually I.M., you’re wasting some perfectly good “outrage” for nothing. You contensions are spescious.

– If Bush had actually done the expediant thing, instead of trying to show loyalty to the people that serve him, and our country, defensing a very good and effective man waging a no-win battle against our enemies, without AND within, he would have cut Rummy loose back a few months ago, which very well could have saved both the House and the Senate for the Republicans.

– Your point, and angst, is both wrong, and wrong headed. Save your faux outrage for something real.

– Bang
I. M. Neiman says:

November 9, 2006 at 5:58 pm

Big Bang Hunter: I don’t need lectures from you on when and where I can feel or express my outrage.

a. I am a conservative and I have supported Bush, despite the many times he has strayed from conservatism.
b. I have served my country in war, as a Marine in Vietnam; my grandson and nephew are Marines in Iraq today, one brother fought in Korea and one in Vietnam (3 tours), my father in WW-II as Captain of a Navy ship in the Pacific. So, I believe that gives me the right to say what I believe without correction and rebuke from the likes of you.
c. I hate the many times during his time in office that Bush has played nice with the Left and has received not one good thing in return for his efforts.
d. Bush received Nancy Pelosi in his office today and pledged cooperation, which means the America people can stand by for some rear end action in tax increases, our troops cutting and running from Iraq in dishonor, and every damn left wing social program Nancy can push forward. Bush doesn’t have the guts to veto anything Congress passes!

We have lost the war in Iraq today! Those soldiers killed died for nothing, they will be denied the honor they deserve. Those having fought in Iraq and still living will be treated like the veterans of Vietnam – like baby killing scum. Lastly, kiss the Middle East goodbye it now belongs to militant Islam, they won the war in Iraq with Democrat Party and American voter help; Afghanistan will fall back to the Taliban because all the terrorists will go there now; and Israel will suffer another holocaust.

Yep, Big Bang Hunter, sounds like good news to me, let us all praise Bush the backstabber!
Baklava says:

November 9, 2006 at 6:18 pm

Characterize him as a backstabber all you want. It doesn’t change the fact that Bush wasn’t accusing Rummy of malfeasance. A shift in leadership can be for any reason. To me it was big of Bush and Rummy as I know they probably talked about it and decided that it was best to “remove” an issue or at least “try” to remove an issue.

If the Democrats go on about the new guy they show their hand in a way.

Your jibber jabber about losing in Iraq seems unfounded if Bush continued his talk about “finishing” the job. He made sure to let people know yesterday that he will try to work on common ground yesterday but that doesn’t mean leaving the job unfinished. Tactics or new ideas are open to be listened to though….

The english language means things. Distorting things with new meaning shouldn’t happen. You are free to but we’ll be here also…
I. M. Neiman says:

November 9, 2006 at 7:08 pm

Baklava said “The english language means things.”

1. Since when? The words in the Constitution have been perverted out all proportion by leftist judges and the United States Congress. If the Judiciary and the Congress by their actions deny the clear meaning of words in the Constitution, then surely twisting words to make them mean whatever we want is good enough for the peasants.
2. For God’s sake, we don’t even know what the definition of is – is!
3. People, especially politicians can and often do use eloquent phrases and specific words which contain very limited meanings, yet they quite often deny the very meaning of the words they used and behave in a wholly contrary manner. Therefore, we must look to their actions:

Billy Jeff told us abortion should be legal and rare, yet he and Madame Hillary increased funding for abortions and promoted abortions theoughout the world. So, his words indicated one course of action and his actions indicated something entirely different.

Bush has never vetoed a bill from Congress! He has compromised and often went to bed with the likes of Ted Kennedy and so we know that more often than not his words do not mean what he will actually do. If Congress, as they will, cut spending in Iraq, Bush will not oppose them, as his record is one of betrayal of his principles, or he deceived us all and at heart he is a Democrat. He sat down with Comrade Pelosi today and promised cooperation, meaning Congress will be become a super-Executive Branch of government and 535 Commanders-in-Chiefs!

Lastly, I don’t need lectures from the likes of you as it is obvious by your attacks against me that you appear to have a low grade intellect and the wisdom of a cockroach! If attacked – I will attack back! You can count on it!
Sister Toldjah says:

November 9, 2006 at 7:12 pm

I.M. – Calm down. I don’t think Bak was lecturing you. He is trying to debate with you.
Little Miss Chatterbox says:

November 9, 2006 at 7:46 pm

I love Rumsfeld and was very sad to see him go.
Phil says:

November 9, 2006 at 9:29 pm

I have lost all respect for President George W. Bush.
He turned on his friend Donald Rumsfeld for the sake of his own political career.

Proof.
LINK

Read the rest of it on that link above.

EXIT RUMSFELD

I was sorry to see that the first casualty of the 2006 election was the Defense Secretary. I had lunch with him a week or so back and he was in fine form, if clearly frustrated. To fire him mere hours after the polls closed makes the President look small. I’m reminded of when Harold MacMillan fired some of his closest cabinet colleagues 45 years ago, and Jeremy Thorpe stood up in the House of Commons and wryly remarked: “Greater love hath no man than to lay down his friends for his life.” Here’s what I had to say about Rummy in happier times, from a 2003 Sunday Telegraph profile just before the Iraq war:
Baklava says:

November 9, 2006 at 9:30 pm

That attitude isn’t persuasive and neither is name calling I.M.

Anger and extreme rhetoric only reflects poorly on yourself and unfortunately conservatives…

I hope you can change.
Baklava says:

November 9, 2006 at 9:51 pm

I’m not sure why you would characterize it as, “turning on his friend Donald Rumsfeld”.

These are the kind of tactics conservatives should leave for liberals. Speculation, fabrication, anger, etc do not persuade.

I missed the “proof” for your assertion. I like Steyn and agree with him that it is sad to see Rummy go. I wish Bush would’ve stood by him THROUGH all of the Bush years. I believe though that the charges being leveled are not helpful and are you doing what you are charging Bush of doing (turning on Bush while you accuse Bush of turning on Rummy). There is no need for it. It is what it is and Bush has continued to say that the objective will be met. He is NOT changing the policy of “finishing the job”.
Baklava says:

November 9, 2006 at 9:57 pm

I agree with the guy in your update ST.

Bush had to do it quickly to get Gates through confirmation before Democrats were actually sworn in in January.

Additionally, the mission is more important than one single man. Rumsfeld hardly was backstabbed or accused of anything. He was merely replaced. If that helps the mission I am for it. If it “removes” an issue it helps. Rumsfeld will be fine. He has had a wonderful career and will go down in history as a great leader and servant for this country. There is no need to make characterizations that didn’t happen. And again, I’m sad to see Rummy go also.
Big Bang Hunter says:

November 9, 2006 at 9:58 pm

I.M. – So any time someone takes time out of their day, time that is just as super important as yours I might add, and has the temerity to disagree with you, they’re “Lecturing”. Have I got that right.I don’t personally care how conservative you are, you made a wrong assertion, and you got called on it. Instead of standing on your pompous “How dare anyone question me” soapbox, if you really had any defense of what you posted you’d state it, not whine.

– Just so it’s all clear for you. A blog is a place where we are ALL free to express our feelings and idea’s, like adult’s, not children. Sometimes we debate and disagree. If you just want to make proclimations, the city park is that-a-way. Grow up.

– Bang
Baklava says:

November 9, 2006 at 10:09 pm

I disagree with your pompous a** Bang. You don’t tell me. I tell you. And Bush STUCK it to Rumsfeld for political gain. I know. I’m in Bush’s head and in Rumsfeld’s head. And I know that Bush and Rummy didn’t have a conversation about this in an adult manner. Rummy got sacked and you know it. He was sacrificed for nothing. Now we LOST this Iraq war. You hear me. The war is LOST. And I hate Bush.

There… Did I do the debate good?
Big Bang Hunter says:

November 9, 2006 at 10:15 pm

– Pretty good Bak….I’d give it a “A+”, but you left out the fact that the Sun is going red giant in 6 billion more years because of that Evil Bush, and his NeoCon lackies, so I’ll have to drop it to an “A”. But you did good for a Red stater “flyover bible thumping gunrack swamp lurker”, I’ll say that for you, you backward trailor trash elephants a**.

– Bang
Big Bang Hunter says:

November 9, 2006 at 10:18 pm

– Oh, and you smell funny…

– Bang
I. M. Neiman says:

November 9, 2006 at 11:10 pm

Big Bang Hunter: I fought for this country, how about you? So, I believe that service earned me the right to express my opinion, whether you and other girly-men like Baklava like it or not. Oh, I am sure you can get your pal Sister Toldjah to ban me from this blog, so you won’t get your sissy boy feelings hurt anymore; that is the way you liberals fight. So, go ahead an cry like little babies and I’ll get banned, but that won’t make you right!

The reason you and comrade Baklava don’t care about what happened to Rumsfeld is because you have no sense of honor, no concept whatsoever that a real man does not turn his back on his friends. Any man who would backstab a friend(Rumsfeld) that has been loyal to a fault in his support – is not a man! If it was important for Rumsfeld to go and he, not Georgi-girl Bush, went public with his desire to get out of the fight between Pelosi and Georgi and he resigned, then I’d have no problem with it; but the truth is Georgi Bush FIRED a loyal and valiant soldier and an honorable man for cheap political gain and to make nice with Pelosi.

What do you think Bush will do when Nancy cuts off spending for the war in Iraq? Do you think he’ll stand up to her or is it more likely, based on his past pattern of behavior that he will make a deal and turn his back on the troops? Well, I have seen our country turn its back on our troops before, like me and my brother, brother-in-law, father-in-law and many friends after Vietnam; and I can tell you that is exactly what will happen within the next 12-18 months, and you two will join in condemning our soldiers, spitting on them as they come home with their tails betwen their legs in utter defeat.

You and all those like you that turned the Congress, the White House and the country over to the Democrats will live to regret that decision; and when you do I could care less about all your cry baby tears then!
When America voted the Democrats back into power we lost the war in Iraq and against militant Islamic terrorism and none of your false defense of Bush will alter that simple fact. I know, I lived through it before!
Sister Toldjah says:

November 9, 2006 at 11:11 pm

I.M., Bang and Bak didn’t “turn this country over to Democrats.”

You really need to calm down.
Big Bang Hunter says:

November 9, 2006 at 11:26 pm

– Good lord…. someone has wandered too far from their meds….

– Bang
Big Bang Hunter says:

November 9, 2006 at 11:38 pm

– I.M. – Normally I’d show you a courtesy you obviously lack the self control to show others, by going through your post, point by point, to enlighten you vis a vis your muddled headed thinking, and over the top words directed toward people you know not a thing about.

– But judging from your apparent personal issues, I’ll save a lot of time and just recommend you get yourself some professional help in the area of anger management, before you do something important. thats the best offer you’ve had all day son. Sempre Fi.

– Bang
Baklava says:

November 9, 2006 at 11:39 pm

I.M. wrote irrelevantly, “I fought for this country, how about you?”

How is that relevant to the topic?

I.M. wrote, “So, I believe that service earned me the right to express my opinion”

Serving doesn’t give you the freedom to make false accusations and then not have them questioned. Freedom of speech is for everyone. You don’t know if Bang or I served and it doesn’t matter to the conversation…

I.M. didn’t have an argument so resorted to name calling, “and other girly-men like Baklava like it or not”

Not to worry. I’m thick skinned. Just pointing out your failing to stick to the topic and be civil. Oh, but yes, you are allowed to come into someone’s house and insult because you served and you don’t know if we did or not.

I.M. diverted the discussion further with, “Oh, I am sure you can get your pal Sister Toldjah to ban me from this blog”

She thinks independantly. She has a comment policy. You are breaking some rules on it. Your behavior is at question not whether you disagree or not. Disagreement is always allowed.

I.M. erroneously talked about what I “care” about by asserting, “The reason you and comrade Baklava don’t care about what happened to Rumsfeld ”

Reading comprehension would show that I do “care” what happened to Rummy. I liked the man. I wish he could’ve stayed. Read the posts above again to understand what I as saying.

I.M. tries to make a point saying, “is because you have no sense of honor”

My sense of honor is to the MISSION. Honoring the soldiers dead or alive in Iraq by working towards finishing the mission. Rumsfeld is honorable and if he discussed this with Bush they made an honorable choice to try to work towards finishing the mission. Rumsfeld is not wounded, lying on the ground, asking Bush to, “go on without me – you can do it”. Rumsfeld can supply advice from afar, has served honorably and will go down in history as serving with distinction during the WOT.

I.M. wrote, “Any man who would backstab a friend(Rumsfeld)”

What statement of Bush’s backstabbed Rummy? How was Rummy assaulted or mischaracterized or accused of something? I just do NOT feel that Bush “backstabbed” when the two obviously discussed the possibility long ago.

I.M. asked, “What do you think Bush will do when Nancy cuts off spending for the war in Iraq?”

I do not think that will happen. But maybe I’m naive. They will work together to try to find a way to “finish” the war in Iraq. Nancy will try to make herself look like the one who finished an impossible situation. My guess. Alas, this is not relevant to the Rummy discussion though. The Republican lost the house. It is what it is whether Rummy was replaced or not. Replacing Rummy might go a long way towards completing the MISSION.

I.M. asked, “Do you think he’ll stand up to her or is it more likely, based on his past pattern of behavior that he will make a deal and turn his back on the troops?

I think he’ll stand up for the mission as he has ALWAYS done. He has not shown a pattern of anything but working towards completion of the mission.

I.M. asserted, “and you two will join in condemning our soldiers, spitting on them as they come home with their tails betwen their legs in utter defeat.”

uhuh. yep. That’s what I’ll do. How did you guess? You are soooo smart I.M. Now I’m persuaded to think Bush backstabbed and will cut and run based on past precedence because I.M. charged something about what I’d do and he was right on target.. /end sarcasm

I.M. wrote, “You and all those like you that turned the Congress, the White House and the country over to the Democrats”

How did I do this? I have daily since 1991 worked towards persuading people towards a strong defense, less dependancy and less government. I have persuaded quite a few people (one in particular in 1998 being my proudest conversion towards conservativism). I voted for every conservative that I could. So… how exactly did I turn the country over to the Democrats? Logic please….
The Left Right Debate » So it begins: Rumsfeld steps down says:

November 9, 2006 at 11:46 pm

[…] What the hell? Rummy resigns – Sister Toldjah: ..Is this a little concession Bush is offering to the newly-crowned Dems?? […]
G Monster says:

November 9, 2006 at 11:51 pm

Can’t we all just get along? I see all your points. I hated to see Rummy go, as he kicked the MSM in the butt everytime they attacked him, and was a very strong leader. The people of this country voted in the dems, for whatever reasons we can all speculate.

Maybe they ran some candidates that were in the center that appealled to more viewers. For whatever reason thier candidates won more often, we now have the dems in power in both houses of congress. Let’s hope they use thier power responsibly.

You 3 should really kiss and make up as you typically agree on most issues.
G Monster says:

November 9, 2006 at 11:52 pm

Or at least a handshake?
Big Bang Hunter says:

November 9, 2006 at 11:56 pm

GM – You girlie boy. Mind your own business, or I’ll drop a 500 word sentence in your Post Toasties!

– Bang
Baklava says:

November 9, 2006 at 11:59 pm

G,
Agreeing on most issues but I hope my behavior is never that atrocious. At present, I hope that you can see that no only is the viewpoint important but the behavior. I do not wish to be friends or on the same team with someone with so much anger and resentment. It’ll do NOTHING for our side if we have people on it that treat people that way. It’ll have political newbies running for the nearest liberal to see what they have to say.

See?

Viewpoint matters but so does the way we come across and behave. I may have not done so well making that point but maybe this post will help clear that up. We need to “stick to the topic at hand”, “let people state their opinions”, “disagree by staying on point and using facts and logic”.

I’m not saying I’m perfect. But we need to sharpen our game and strive to better ourselves….
Lorica says:

November 9, 2006 at 11:59 pm

Actually, President Bush probably did Rumsfield a favor. In February, when the investigations begin, it will be very hard to investigate Rummy without making it look like some sort of vendetta. It spares him endless committee hearings that most of us will never know about, and the public heart break of seeing all of our hard work in Iraq go to waste. As much as we hate this, we also don’t know that this might have been Rummy’s decision. Maybe he came to a realization that he could not go thru all the investigations and hearings and…. It might have just saved his life, and his health. I think all of this in-fighting is fruitless, and counter productive. Sadly it is just angry lashing out, and it is not helping anyone. – Lorica
Big Bang Hunter says:

November 10, 2006 at 12:10 am

– He didn’t look all that good in recent appearences Lorica, so you’re probably right on the mark…

– Bang
G Monster says:

November 10, 2006 at 12:25 am

You guys are still up? Good Evening. FYI…I did read Baklava’s post, and I.M. is a little out of control. Maybe is on the bottle after seeing the dems take control. Hard to blame him, but yes, we should all exhibit good behavior. Which is why it is so hard to swallow Pelosi as speaker, but hey, the fat lady has sang for the 2006 elections.
Big Bang Hunter says:

November 10, 2006 at 12:31 am

– Actually GM, she started singing for ’08 already, which is why I’m so upbeat about things. ’06 is over. time to move on.

– Bang
I. M. Neiman says:

November 10, 2006 at 10:56 am

Sister Toldjah: It is your friends Baklava and Big Bang Hunter that attacked me first solely for expressing my opinion on the subject of Rumsfeld being fired. I did not start the fight but I will defend myself against what I believe is their mindless, unreasoning attacks against me. I used no coarse language, or made any threats, though I did indicate my low personal regard for these two people. You may of course ban me immediately, because I will not bow down and accept the attacks of those posting here that you seem to wholly support.

I hate dishonorable people and I believe what Bush did to Rumsfeld lacked all decency and honor. I have served in the military and out in many, highly dangerous life and death situations, where loyalty and honor were absolute requirements if people were going to survive. Among the rules adhered to by people in these professions, one of them requires that we cover the back of our comrades in arms – this Bush miserably failed to do in the Rumsfeld case. Further, based on Bush’s patterms of behavior in working with the liberal Democrats and giving in to their demands, I believe Bush is about to abandon our brave troops in Iraq, because Nancy and Harry will threaten to cut off funding and Bush has not, in my opinion, demonstrated any personal courage in fighting the Democrats. So, I will not as you demanded – “calm down,” when I believe those brave men and women who gave their lives in a noble cause will have died for nothing, and those warriors left alive will suffer the same shame that millions suffered after Vietnam.

So now the ball is in your court and I expect this post will probably be blocked and I am sure that all future posts will be banned. Why? Because I chose to defend a man of honor and will not drink Bush kool aid and say he is a good man when I believe he did something so treacherous.

As to those asserting Rumsfeld is probably better off, I agree. I hope we can now let him rest in peace in ignominy (a total loss of dignity and self-respect or an incurring of public disgrace.) What a shame!

Oh, to Big Bang Hunter – Unless you served in the Marine Corps, I think your use of our motto is wholly inappropriate!
Baklava says:

November 10, 2006 at 11:21 am

I.M. wrote, “one of them requires that we cover the back of our comrades in arms – this Bush miserably failed to do in the Rumsfeld case.”

You have a laudibly high standard for Bush but Rumsfeld wasn’t in arms. The people on the ground are and they need Bush to do anything he can to have the mission complete. Bush replaced Rummy without badmouthing, backstabbing or accusing him of impropriety.

I.M. wrote, “I believe Bush is about to abandon our brave troops in Iraq”

I don’t but I could be wrong but he hasn’t shown that to be something he would do. He sticks to his convictions to the point of people calling him “stubborn” even on the immigration issue which is an 80/20 polling issue.

I.M. diverted the discussion again with, “So now the ball is in your court and I expect this post will probably be blocked ”

You were wrong!!!

I.M. asked, “Why?” It’d be because of the comment policy being ignored blatantly if it did happen.

I.M. without knowledge of Bang or Baklava’s military service wrote, “Oh, to Big Bang Hunter – Unless you served in the Marine Corps, I think your use of our motto is wholly inappropriate!”

What is inappropriate is the assertion that you are allowed to speak whatever allegations and that we can’t question you based on your “service” and lack of knowledge of ours. The WHOLE discussion is inappropriate. EVERYONE in this country is allowed to speak. It is that kind of talk that will NOT persuade and I hope to convince you of that because it is better that you are on our side convincing then on our side turning people away from us.

Our behavior mattes. Our words matter. That is why I spoke about words meaning things above.
Sister Toldjah says:

November 10, 2006 at 11:28 am

I.M., if you were banned here, it would be because I have grown tired of your drama king posts. If there’s anything worse than a snotty liberal, it’s a holier than thou conservative who thinks that disagreement with another conservative is tantamount to a declaration of war.

You don’t seem to really like ANYONE here, so I can’t figure out why you still come here? Maybe it would be a good idea for you to find a place more suitable to your liking, where everyone agrees with you and bows down to your way of thinking.
I. M. Neiman says:

November 10, 2006 at 11:43 am

I found this interesting post on “The Political Pit Bull,” which proves many in the GOP share my feelings: “The New York Times is reporting today that “painful off-again-on-again discussions” about dumping Rumsfeld had been going on at the White House since late summer, but the President resisted removing Rumsfeld for various reasons (including the lack of a replacement) until recently. Meanwhile, The Hill notes that the resignation announcement the morning after Democrats took back control of Congress apparently has some Capitol Hill GOPers furious.”

Baklava
A. I did not ever say because I served no one could question my opinions, that is a lie! I simply said because of that service, I have at least the same rights as those who did not serve to express my opinion.
B. You and I will never be on the same side! I am a conservative and an American that believes in our Constitution as originally crafted, and in our men and women under arms. From what you have posted, it ‘appears’ to me, that is, my personal opinion is: you are a Chafee Republican at best.
c. Rumsfeld was the Secretary of Defense, in charge of the entire military establishment, and like any commander, especially during a time of war, whether in uniform or not carrying a weapon he is still part of that military, as the President being Commander-In-Chief is part of that military.

Words no longer have any value in this world, they have no certain meaning; but our actions, what we do even when no one sees us testifies volumes about what kind of person we are, and no linguistic gymnastics by you or others will change that simple fact. If you say you are a Conservative and yet are not angry about Bush’s immigration policies, your actions speak louder than your words on that issue. I only used that as an example, I have no idea what you think about his immigration policies.

Lastly, you are assuming Sister Toldjah has even looked at my post yet, and we’ll see as the day progresses what the truth really is! I’ll bet you are hoping she will ban me, huh?
Severian says:

November 10, 2006 at 11:44 am

If it was important for Rumsfeld to go and he, not Georgi-girl Bush, went public with his desire to get out of the fight between Pelosi and Georgi and he resigned, then I’d have no problem with it; but the truth is Georgi Bush FIRED a loyal and valiant soldier and an honorable man for cheap political gain and to make nice with Pelosi.

How do you know that Rumsfeld didn’t jump on this grenade, why do you assume that he was pushed? Politics is not entirely like combat, though there are similarities. No one is dying on the Hill or at the WH because of this. Rumsfeld has long publically stated that he serves at the pleasure of the President, and that he’d go whenever Bush decided it was time for him to go. I personally think Rumsfeld was an excellent SecDef, and that the problems are not due to him, but if sacrificing Rumsfeld allows Bush to continue to get the Dems to fund the war or support it in any way, than it was a good decision. Sticking to one person in politics, if it was likely to result in problems that affected the military troops in the field and/or war policy, would not be a smart decision. It’s worth him leaving even if there is only a possibility it’ll help. Personally, I agree that it sucks, but politics is a dirty business, and as Machievellian as it gets, and if Rummy throwing himself on a political grenade offers the chance to ward off further negative impact to the war effort, so be it.

You seem like an angry, intolerant, and somewhat narrow minded person in your rants here IM. I’m willing to give you the benefit of the doubt, but not if you keep this up and particularly not if you keep playing the abused and angry victim role. I think you have a lot to offer from your experience if you’ll calm down and not view everything as an attack. Obey the posting rules, calm down, and I think you’ll find this a pleasant place to discuss things.
I. M. Neiman says:

November 10, 2006 at 11:49 am

Ah! I was proven correct, because I am willing to defend my beliefs and because I am passionate about my beliefs, Sister Toldjah has just asked me to leave.

That’s okay! By the way, I don’t even know what drama king means!

I am not ashamed of my beliefs and while my current anger at Bush will subside, I am not ashamed of being passionate about what I believe. I never used coarse language and while I passionately defended what I had to say, I did so with honesty.
Big Bang Hunter says:

November 10, 2006 at 12:04 pm

“Lastly, you are assuming Sister Toldjah has even looked at my post yet, and we’ll see as the day progresses what the truth really is!”

– Hows that “progressing” going I.M.?

– Personally I think you’re being as antagonistic as possible, to goad ST into banning you. Kind of interesting that on the one hand you absolutely explode when anyone disagree’s with your over the top comments, but you don’t hesitate to tell me, a perfect stranger, when and where, and whether, I have a right to use the Corps pledge. Apparently, in your private hell of whatever personal issues you have, you’ve forgotten the very meaning of the words “ever faithful”. Especially to your fellow citizens, and your very own brothers in arms. For myself, this is the last time I waste words on you.

– Bang
Lorica says:

November 10, 2006 at 12:21 pm

As to those asserting Rumsfeld is probably better off, I agree. I hope we can now let him rest in peace in ignominy (a total loss of dignity and self-respect or an incurring of public disgrace.) What a shame!

What disgrace I.M.?? Rummy has, as my friend Severian just reminded me, ALWAYS said he served at the pleasure of the President. I think you dishonor the service of Sec. Rumsfield. I think it is wholly un-appropriate for you, as a Marine, to call the Commander in Chief, some of the names that you have called him over the last couple of days. I think YOU need to stop opperating out of fear, and reacting to what you feel, and start trying to be more proactive.

I don’t believe that President Bush will abandon our troops out in the field. If anyone does it will be the Democrats, and then it will be their fault not the Presidents. I don’t think the Dems can handle the extreme bad press they would get if they did abandon out troops. I do believe that if the Dems did do these things that the Reps would be right there to capitalize on this stupid, stupid mistake. Howls of reliving Vietnam would be be so loud that it would shatter the Dems for a generation.

Now let’s start to give Thanks for what we do have. I believe Gates is going to be very good for the troops in the field too. Let’s hope he can bring more intel from the field and get these terrorists and bring our troops home with the Hero’s welcome they so richly deserve. Now let’s deal with the anger, and the fear, and be pro-active in this new congress. If we don’t, a loss in 2008 is almost guaranteed, and then you will have a new understanding of what misery is, as the first woman Commander in Chief will be Hillary Rodham Clinton, and we all know how she despises our troops. – Lorica
Severian says:

November 10, 2006 at 1:19 pm

You make a good point that’s worth repeatng Lorica, if the Dems decide not to abandon the troops, it will not be because they care anything about the troops. It will be because they fear the negative reaction they will get from it. And that is very telling.

As for IM, well, I was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt, but no more. You are too enamored of playing the abused martyr. You aren’t taking advantage of the opportunity to moderate youself and stick to the point, you are in an apparently perpetual rage against everything, and would rather act in a way to force ST to ban you so you can sit back and smugly tell youself it’s everyone else who’s against you not that you have problems of your own. Go sell crazy somewhere else, we get all we need here from the wandering moonbats that come thru.
Baklava says:

November 10, 2006 at 1:33 pm

I.M. lied.

ST didn’t ask you to leave. Words mean things… They can’t be changed to mean something else.

I.M. wrote, “I am not ashamed of my beliefs”

Nobody said you should be ashamed. We just asked you questions and said we don’t believe you are correct on some specific things.

I.M. wrote, “I am not ashamed of being passionate”

Being passionate is also irrelevant. We questioned your assertions we didn’t say you aren’t allowed to be passionate.

I.M. wrote, “I never used coarse language”

No… but you broke the comment policy by directly attacking others intelligence and calling them names whether they were coarse names or not. But this is also irrelevant. HOW COME I.M. you can’t answer questions? This is a legitimate question. I asked questions to figure out why you stated the things you stated. Many questions. None were answered. I address what you write and you seem to divert and attack. You can change. For the good of this country your debate style should change. We need people on our side to be persuasive not attackers.

Lorica wrote, “I don’t believe that President Bush will abandon our troops out in the field. If anyone does it will be the Democrats, and then it will be their fault not the Presidents.”

Amen Lorica. Logic wise that is sound. If the Dems cut off funding that IS the Dems fault. And America put them in power so you might say indirectly it was America’s fault but I am NOT one to say that. I think we as conservatives need to be more persuasive and not turn off voters.
I. M. Neiman says:

November 10, 2006 at 1:58 pm

About Rumsfeld being dishonored, I liked this post by Ric on “The Political Pit Bull:

Replying to my post, “Unfortunately, I think you are right. Rumsfeld, undeservedly, will be held accountable for “all” that has gone wrong in the Iraq campaign. Any of the positive aspects will be masked by negativism, which is an out-and-out distortion of the facts. For some insane reason, history, especially text books, are written and controlled by the leftists of the ink trade. Vilification of Rumsfeld is already in the books, those not even near the presses at this moment in time. George Bush will not fair well, to boot; the distorted view youngsters get, in all levels of education is criminal, is near criminal. That, nevertheless, is how the left maintains its base, by the proliferation of the BIG-LIE.”

That is what I mean about Rumsfeld, by firing him, historians will use that fact to vilify him and he, more than Bush, will be the insane architect of the Iraq war and our defeat there; and even if, as you assert the Democrats will actually be responsible for our troops leaving in defeat, history will blame Rumsfeld and to a lessor degree Bush. That is a sad fact of life!

Would they still blame Rumsfeld if he had not been fired? Yes! But, more weight was added to their arguement, as they will assert that he was fired for gross incompetence. Considering his honorable service to this country over many decades, his modernization of the military and his leading American into two very swift victories in Afghanistan and Iraq, despite the long, torturous battles in Iraq since then, it is a shame he will be treated like an enemy of the United States, IN MY OPINION!
Baklava says:

November 10, 2006 at 3:05 pm

I.M. misinformed, “That is what I mean about Rumsfeld, by firing him, historians will use that fact ”

He wasn’t fired.

Revisionists will always try to say whatever they want.
Lorica says:

November 10, 2006 at 4:04 pm

And your opinion is in error I.M. I cannot and will not say it any simplier.

will be the insane architect of the Iraq war and our defeat there;

When did we lose??

But, more weight was added to their arguement, as they will assert that he was fired for gross incompetence.

And what will they credit him when we win??

You see I.M., your basic premise is just not right. You assume we are losing the war. I say we are winning the war. I know that once the new Congress is sworn in, you will see all sorts of news articles about how good things are in Iraq. My friend just spent 2 years in Baghdad, and she loved it. Yes there were some dangers, but nothing like you hear on the MSM. They purposely made things look worse than they were just for this eventuality. She is spending a month here and then going back to the Middle East. She could go anywhere, has a house and grown children here, but she chose where she wanted to go. I will miss her. She has been a good friend to me, and although I worry for her safety, I know she is happy, over there doing what she can for the WOT.

Why now play into the hands of the left with continued anger and wrong thinking?? It is time to overcome our personal reactions, and be a proactive force in this government. Like it or not. I plan on getting in touch with all 3 of my new congressmen. They need to re-think somethings, and I want to make sure they are informed on just what I think of those things. I think it is going to be alot of fun. – Lorica
I. M. Neiman says:

November 10, 2006 at 4:12 pm

Now I don’t want anyone reading this to not have a positive affirmation of their incredible self worth or feel in any way negated by anything written herein or in any of my previous posts; However, Limbaugh reported today (I have no details) that Rumsfeld and others will be tried by a German Tribunal, much like the Nuremberg trials, for their roles in the torture of prisoners at Abu Graib, Guantanamo Bay Military barracks and other locations around the world.

That being said and considering that I am a condemned mental case with horrible, violent anger management problems; I believe that the Democrats will use the actions by Germany as partial excuse for Impeaching Bush next year; and they will demand an investigation and trial into Rumsfeld and others, and despite the evidence they all will be brought to trial in federal courts for torture, violations of civil liberties and war crimes. That is only my ignorant opinion and I trust others posting here will point out the folly of my thinking.

Just in the off chance, albeit exceptionally rare that, I may be at least partially right, doesn’t that mean Rumsfeld as I foolishly and ignorantly mentioned above will be dishonored, his reputation destroyed and his entire public service career negated by more than half of the voting citizens and illegal voting citizens of the United States? Lastly, didn’t Bush firing Rumsfeld exacerbate his problems before the world court? No, as usual, I am probably quite wrong!
Lorica says:

November 10, 2006 at 4:25 pm

Here is another thing that just occurred to me. This thought we need to believe firmly crosses ideological lines. This vote, these elections, are not about getting rid of the Repubs, as much as they are about holding people accountable for their stupidity. Blame who you want or what you want, but we all know the MSM is losing Viewership and Readership. Kattie Curric can’t hardly pull her numbers out of the basement to save her life. Even asked Rush Limbaugh to give her a hand, then she turned around and bit him. NYT has lost almost a million readers, if I remember correctly. That is alot of money. Has Rush lost listeners??? Where is Air America?? In the tank. The American people are better informed that we give them credit. Yeah some are deceived, but on the most part they are better than we think. Back to my main point. If this is about the American Voter holding the Elected accountable, then the Dems better do the right thing or they will be bounced out too. Let’s face it the Reps were done in by the independant vote and by acting like Big Government Libs. And where did it get them?? The people were angry about alot of things, yes there were concerns about the war, and our enemy played on those fears. But there were larger concerns about the Deficit and the stupidity of how the Government was being run as evidenced by what happened with Katrina, and a handful of other situations. – Lorica

P.S. I do not believe that Katrina was the fault of the Federal Government. I do believe the main failure lies in the local Government with the foolish decision not to evacuate New Orleans 2 days before Katrina hit the shores.
Baklava says:

November 10, 2006 at 4:27 pm

That first paragraph I.M. you know and I know is a bunch of false allegations against Rummy.

The second paragraph may or may not be true. It is as it is. The Dems will act as they will act. You didn’t have to end your second paragraph with “That is only my ignorant opinion” as I nobody here is surprised by Democrat actions anymore.

Your third paragraph about Rummy being dishonored is nothing anybody could’ve done anything about because yes, Germany and Democrats will do as they will do. Replacing Rummy doesn’t dishonor Rummy. But the left will try their hardest to for the next 50 years.

Clarity is key. Humanity’s struggle is against confusion. While you are rightly upset about Germany and the Democrats foolish actions, turn that into persuasive arguments to liberals about how foolish THEIR (Democrat leaders and Germany’s) actions are.

On your last statement, Bush firing Rumsfeld did not exacerabate Rumsfeld’s problems to the world court because their allegations have been long standing and would’ve continued. The mission in Iraq still stands, G’tmo stands, Terrorist surveillance stands and SWIFT stands. The allegations are against a so-called executive branch abuse of power that continues. It has less to do with Rummy and more to do with FALSE allegations against this administration and EVERYBODY in this administration. They have tar and feathered Gonzales, Rice, Rumsfeld, Bush, Cheney, etc because the left elitists and German elitists do not understand this GWOT and do not understand that the administration is acting within it’s authority during a war.
Lorica says:

November 10, 2006 at 4:42 pm

I.M. Let’s cross that bridge when we get to it. Again you cannot operate out of fear with these assumptions. Who is going to try Rummy?? If it just some group of asinine leftists, then who really cares. Wasn’t it Conyers who had mock impeachment trials and it made him look like and ass??

Again you say Bush fired Rummy, do you know this for a fact or did Rummy ask to be relieved. Rummy said himself that he had tendered his resignation twice and GW turned him down. If they had come to mutual agreement, then is it Bush Fires Rummy or is it Rummy decides to resign?? The Dems are pretty clueless the only problem was they weren’t in charge. And that is how we got here. Reps were in charge and Dems took advantage of our failures with the voters. Seems to be a pretty good strategery to me. But turn-about is fair play. – Lorica
I. M. Neiman says:

November 10, 2006 at 5:04 pm

Now I don’t want anyone reading this to not have a positive affirmation of their incredible self worth or feel in any way negated by anything written herein or in any of my previous posts; However, I have lived from Truman’s first Administration, and while I do not have even a fraction of the intellect, wisdom and mental acuity of virtually everyone else posting here, my experiences and observations over several decades of life aid me in projecting what is likely, not with ‘absolute’ certainty, will probably happen soon.

The Democrats will threaten to cut off all money for the war in Iraq unless Bush gives into their demands for a strategic withdrawal from Iraq (Cut-and-Run); that is exactly what they did to me and my fellow war criminals in Vietnam. Yes, I know Nixon was President, but it was the Democrat controlled Congress that forced his hand and a Democrat controlled Congress will force Bush’ hand; and there is no longer any support within this country to help him resist them, so he will agree to withdraw. Oh, he and the Democrats will employ pleasant sounding euphemisms, but it will be cut-and-run by another name, we will have lost the war, and even though I am a mental defective with violent, anger management problems, in my opinion our dead soldiers will have died in vain, as my friends did in Vietnam.

Yes, you will all scream – you are wrong, you are an angry old fool and we don’t give a damn what you say, that won’t happen. Okay, I hope you are right, but history, recent history is on my side.

As to Rumsfeld, yes this may all have happened anyway; but as I have asserted from the beginning his getting fired certainly won’t help his case. How do I know he was fired? a. That was and remains the consensus of both the liberal and conservative media. b. A resignation is written and accepted, it doesn’t require meetings and discussions, except for timing. Meetings indicates to me that, while the words ‘you are fired’ were not used, to call Rumsfeld in to discuss the subject indicates pressure to resign, which equals ‘you will quit so I don’t have to fire you,’ that is they way corporate types like Bush and Cheney fire people.

But, I am an ignorant old fool and that is the best senile thinking can achieve!
Baklava says:

November 10, 2006 at 5:21 pm

I.M. wrote, “Yes, you will all scream – you are wrong, you are an angry old fool and we don’t give a damn what you say, ”

No. What you said in the first two paragraphs is pretty sound speculation. I can only hope that the Democrats do not do what they keep talking about. If they do, I can only hope that the American people scream that that isn’t what they elected them to do.

I.M. wrote, “his getting fired certainly won’t help his case.”

Maybe it will. It’ll give him more time to put forth facts. While working he had to focus on his job.

As for your last paragraph. It’s funny to see you write that way. Nobody called you ignorant, senile or old or a fool. Just making sure the record is straight…..
I. M. Neiman says:

November 10, 2006 at 6:02 pm

I tried to post this before and perhaps I have been blocked, but it is possible to make a message crystal clear while using even praise worthy words. Bush would not have said to Rumsfeld, “You are fired,” but he could still get that message across clearly without using those exact words.

Thus, while I would not expect you or others to use those exact words, the message got through quite clearly.
Big Bang Hunter says:

November 10, 2006 at 6:08 pm

– and I.M. – If you simply insist on calling yourself those things the rest of us absolutely refuse to argue or disaggree with you…. a show of conciliation on all our parts…

– Bang
Lorica says:

November 10, 2006 at 6:13 pm

Amen Bak. We shall see what the future holds, but I hold to my original assessment. If the Dems call for alot of hearings to discuss the errors of the past, they will clearly show their true agenda all along, and that the whole “America Needs A New Direction” was a sham, and they can kiss 2008 away, which really is the true prize in their minds. – Lorica
Big Bang Hunter says:

November 10, 2006 at 6:30 pm

– I doubt they’ll be that stupid Lorica. With Emanuel throwing the roses on the hard lefts coffin on National TV yesterday “vowing to move away from “extreme voices that serve to devide, rather than unite”, unless something drastic changes in the next few months, it’s looking like the Dems have learned their lessons, and do not intend to repeat the “Kerry’s” of the recent past. But we can hope.

– The Left is already busy disavowing anything that happens in Iraq, saying they can’t be blamed for the mess. I told them if they think that will fly with the electorate, if the whole thing turns into a bloodbath, and the Wahhabists end up in charge there again, to let me know if they’re interested in some South Africa Gold mine stocks.

– Another SecProgg twit said I should think about it as the Dems being the relief pitcher, coming in, in the late inning’s, trying to save an almost hopeless cause. If he can’t no one can blame him.

– I responded by telling him his analogy was fine as far as it went. What he left out is that if the bench warmers get their shot, and fail, they are seldom around on next years roster.

– Bang
I. M. Neiman says:

November 10, 2006 at 6:45 pm

MY Posting policy: “I don’t want anyone reading this to not have a positive affirmation of their incredible self worth, their superior intellect or wisdom or feel in any way negated by anything written herein or in any of my previous posts. I am just a senile old fool expressing my stupid opinions, which are of no worth.”

BBH: I only stated what you three or four obviously believe, but apparently even my stating your own hate filled beliefs about me offends you, that makes it very hard to discuss anything because you are so thinned skinned and apparently above any criticism. The policy of this blog apparently, is no one is allowed to say anything that offends you 3-4 people, so please go to Sister Soldjah and maybe she can comfort you. Otherwise, to try and satisfy your egos I have instituted the policy on top of this post.

You may go back to my post of 1:58 PM; 4:12 PM; 5:04 PM; and 6:02 PM and I dare you to find anything that was written to offend the Four Amigas/Amigos!
Lorica says:

November 10, 2006 at 6:45 pm

Those same benchwarmers also get tagged with the loss, and not a save. So it is just as important for the relief pitcher to get the save . The logic of the left is so two dimensional. If the deathtoll of our troops in Iraq doubles due to the effects of this new Congress, there will be a cause to their effect. They can’t hide behind “it was a mess already”. They will be held accountable. – Lorica
Severian says:

November 10, 2006 at 7:00 pm

IM, try looking in a mirror when you say the following:

very hard to discuss anything because you are so thinned skinned and apparently above any criticism

You have a problem, one that I’ve seen all too often, you are guilty of what you claim for others, much much more so. Which is a pity as some of your arguments are spot on and prettly succinctly and eloquently stated. But the value of your arguments is hard to find when they are surrounded by your self-pity party you seem intent on having for yourself. Sarcasm can be a useful tool, but not when mixed with the aggrieved, woe is me, y’all are all bastages for picking on me, etc. I could go on, but it’d be pointless.

If you learn to interact with others without needing to constantly play the aggrieved party, you will be a good addition to any discussion I think, but unless you do, your message will be drowned out by your personality problems.
Lorica says:

November 10, 2006 at 7:03 pm

I.M no one here believes that. We believe you are passionate and angry. That combination can be dangerous. But it is a double edged sword. It cuts both ways. Our only real concern is what seems like total defeat. This is a bump in the road, and if used correctly could be very healthy for America. Let us not pour down a huge load of future possiblities that play directly to the opposition ideologues. We must remain strong. If this possiblity becomes eventual then come back here and hollar and scream to your hearts content, You will have willing allies. But for now, this is all about overcoming, and becoming stronger. I welcome the chance to become better than what we were. We had become lazy and feckless after the 2004 elections. Something about political capital being spent. Well there ain’t no more political capital. Now we have to overcome by the presentations of our ideas. It will be hard work, and we will need people like you with us. – Lorica

I am out of here. The boys will be waiting on me at the cigar room, and I still don’t have my socks on. Mmmmmm I can smell the Gurkha Centurian buring now.

http://www.cigarsinternational.com/prodDisp.asp?item=CS-ZTA&cat=3
Big Bang Hunter says:

November 10, 2006 at 7:41 pm

– I.M. – You’re exactly the same as everyone else on this blog – a guest poster – no more, no less. you don’t get to set policy, even covertly, unless that simply means you’ve decided to debate civily, which would have saved you a lot of apparent misery, mostly self imposed, in the first place, since not one of the things you’ve accused others of saying or doing against you has happened yet. You’re simply bad mouthing a lot of very nice people through lack of your own self control, and paranoia. Enough. Just enough. ST’s blog is not your own personal therupy coach.

– Bang
I. M. Neiman says:

November 10, 2006 at 8:29 pm

“I don’t want anyone reading this to not have a positive affirmation of their incredible self worth, their superior intellect or wisdom over my own or feel in any way negated by anything written herein or in any of my previous posts. I am just a senile old fool expressing my stupid opinions, which are of no value to anyone but myself.”

BBH: I said I set my own policy for how I post here, I DID NOT say I was setting policy for this blog, you manufactured that interpretation out of pure, unreasoning hatred.

Once again I challenge, I dare you to go back to my posts of 1:58 PM; 4:12 PM; 5:04 PM; 6:02 PM and 6:45 PM and find anything therein that was written to even hint at or intimate anything to offend the Four Amigas/Amigos! I understand you four are above all criticism if anyone wants to post on this blog, I thorouhgly understand that you four are not to be spoken to except in homage and understanding that everyone is of less value and worth then yourselves. So, I start each post stating my clear understanding of those policies of this blog to avoid offending you five!

Lastly, I have suffered absolutely no misery, I am a man, which is something alien to most people today; and I can take any and all personal attacks by word, deed or weapon, and while prevented at this blog from defending myself verbally, I am able to properly defend myself without any stress whatsoever.

I have paid you four, possibly five now with Severian added; all demanded and due homage, I have humbled myself as an inferior being to you five so that I can comment and hopefully converse with less sensitive people about topics that interest me, as I did in the first story with two people, absent the rancor and acrimony my presence creates among the five amigas/agmigos.

Now what more must I do, other than accept your opinions wholly and without reservation, which I will not do; to get you five to leave me alone, to allow me to post here, to allow me to interact with others on this blog, and somehow not offend your sensitive natures?

MEA CULPA! MEA CULPA! MEA CULPA! I repent for ever offending you five superior beings!
Baklava says:

November 10, 2006 at 10:04 pm

Why do you continue that way I.M?

Your insults haven’t caused me to act out with anger…

I’ve stuck to your words, asked questions about your words, pointed out things regarding your words, and pointed out where I agree and disagree with your words….

Almost every post from you has either a tongue lashing or a pity party in it and nobody here including myself knows why that goes on. We have stuck to what you wrote.

Is there a way for you to move on without attacks on others or yourself? Not because we are thin skinned. It’s the exact opposite. All of us here are a asset to ST’s blog as we all have quite a history and knowldegebase. The insults don’t bother us. But we’ll point out to you that we wish for you if you are going to speak for conservatives that we hope you can change towards being persuasive as opposed to someone who hurts our cause. We WANT America to win and we NEED as many persuasive people on our side as possible. Your history and knowledge could be an asset if you sharpen your persuading skills…

My WHOLE goal with you is to see if I can persuade you and with you I hope to persuade you to be persuasive and not have the behavior issues that you have.

If you do not want to change and wish to ignore advice that’s ok. I’ll continue to try to persuade you to be persuasive and not a harm to our cause.

BTW, Please don’t be offended with this post. or how do you put it… I don’t want you to not have a positive affirmation of your incredible self worth, your superior intellect or wisdom over my own or feel in any way negated by anything written herein or in any previous posts. I’m just a cockroach girly man expressing my idiotic opinion, which is of no value to anyone but myself.

But in all seriousness… Do you see my point I.M.? We need people to be converted/persuaded not turned away from us. Discussion in the midst of disagreement needs to be our sharpest skillset.
I. M. Neiman says:

November 10, 2006 at 10:18 pm

“I don’t want anyone reading this to not have a positive affirmation of their incredible self worth, their superior intellect or wisdom over my own or feel in any way negated by anything written herein or in any of my previous posts. I am just a senile old fool expressing my stupid opinions, which are of no value to anyone but myself.”

I can only ask, one last time: Now what more must I do, other than accept your opinions wholly and without reservation, which I will not do; to get you five to leave me alone, to allow me to post here, to allow me to interact with others on this blog, and somehow not offend your incredibly sensitive natures?

MEA CULPA! MEA CULPA! MEA CULPA! I repent for ever offending you five superior beings! If it will help, I will crawl across America on my athritic, bloody knees in sackcloth and ashes, stopping every mile to repent loudly and begging God’s forgiveness for offending the five Amigas/Amigos!

If it means being forced to accept your opinions and deny my own beliefs or write everything in a way pleasing to you all, then you are SOL! Otherwise, please refer to paragraph Three!
Baklava says:

November 10, 2006 at 11:13 pm

I.M. wrote, “I can only ask, one last time: Now what more must I do, other than accept your opinions wholly and without reservation, which I will not do;”

You don’t have to accept my opinions. There is plenty of room for disagreement. But when we ask questions and state our disagreement, be respectful. Don’t lash out with names and directly questioning our intellect and stating irrelevant things about how you served. Not because we can’t take it but because it’s not persuasive.

When we question you just answer the questions or continue disagreeing. Stay on topic, on subject. Diversions add for confusion not persuasion.

I.M. wrote, “to get you five to leave me alone, to allow me to post here,

You can post here. Nobody is saying that you can’t. You have been addressing us and we’ve been addressing you.

I’m not offended though you keep writing about me being offended. I hope to see you as more persuasive in the future. Don’t you want to be?

Your last paragraph is something none of us have said. Questioning what you wrote or disagreeing is something we should be allowed to do also. Right?

Comments are closed.