McCain: 'No Confidence' in Rumsfeld

[Prozac the Robert]

Western democrats also tend to be a different breed-- typically pro-gun-rights, for example. These Centrist pols, both Rep and Dem, in the West need to pool their resources and develop a new Centralist Party. I bet they'd get a lot of response and push the other parties into their respective corners.

I wonder if that wouldn't be a bad thing. You could be redued to only one effective party, which isn't really a good thing for democracy.

[White Haven]

Neither is this abortion of a one-and-a-quarter-party-system we have now, with the degree of overlap. and purely cosmetic differences. If the change is for the better, great, if it's for the worse, maybe it'll be bad enough to force voters out of cud-chewing complacency.

[Sea Skimmer]

Like Shineski?

Yes, Shineski, spawned of Stryker and the 20 ton Future Combat System. What a wonderful man to listen too.

[Illuminatus Primus]

Like Shineski?

Yes, Shineski, spawned of Stryker and the 20 ton Future Combat System. What a wonderful man to listen too.

Wow, what a glorious red herring considering he was right that we needed more troops than Rumbag and Wolfowitz said we did.

Does the phrase "it does not follow" come to mind when you think of "Stryker and FCS" and then "Shineski said we needed more troops than Rumbag said and he was right."

[Patrick Degan]

Like Shineski?

Yes, Shineski, spawned of Stryker and the 20 ton Future Combat System. What a wonderful man to listen too.

Hmm... Attacking the Messenger Fallacy, Red Herring Fallacy, a Non-Sequitor, and totally missing the point that Shinseki was right when he said more troops would be needed and Rumsfool and Wolfoblitz were DEAD FUCKING WRONG.

[Rogue 9]

Like Shineski?

Yes, Shineski, spawned of Stryker and the 20 ton Future Combat System. What a wonderful man to listen too.

Hmm... Attacking the Messenger Fallacy, Red Herring Fallacy, a Non-Sequitor, and totally missing the point that Shinseki was right when he said more troops would be needed and Rumsfool and Wolfoblitz were DEAD FUCKING WRONG.

Yeah, well any old idiot could have told them that. It takes a very special idiot, however, to think that tracked vehicles are obsolete.

[Illuminatus Primus]

Yeah, well any old idiot could have told them that. It takes a very special idiot, however, to think that tracked vehicles are obsolete.

Whatever, armchair general. I might stomach that kind of boorish, tenured condescension from a guru like Skimmer, but you're just being a wannabe with a remark like that.

Anyway, the issue is entirely moot. It was claimed that Rumbag listened to military commanders about troop needs and that is clearly and demonstrably false. Shineski's disproved or unreasonable concepts which are totally irrelevent to the issue being dealt with notwithstanding.

[Rogue 9]

Oh, and I don't think a single centrist party would work. There are too many different kinds of centrist. There are those who are fiscally conservative and socially liberal, those who are fiscally liberal and socially conservative (an odd combo, but it happens), those who go middle of the road on almost everything, and so forth. I could find fellow centrists who are more my polar opposite than any given Democrat or Republican. I don't think you could find enough common ground to make a single coherent centrist party.

[SirNitram]

those who are fiscally liberal and socially conservative (an odd combo, but it happens).

Sounds like the current administration's love of massive pork and social regression.

[Rogue 9]

those who are fiscally liberal and socially conservative (an odd combo, but it happens).

Sounds like the current administration's love of massive pork and social regression.

Well, now that I think about it... Yeah, you've got a point.

[Durandal]

Yes, Shineski, spawned of Stryker and the 20 ton Future Combat System. What a wonderful man to listen too.

Apparently, in this case, he'd have been a great guy to listen to.

[Vympel]

Rumsfeld has always been full of shit on these matters- on most matters, it seems. He and his ilk consistently claim they're listening to "the commanders" (nice and vague) about what troop levels are required etc, but nothing's being done. They've had almost 2 years to get it right and do something, they've done fuck all but piss soldiers off.

Anyone catch the Daily Show's segment on Donald Rumsfeld's ability to ask himself the tough questions?

[White Haven]

Asteroids do not concern me...

Listening isn't actually the same as caring what's said, after all. As for variety in centrists, you've got the fundie meatheads and the multibillionaire magnates together in the Republican party, yes? Massive dichotmoies aren't impossible, just a devil to balance.

[kheegster]

There's no way in hell he's getting the nominiation. He was nearly blacklisted when he went against Bush even though the party had all but crowned the fucker on his Ranch in Texas at the beginning of primary season.

I said he ought to get the nomination, not that he would. Some empty suit with a Club for Growth endorsement and name recognition will get the nod.

So who looks like the likely GOP candidates then (given there's still 4 years to go)?

BTW, what does GOP stand for? Been wondering for a million years.

[frigidmagi]

BTW, what does GOP stand for? Been wondering for a million years.

Grand Old Party.

[Patrick Degan]

BTW, what does GOP stand for? Been wondering for a million years.

Grand Old Party.

These days, "God's Own Party". At least according to the fundies now running it...

[Darth Wong]

I loved that Rumsfeld "you go to war with the army you have, not the army you want" comment. Anyone who's had any experience in business knows that line all too well, because it is an utterly classic middle-management line that every engineer has heard a thousand times. "Work with what you have, not with what you want".

Except that when a plant worker has to work with what he has, it means less productivity for the same effort. When you apply that same business-based mentality to the military, it means dead soldiers.

[SecondStorm]

I loved that Rumsfeld "you go to war with the army you have, not the army you want" comment. Anyone who's had any experience in business knows that line all too well, because it is an utterly classic middle-management line that every engineer has heard a thousand times. "Work with what you have, not with what you want".

Except that when a plant worker has to work with what he has, it means less productivity for the same effort. When you apply that same business-based mentality to the military, it means dead soldiers.

Couldnt agree more. Sometimes you cant "re-allocate resources", sometimes the only thing you need is more resources.

Iraq is one of those situations.

[White Haven]

I'm starting to think that the /lack/ of an MBA should be a prerequisite for high government positions. Sheeah, this is making me queasy.

[Aaron]

I'm starting to think that the /lack/ of an MBA should be a prerequisite for high government positions. Sheeah, this is making me queasy.

This makes me certain that prior military experiance at the Flag level should be manditory for the SecDef position.

[White Haven]

No argument there...this is like accountants running engineering companies.

...

...

Waaait a minute....

[Joe]

When he ran in 2000 he wasn't well known enough to defeat the Golden Boy, but that campaign established him as a national personality, and in the last 4 years, he's only gotten more popular. I think McCain is probably the most universally respected politician in America today, and barring some unanticipatible occurrence between now and then, he definitely ought to be the GOP candidate in 2008. I still think the party leadership is more likely to try and run some neoconservative troglodyte who will keep staying the course, though.

Consider McCain the preferred candidate of the true blue neoconservatives. He was their first choice in 2000 (the Weekly Standard endorsed him, not Bush, during the primaries) and they probably would prefer him now as well. In 2000, McCain was the guy running on interventionism while Bush was running on "no nation-building." He was the one advocating a more active policy against rogue states in favor of free, democratic governments, and he also called for a much tougher line on China - an issue that rarely comes up these days but it very important to neoconservative thinkers - than Bush did. The reason McCain can't become the Republican candidate is not because of neoconservative obstruction, it's because he won't whore himself out to the Christian right.

If McCain were to become President in 2008 it would be unwise to expect a departure from Bush's foreign policy. But I imagine it would be run much more competently.

[Raptor 597]

Rumsfeld has always been full of shit on these matters- on most matters, it seems. He and his ilk consistently claim they're listening to "the commanders" (nice and vague) about what troop levels are required etc, but nothing's being done. They've had almost 2 years to get it right and do something, they've done fuck all but piss soldiers off.

Anyone catch the Daily Show's segment on Donald Rumsfeld's ability to ask himself the tough questions?

"Now, now settle down." God, my stick-in-the-ass principal isn't even that uptight.

[Alyrium Denryle]

When he ran in 2000 he wasn't well known enough to defeat the Golden Boy, but that campaign established him as a national personality, and in the last 4 years, he's only gotten more popular. I think McCain is probably the most universally respected politician in America today, and barring some unanticipatible occurrence between now and then, he definitely ought to be the GOP candidate in 2008. I still think the party leadership is more likely to try and run some neoconservative troglodyte who will keep staying the course, though.

Consider McCain the preferred candidate of the true blue neoconservatives. He was their first choice in 2000 (the Weekly Standard endorsed him, not Bush, during the primaries) and they probably would prefer him now as well. In 2000, McCain was the guy running on interventionism while Bush was running on "no nation-building." He was the one advocating a more active policy against rogue states in favor of free, democratic governments, and he also called for a much tougher line on China - an issue that rarely comes up these days but it very important to neoconservative thinkers - than Bush did. The reason McCain can't become the Republican candidate is not because of neoconservative obstruction, it's because he won't whore himself out to the Christian right.

If McCain were to become President in 2008 it would be unwise to expect a departure from Bush's foreign policy. But I imagine it would be run much more competently.

I have no issue with neocon foreign policy. It is the Bush admin's domestic policy that I cant stand, and it is a stance that McCain(my beloved senator BTW) does not share. Which makes me a happy panda

[Joe]

Foreign policy is the only place they matter. They have no real defined goals for domestic or social policy.