Video: Bush announces Rumsfeld’s resignation; Update: Awesome up-with-amnesty Q&A added!
posted at 2:42 pm on November 8, 2006 by Allahpundit
I ‘Tubed some highlights. This is just from the speech portion; the juicier stuff, including new hope for his amnesty plan for illegals, came in the Q&A, but it’ll be a little while before that’s ready. When it is, I’ll update with more vid.
Jim Treacher e-mails: “Kos must feel like the kid on Christmas morning who’s surrounded by presents — but didn’t get the one he REALLY wanted.” Comfort enough.
Update: I forgot about Bolton’s recess appointment. Say bye-bye to the mustachioed one. Liebs likes him so he might stand a chance on a floor vote, but I doubt he’ll make it out of committee now.
Update: Here’s the Q&A. It’s all worth watching, but the part that’s going to make Michelle cry starts around five minutes in.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
We better be ready to use that filibuster thingamajiggy that the Dems were so fond of when that amnesty plan comes up.
Mark V. on November 8, 2006 at 2:48 PM
Godspeed, Mr. Rumsfeld. Thank you for your service.
Pablo on November 8, 2006 at 2:52 PM
I don’t know, Kos might get exactly what he wants yet – How can the Democrats avoid putting a bill to pull troops out of Iraq or at least set up a timetable now? They didn’t win because people thought Iraq was wildly successful. They won because people wanted a change in direction. And there’s only one change possible.
I e-mailed my Dem congresswoman this morning telling her I expect her to push for troop withdrawals now that they have the majority. I can’t be the only one sending that e-mail today.
Enrique on November 8, 2006 at 2:53 PM
Bush is having a good day. He finally has a Senate and House he can work with. Can you see the Republicans filibustering a Bush SCOTUS nominee?
windbag on November 8, 2006 at 2:53 PM
Newt – Rumsfeld in 08
RobertCSampson on November 8, 2006 at 2:55 PM
If Bush used this tone and uttered the phrase “I take responsibility ”
a little more oftenonce before the election the results might have been different.JaHerer22 on November 8, 2006 at 2:55 PM
Enrique,
They can’t do it. It isn’t within their Constitutional authority to deploy, or redeploy our troops.
Take a look at the history of midterm election for a second term President. This is on the low side of the congressional seat loss scale. This is the normal flow of things.
Do you think this means people want a change in the economy too?
Pablo on November 8, 2006 at 3:01 PM
Should have happened years ago
rattrap47 on November 8, 2006 at 3:02 PM
Rummy SHOULDN’T have resigned-that is, after all, what the left wanted.
Rush said that in Bushes speach he sounded like he wanted to finish more popular than principled.
If W starts handing the left gifts I’ll change my registration to libertarian.
If conservatives don’t start staying to to their values I’M LEAVING!!
Hey Enrique:
Would you rather fight the terrorists over there or in your yard.
We’re not France-or are we.
annoyinglittletwerp on November 8, 2006 at 3:03 PM
Can we move Bolton to secretary of state
Defector01 on November 8, 2006 at 3:03 PM
Elections have consequences.
TheBigOldDog on November 8, 2006 at 3:08 PM
bleh… Dems win majority, big deal. Let’s see what they can get done and what they actually do over the next couple of years. There’s another election in two years and we could take it all back.
The Dems love to self-destruct, and they can barely get along with eachother. So other than a speed-bump, this means nothing.
SilverStar830 on November 8, 2006 at 3:10 PM
Frankly I think it may be fun to do with the Dems have been doing for the past six years: snipe from the sidelines. Come on, Dems! Dooooooo something! There are still terrorists around! People are dying in Iraq! Dooooooo something!
the wolf on November 8, 2006 at 3:13 PM
I take it you can only get a recess appointment once.
EFG on November 8, 2006 at 3:14 PM
This is an appropriate time to appreciate the poetry of Donald Rumsfeld.
Pablo on November 8, 2006 at 3:14 PM
Well, at least Bolton won’t be going WILLINGLY (in his heart).
seejanemom on November 8, 2006 at 3:20 PM
Next Dick quits, Condi moves to VP and Bolton to State.
I smell Rove!!!
Dread Pirate Roberts VI on November 8, 2006 at 3:20 PM
I really disagree–I believe the Republicans foolishly abandoned the moderates in their party and left that part of the spectrum ripe for the picking for the Dems–look at who they picked to run–socially conservative Dems, the Reagan Democrats as they are called (Casey, Webb, Tester e.g.)
So there is an interesting dynamic at play–the Repubs in Congress are more conservative than ever with their moderates taking a beating; the Dems are more conservative as well, except for their leadership.
And alas, poor Batboy Bush really, really thought he would hold both houses. Gotta give his old man props, that woebegotten soul knew when he was beat.
honora on November 8, 2006 at 3:21 PM
Bush should do the following:
pardon all marines in the brig…………..carte blanche
pardon the two border patrol agents…they affected the election.
Kill Sadr the cleric….Now
Send tanks 5 miles into Syria to see what is there.
But this dumb joke as a pres…has no idea what power he has…..he is stupid….the CIA is back and running the country.
LZVandy on November 8, 2006 at 3:22 PM
Guiliani-Santorum ’08. Screw McCain.
The Dems are in the hot seat now. The leadership so driven by the nutroots they going to implode from the weight of expectations.
Iblis on November 8, 2006 at 3:23 PM
fk moderates………..honora
LZVandy on November 8, 2006 at 3:23 PM
Dec Vanity Fair makes the same prediction re Cheney but predict McCain as VP. Interesting: the clash of the dogmatic versus the pragmatic. McCain could win, Condi couldn’t–she’s too tarred with the Iraq brush.
honora on November 8, 2006 at 3:24 PM
Since we are deeper in fantasyland than a three year old at Disneyland:
Cheney out…Michael Steele in!!
liberrocky on November 8, 2006 at 3:25 PM
Eloquently proving my point. If you’re interested in expanding your vocabulary, here’s one for you: marginalized. Trust me, you’re gonna get used to hearing that one.
honora on November 8, 2006 at 3:26 PM
What are you joking? The Reps didn’t have the nards to stand up to the Dems before they lost their majority in both houses. What makes you think they will now?
Benaiah on November 8, 2006 at 3:27 PM
Absolutely, run a guy who was number 3 in the Senate leadership, and managed to get bitched slapped by a candidate who is just this side of comatose.
honora on November 8, 2006 at 3:34 PM
I don’t think so. Bush should try to get him through the Senate. (More video of Dems refusing to stir the pot at the corrupt UN can’t hurt.) But another recess appointment of Bolton is just what we need to fire up the base.
Bill C on November 8, 2006 at 3:37 PM
Is it me, or does Bush sound flatly pissed to be letting Rummy head off to the sunset?
yo on November 8, 2006 at 3:40 PM
Funny.
Casey almost made me comatose last night with his victory speech. Honestly, I’ve never seen anyone be so boring after winning so big.
Slublog on November 8, 2006 at 3:43 PM
I understand the President has also just announced that he’s renaming the Department of Defense, which will heretofore be known as the Department of Appeasement, and is replacing the Joint Chiefs with borrowed French officers. And now that Kerry’s established his credibility with our allies he’ll make a perfect replacement for Bolton. The Dhimmi’s will murtha everything up bad enough in the next two years to pretty much guarantee the Republicans get the country back, but will there be anything left worth having?
bdfaith on November 8, 2006 at 3:45 PM
I’m guessing he is royally pissed but I didn’t pick that up in his demeanor.
honora on November 8, 2006 at 3:47 PM
Honora said:
Could you possible be more clueless honora? The democrats abandoned their moderates (Lieberman) whereas the Republicans embraced full-blown RINOs (Chaffee). If anything, this election proved to the democrats that they dont need to come to the center to stay in power. Yes, some of the democrat candidates took more conservative positions because they knew they wouldn’t win otherwise, but let’s see what happens when it comes to the VOTES. Since the Congress is still pretty evenly split, if these so-called conservative democrats actually vote conservative, then the Democrats won’t have accomplished much anyway. Say hello to the frustration Republicans have experienced with the Senate the last several years.
Conversely, if these so-called conservative democrats vote along party lines, their votes will expose them as the liberals that they are, and they will be thrown out on their collective as*es come re-election time.
kaltes on November 8, 2006 at 3:47 PM
If Bolton goes, I will run wild in the streets burning cars and buses.
EF on November 8, 2006 at 3:50 PM
Honora and Constipated……look on the bright side, Michael Jackson is making a come back performance at the World Music Awards in London. The Good Ol Days Are Here Again!…da.da.da.daaaaaa.da…da.da.da.daaaaaaaaa.da
Limerick on November 8, 2006 at 3:50 PM
Nope. “W” quits and CHENEY F*CKS ‘em in the *SS for two of the longest years of their lives….oh, if I were queen…..
seejanemom on November 8, 2006 at 3:52 PM
Probably. Oh wait, that was a rhetorical question, right? You guys, honestly.
honora on November 8, 2006 at 3:52 PM
What an undeserved ending for such an honourable man.
WriterMom on November 8, 2006 at 3:54 PM
EF ha ha…are you a Fwench yoot or something?
WriterMom on November 8, 2006 at 3:55 PM
Honora said:
Are you kidding me? (1) Condi isnt tarred with any Iraq brush, maybe Rumsfeld, Bush, Cheney, but not her, and (2) Bush managed to win the 2004 election in the midst of the Iraq War, so clearly this election wasnt about the war, and (3) Lieberman vs Lamont was a referendum on the war, and Lamont for crushed. Hardly evidence that the Iraq War is behind the results of this election.
The reality of the situation is, that this election was NOT about Iraq. The liberal democrats have ALWAYS been fiercely against Iraq, and they have always been marginalized, and this election is no different. The democrats picked up seats not by hammering on the Iraq war, but by pretending to be more conservative in select races. Several of the major democrat candidates that ended up winning supported the Iraq war and oppose the cut-and-run of the liberal left.
The democrats and the media know this election wasnt a referendum on the war, but theyll go ahead and lie to say it was to perpetuate the fiction that this election was a victory for the anti-war left. Far from it.
kaltes on November 8, 2006 at 3:55 PM
*sniffs*
Whats that smell? Smells like Darfur. Osama may get his wish and draw us into that region. Excellent.
Theworldisnotenough on November 8, 2006 at 3:56 PM
Limerick, howdy. Keep in mind that the Dems held the Congress for 40 years, 1954 thru 1994. Imagine, all that time and the Republic survived, indeed even prospered. You want to run around Cassandra like, go ahead. But it’s rather foolish IMO.
honora on November 8, 2006 at 3:57 PM
Bush tapped Gates to thwart Democrats ability to hide behind the Iraq Commission’s upcoming report. Since Gates was an author, Democrats will be forced to support our Mission rather than sour the publics patience. Brilliant move. Now that Democrats are in Institutional positions, it will place a greater burden on them to support US foreign policy.
Fritz on November 8, 2006 at 3:58 PM
Honora, you have victory disease today. Most days you are willing to look at the issues and talk…but today Constipated has you by the hand.
Howdy back honorable foe!
Limerick on November 8, 2006 at 3:58 PM
hmm, 1954 thru 1994… how many wars did we lose or half-ass during that time?
Lehosh on November 8, 2006 at 3:58 PM
…an aptly named magazine, that. Have you ever actually *read* Bunyan? Vanity Fair isn’t a nice, positive place, nor are its inmates portrayed as being all that wise.
…but, McCain would fit right in there….
…and here’s an eye-openner for you: the Dems won *NOT* because so many people agree with them, but because so many people *DISAGREE* with what they see going on…and the Dems are very much a part of that. When you’re the only other thing on the menu, you’re apt to pick up a few seats.
Here are a few words for *you*, plucked from the ether around the Democratic Party, although they seem blissfully unaware of any of them: sedition, treason, surrender, ignominy, cowardice, scabrous, pusillanimous, disloyal, subversive, knave, villain, and sellout.
I’d’ve included “whore” and “rat”, but I wouldn’t wish to slander “sex workers” or vermin by the comparison.
…now, excuse me if I notice you no more, and wish you to go gloat among your own species. What I’m sure sound to you like your own righteousness sounds flat to my ears.
…go find the kitchen cabinet of your choice and hunker down with the other roaches…I’m turning on a light….
Puritan1648 on November 8, 2006 at 3:59 PM
Now don’t try sweet talking me now.
Actually, defeat becomes you. It’s your natural mileau, the perfect canvas for your sourness, self righteousness, and sheer ugliness of soul. Party on baby.
honora on November 8, 2006 at 4:02 PM
Can’t we all just get along?
Limerick on November 8, 2006 at 4:03 PM
“Limerick, howdy. Keep in mind that the Dems held the Congress for 40 years”
Yeah, no shit. Makes one wonder why blacks keep voting for them. Can anyone tell me what the dems have done for blacks in forty years of control?
darwin on November 8, 2006 at 4:03 PM
But Darfur is noble and honorable! How dare you question their morality!
But seriously, I wonder if the democrats/whigs will be able to admit we’d be fighting muslims in Darfur as well? Nah…
SouthernGent on November 8, 2006 at 4:04 PM
Even though it took the Republicans getting destroyed for Bush to remove Rummy, it had to be done.
Notice how the Democrats went after former military, social cosrvative Democrats to win. I’m not a huge fan of MCcain and Guliani, but having them for 08 = game over. And thats what conservatives may have to settle for in 08. Allen is finished, Santorum is done but I’d put him as head of the RNC.
V15J on November 8, 2006 at 4:05 PM
So now I really CAN hire Pedro to do my job while I pay him 3rd world wages and stay home and reap the benefits! YAY!
SouthernGent on November 8, 2006 at 4:06 PM
Well, crap; thanks a lot Bush. I was depressed enough about things and now you fire Rumsfeld.
The one thing that was worth suffering the slings and arrows of the left and RINOS for, and you flushed it down the toilet.
You are not one bit better than your father; Just a week ago it was all “Read my lips: No new SecDef” And today he is gone.
I’m outta here before I start using words I’ll regret later.
Thank you for your service Mr. Rumsfeld. I’d have been proud to have gone back to work for you.
LegendHasIt on November 8, 2006 at 4:06 PM
No, yoot, WriterMom, but I am half french. We came here in the 1700s, though. I use to go to france quite a lot in the early 90s. They are always burning cars there. It’s like an annual ritual.
EF on November 8, 2006 at 4:07 PM
I was okay last night, okay this morning. I could easily admit that they deserved to lose. They forgot about the folks that brung them and then those folks left them standing there alone. My first thought this morning was actually….okay, how do we correct this and what can I best do to help. That, and making sure I had 2 years worth of popcorn on hand coz it is going to be quite a show.
Now, I am just pissed as hell and feeling betrayed. I know I am in a minority, but i rather liked Rumsfeld (maybe having been in/around the military for so long) and I suppose almost adored Dubya. He was to me the strength of my country, stood up for the things I love best about it. And yes, I knew that Rummy was a huge lightening rod…and admired W all the more because he stood by him, no matter what. Go right ahead trolls, kick me for that statement. I am a self professed Rep though, so it figures, right?
And then this shoe fell! Don’t try and tell me this was ‘just’ decided! If he was going to fire him, and yes, he was fired no matter the politico speak about it, why not LAST Wednesday when it just maybe would have made some difference?
Not a tear shed with the election, but my sense of betrayal by a man I greatly admired has left me in tears this afternoon. This man I so looked up to just turned pussy and ran crying away……whatever you want Nancy, just let me go out with a peaceful last 2 years and good numbers at the end.
Betrayed!
dustoffmom on November 8, 2006 at 4:08 PM
Look, these guys are gonna gloat about our loss/ their gain. Descending to the level of pettiness that is the hallmark of the left does nothing constructive. Let em have their moment because it wont be that long- they will screw it up. ‘Sides DON’T FEED THE TROLLS!
Trooper on November 8, 2006 at 4:08 PM
What an undeserved ending for such an honourable man.
WriterMom
That is ok Mom…..he is an honorable man and he will carry that honor with him. He doesn’t need the Dhimmi’s respect.
Limerick on November 8, 2006 at 4:12 PM
Rumsfeld is as cynical a political sacrifice as is possible. It’s likely that the job can’t be done better–and with regards to Iraq, that it can’t even be done at all. But by removing the left’s favorite target, one at least moves to undermine the left’s (even more cynical) verbiage about “changing the course” in Iraq. No, the verbiage doesn’t actually mean anything, and no, Rumsfeld’s departure likely won’t make any difference on the ground overseas (or at least not a positive one). But with Democrat-sponsored failure in Iraq now a near certainty anyway, the fundamental question becomes merely whether or not classical western liberalism can survive the century at all (and at present, the evidence doesn’t look good). So perhaps this is as good a time as ever to be cynical.
Blacklake on November 8, 2006 at 4:13 PM
Anyone catching Rangel on Fox, right now?
Methinks the folks who voted for the dems are going to be introduced to a new term: “Bait and Switch Democrats.”
Rangel says when asked if he’ll let the Bush tax cuts will be allowed ot expire in 2010(paraphrasing): Why would nay good tax writer make a statement about cuts in 2010 if we don’t know what the economy is doing?
If the last 6 years taught us anything, there’s nothing more annoying than a pissed off liberal. The dems may soon understand what the GOP has been going through.
yo on November 8, 2006 at 4:14 PM
…what in the wide-wide world of sports makes you think for a *millisecond* that the vermin who’ve come here to gloat are interested in anything “constructive”?
A hallmark of the Right is combattiveness.
…my post earlier wasn’t “petty”…it’s just good to let the gazelle know that the roles may’ve reversed, but the lion is still the one with the teeth.
As with all gazelles, they can run and had better keep running…but they’d better not stumble.
Puritan1648 on November 8, 2006 at 4:15 PM
All y’all who wanted us to lose…congratulations!
This year they marched, in 2 years they vote! (And they ain’t gonna be votin’ (R), Lindsey Graham, McCain, Snowe, and all the other useful idiot RINOS)
SouthernGent on November 8, 2006 at 4:18 PM
Puritan- not saying you shouldn’t be pissed- I am too. But debating people who cannot rationally make a coherent statement other than “HAHA you lost!” Is not going to do anything but encourage them. Believe me I don’t think this situation is ideal but I’m sure they (Dems) will hang themselves by the next election. They are predisposed to flights of amazing stupidity have patience and they will sink themselves.
Trooper on November 8, 2006 at 4:20 PM
Too little too late. Bush lost the election and control of congress with his amnesty crap and his refusal to budge on Iraq. While it is great to have loyalty to his cabinet, what about the loyalty to the voters? He has fumbled and bumbled the past 2 years and has been ineffective.
Exactly. Bush stood by and let the election get away. What was he thinking?
Wade on November 8, 2006 at 4:21 PM
I agree with:
retired on November 8, 2006 at 4:21 PM
Is it just me, or does anyone else not remember presidents ever sacrificing cabinet members just because the opposition party wins congressional seats? Why in God’s name was this necessary? Is bending over and kissing the feet of liberals suddenly one of the Ten Commandments? This makes W look like a suck-up, and I can only imagine what al-Qaeda is thinking about it…
Halley on November 8, 2006 at 4:28 PM
…who’s pissed. I don’t get pissed. That’s the problem with plaintext: it can’t convey tone of voice.
I don’t get pissed…I get organized.
…and, who was debating. I was speaking *AT* this person, not *TO* them.
You are correct, though. It does encourage them. Like the little boy poking the broomstick into the beehive, they’re usually not bright enough to know when to quit.
I’m using today to vent…they’ve been allowed to vent…they’re venting right now…fetid billows of self-righteousness…tomorrow, it’s back to work, trying to preserve something of the America my father gave to me for my children…an America which doesn’t seem to suit their preferred color scheme.
They will slip by the end of the week, and the press will be there to catch them. I have no illusions about that.
Still, they’d be smart not to stumble. History is crouched in the dark, ready to strike.
Puritan1648 on November 8, 2006 at 4:32 PM
RustMouse on November 8, 2006 at 4:39 PM
I got you- I know what you mean. Besides, the gazelle illustration is spot on. Or maybe it should be more like blissfully ignorant prairie dogs getting unknowingly snatched by a predatory hawk.
Trooper on November 8, 2006 at 4:40 PM
…spot on…of course, spot on…face it…I’m quotable….
…then again, I have to be…if I ever show up in a calendar, it’ll be as text, not among the pictures….
…”The Men of HotAir”….
…but, hawk/prairie dog? Subterranian rodent is apt, and while more North American in imagery, it doesn’t convey the proper amount of…well…bone-crushing violence that I had in mind.
Puritan1648 on November 8, 2006 at 4:58 PM
Puritan you are an eloquent writer. Keeep up the good posts.
infidel on November 8, 2006 at 5:08 PM
…don’t sell yourself short, In…there’re some *VERY* sharp, lucid and savvy folks here on HotAir….
…and, the more I think about a “Men of HotAir” calendar…the more I cringe…AP in a G-string…*EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEUUUUUUUUUUUUUWWWWWWWWWWWWWW*
Puritan1648 on November 8, 2006 at 5:11 PM
Calendar? Did someone say calendar! Sign this Hot Head right up!
RushBaby on November 8, 2006 at 5:50 PM
Where do I sign for that?
Jaibones on November 8, 2006 at 6:25 PM
Everyone is focusing on Rumsfeld, and the MUCH more significant issue from those vids is the amnesty.
That the president openly and willingly admitted that he could get more done to aid illegal immigration with a liberal-controlled congress should be the scariest thing about this entire election season.
Scarier than Speaker Pelousy.
Scarier than Ways and Means chairman Rangel.
Scarier than Majority Leader Reid.
Our president wants to throw out the welcome mat to millions more people who commit a crime to be here, ignore the millions who committed crimes getting here befeore.
Do you liberals really care how many Americans are killed by foreigners? More than 4,500 hundred traffic deaths per year over the last decade have been at the hands of drunk illegal aliens, and more than 2,800 murders per year committed by illegal aliens.
Add it up, more deaths each year in America by illegals than all the deaths directly attributable to both 9/11 and the GWoT. Stick that in your socialist pipe and smoke it.
Freelancer on November 8, 2006 at 8:42 PM
AP, not sure if everyone got your point about the Bolton update. Bolton becoming UN ambassador was a recess appointment, which means that he still needs to be confirmed by the Senate. Now there will be little chance he will get through that process, since he’s actually the right man for the job.
I’d like to see Bolton stay where he is, but if he gets rejected, State wouldn’t be too bad, supposing that Rice leaves State for some reason.
Freelancer on November 8, 2006 at 8:46 PM
I wonder what interesting tidbits that ole Rummy will have to dish out?
The talk show circuit and a book maybe.
Speakup on November 8, 2006 at 9:35 PM
A coworker remarked to me earlier today that perhaps if Bush had dismissed Rummy a year or so ago, Republicans may have done better in yesterday’s election. I must say I agree.
infidel4life on November 8, 2006 at 9:37 PM
Now. . The day after. . .NOW HE TELLS AMERICA, that the jihadis are looking for a dem victory. I can’t understand why republicans in office have been playing nice nice. We’ve got appeasers for leaders and cut and runners for voters, as well as quiters for candidates.
That’s it, I’m joining the . . .ok, there still isn’t a better party, but grrrrrr
- The Cat
MirCat on November 8, 2006 at 10:23 PM
NEWSFLASH! ‘Real conservatives quit the Republicans who lost Tuesday, then Republicans lost Wednesday, and Republicans will continue to lose for at least 2 More Years!
‘Real conservatives’ wanted it, and they got it. Get used to it.
DannoJyd on November 8, 2006 at 11:54 PM
I just wish he had replaced Rummy with Colonel David Hunt. Now that would have been an awesome confirmation hearing.
He always on one of my local/semi-national talk shows up here in the deep, deep blue socialist hell caled Massachusetts.
reaganaut on November 9, 2006 at 12:41 AM
Let’s not forget that Bush was an excellent poker backer back in the day. When I heard his presser yesterday; he was talking about finding common ground with the Dems who would work with him, for example, those who have an idea for a “different path to victory. Those who want to pull out tomorrow, there’s no common ground possible there.” That’s a bright line. But can’t you just hear the koskids, “WHO of the DEMS DARES have this ‘different path to victory?’ WHAT??? Some Dems are negotiating with Bushitler? A DEM? WE OWN THEM–IT IS FORBIDDEN!!! WHO–WE–we’ll find them and rip their throats out!! We were promised the enactment of the entire nutroot agenda since we delivered this election for the Dems, Lamont being the prime example of our handiwork-oof–nevermind, anyway, at least he initiated the dialogue that precipitated the dynamic by which the–nevermind– ANYWAY Howard Dean won’t let us down! Howard? OH HOOWWWARD!!!” See how Bush was driving that wedge in all quiet like? Heh, hehh– a little poker face.
Meantime, I heard a sound-bite from Howard at the 12:30 newsbreak, and HE was saying, “So we’re going go to go in new direction on Iraq like we promised the America people, we’ll pull the troops out of Iraq–well we’re not going to just pull them out, we’ll stablize country first, and then we’ll bring the troops home, which is what America wants.” Sound of me picking up my teeth. Scuse me? “Stabilize the country first?” Now I never heard any “stabilizing the country first” talk from Howard Dean BEFORE the election. Did you? “Stabilizing the country” could take, well, years, and involve a few thousand American casualities. So here we are post-election, and the difference between that and what Bush has been doing is what exactly?
Further on, Bush was saying, “To our troops, I want to assure you–the Democrats support you, they will not abandon you. I SO don’t think he would blow smoke up their asses–so which Dems has he been getting these assurances from? We’re going to find out before too long, and the nutroots will have contracts out on them. I’m with yo–Methinks the folks who voted for the dems are going to be introduced to a new term: “Bait and Switch Democrats.” Methinks the kook-fringe Dems are getting snookered, at least on Iraq. Let’s not make the mistake of misunderestimating Bush. I think he’s just a-laying back in that brier patch right now.
smellthecoffee on November 9, 2006 at 9:01 AM
Interesting post. Two points: the Congress does not control our actions in Iraq, other than funding which they won’t pull in spite of some wild predictions. Secondly, there are no good options left for Iraq. I am no fan of the admin and esp Rummy, but I don’t delude myself that he was deliberately taking this grim course. Sometimes you paint yourself into a situation from which you have no remaining good choices.
In chess this is called checkmate, something you don’t want to be in. Here’s hoping I’m wrong.
honora on November 9, 2006 at 10:29 AM