Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Tom Friedman's Free Advice to the G.O.P
Topic Started: Oct 23 2003, 05:51 PM (895 Views)
benetil
Unregistered

"Republicans seem to think they don't have to think when it comes to Iraq. They only have to applaud the president and whack the press for not reporting more good news from Baghdad - and everything will be fine." - Tom Friedman, article published on 10/23/2003

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/23/opinion/23FRIE.html

And somehow, in the midst of the difficult situation in Iraq, the Bush administration would have the American public find comfort in Donald Rumsfeld's "memo" that mysteriously found its way to the press - that while the memo was certainly never intended to become public, at least it proves that Donald Rumsfeld is on the ball. That's right, everything will be fine. Come to think of it, someone in the Bush administration also provided information about Valerie Plame (CIA). When I watch President Bush's executive branch of our government defy the Freedom of Information Act, I have a hard time accepting the leaks of the CIA employee's name and the Rumsfeld memo as anything other than manipulative politics.

President Bush should fire Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. His (Rumsfeld's) plan and vision for the post war operation in Iraq has become an unseemly, mucked up deathtrap for our military men and women. I believe that Donald Rumsfeld is a disingenuous, repulsive person - I can hardly stand to view his face on the television.

It is time for Donald Rumsfeld's successor to act on the ideas in that memo that was purportedly leaked to the media - and to provide our troops with a mission and a plan that they can LIVE with.
| Quote | ^
 
Dandandat
Member Avatar
Time to put something here
benetil
Oct 23 2003, 06:51 PM
"Republicans seem to think they don't have to think when it comes to Iraq. They only have to applaud the president and whack the press for not reporting more good news from Baghdad - and everything will be fine." - Tom Friedman, article published on 10/23/2003

Tom Friedman needs to be a little more objected and little less subjective. Now I am not a Republican, but what is the point of making such a statement? I mean its obviously not true, no matter how you feel about the issue how can you kid your self into thinking 1) it was one parties fault, 2) that that party wasn’t thinking? Of cores people thought/think about this they aren’t mindless drones. A statement like this does little to sway my opinion of the Republican party, but you can be sure I believe Tom Friedman is a fool with his head up his ass.


Quote:
 
President Bush should fire Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. His (Rumsfeld's) plan and vision for the post war operation in Iraq has become an unseemly, mucked up deathtrap for our military men and women.
Death trap? the Hurtgen forest was a deathtrap, compared to that Iraq is a walk in the clouds. Not to belittle the people who have fought and died there, I wish it weren’t so, but please if we are going to make statements like that - lets try to put it into contexts. His post war operations in Iraq have become unseemly and mucked up? Ask ten different people if that’s true and you will get ten different answers, so how can you be so sure your view point is the right one?

Quote:
 
I believe that Donald Rumsfeld is a disingenuous, repulsive person - I can hardly stand to view his face on the television.
Really why? I mean I can understand why some one would disagree with his actions sure, and maybe why you would call him disingenuous (although name one thing you know "for sure" that he was dishonest about). But why would you say he is repulsive? Do you know him personally?

Quote:
 
It is time for Donald Rumsfeld's successor to act on the ideas in that memo that was purportedly leaked to the media - and to provide our troops with a mission and a plan that they can LIVE with.
Most certainly if we got rid of Rumsfeld his successor would be a republican and as Friedman has already pointed out republicans don’t think. So if we get another republican he will ack just like Rumsfeld right? so what’s the point?
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Admiralbill_gomec
UberAdmiral
Free advise is worth what you pay for it... especially when it comes to unsolicited opinion.

P.S. Opinions are like rectums, everyone has one.

Lastly, my friend... you don't know what you're talking about.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Wichita
Member Avatar
The Adminstrator wRench
1. Who is Tom Friedman and why should I care what he thinks?

2. Wichita's Free Advice to the Democratic Party:

* Keep telling people that, because they may disagree with you, they must seem to think they don't have to think and you'll be referring the President Bush as a two-term President. No one likes to be told that they are too dumb to understand something - especially by people they have no reason to respect.

* Stop telling people that you supported the war in Iraq because you were "lied to" by President Bush. Since you've spent so much time making fun of his intelligence, you come off as even less intelligent when you use the excuse he put one over on you.

* Tell people YOUR PLAN for Iraq. We are there now - we can't go back and change that. So what are YOU going to do if elected? Troops home by Christmas? (for the old fogeys in the group) If you don't intend an immediate pull-out, how is your plan going to keep people from dying?

* Recognize that the Clinton years weren't the "be all and end all" economically. Yes, many people became "haves" (at least on paper), but the divide between them and the "have nots" got even bigger. (Michael Moore made a career out of people being thrown out of work during that period.) Explain - to the people you have already told are to dumb to think - HOW you are going to make THEIR lives better by taking more money out of their pockets.


And yes, I read Bill's comments on free opinions ... :D :D
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Dandandat
Member Avatar
Time to put something here
Wichita
Oct 23 2003, 08:26 PM
* Stop telling people that you supported the war in Iraq because you were "lied to" by President Bush. Since you've spent so much time making fun of his intelligence, you come off as even less intelligent when you use the excuse he put one over on you.

Not only that. Are we to believe that the country is run by one man? There maybe one man at the tope but just like in every profession the guy at the top doesn’t have all the power, he has to differ to who is beneath him. and the people beneath him have a fear amount of information on the subject. So I’m sorry I don’t believe it when Congress says they where duped into this one. They step in to it like every one else for better or for worse.


Quote:
 
* Recognize that the Clinton years weren't the "be all and end all" economically. Yes, many people became "haves" (at least on paper),
sorry I just thought the on paper part had to be emphasis a little more. When will people stop chasing after a memory that was never real in the first place? I find it funny when I hear people complain how much they lost in the market. I just want to go up to them shake them a bit and say “you never realy had it, you you couldn’t have lost it, just get over it”
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
benetil
Unregistered

The post war operation is an indictment of Donald Rumsfeld's ineptitude and incompetence. I wanted to puke as I watched Secretary Rumsfeld feign surprise that his little composition had mysteriously found its way to the media. I'm sure he rehearsed his performance of musing over his memo by saying, as he smurked, "Not bad."

Interesting that the "memo" story broke while President Bush was out of the country, too. These guys are bad actors - just awful - playing games with this whole mess in Iraq while American kids are being killed on a daily basis.

I'd just as soon he (Rumsfeld) address some of the items in his memo in a legitimate press conference - rather than staging the drama of this charade. For me, the only good thing is that at least he (Rumsfeld) acknowledges that what we're doing right now isn't working and that if we keep doing what we're doing, we'll keep getting the "results" that we've been getting.

And while American soldiers are being systematically picked off by an organized guerrilla offensive, all the President and other members of the administration can do is to gripe and complain that the media isn't finding the silver lining on that cloud.

They (Bush administration) just don't get it - and they just keep telling themselves that, "everything will be fine." At least the Bush adminstration can count on the party loyals to believe that Secretary Rumsfeld's plan is so brilliant that its genius escapes the average human. Nice work, Donald.
| Quote | ^
 
Wichita
Member Avatar
The Adminstrator wRench
As long as you attribute it to "party loyalists", you will never begin to address the real issue.

No one has provided a better alternative.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Dandandat
Member Avatar
Time to put something here
benetil
Oct 23 2003, 09:59 PM
They (Bush administration) just don't get it.

And you do? That is the problem I have with this "they just don’t get it" argument.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
benetil
Unregistered

Wichita
Oct 23 2003, 09:10 PM
As long as you attribute it to "party loyalists", you will never begin to address the real issue.

No one has provided a better alternative.

The people who continue to stand by President Bush's Iraq policy remind me of the people who stood by President Clinton in the early stages of the Monica Lewinsky scandal - - until - - oops, the little DNA evidence. Blind loyalty to the Party in the land of the free and the home of the brave.
| Quote | ^
 
Dandandat
Member Avatar
Time to put something here
benetil
Oct 23 2003, 10:20 PM
The people who continue to stand by President Bush's Iraq policy remind me of the people who stood by President Clinton in the early stages of the Monica Lewinsky scandal - - until - - oops, the little DNA evidence. Blind loyalty to the Party in the land of the free and the home of the brave.

I am not loyal to any party - I find the part system to be distasteful. Yet I still stand behind President Bush's Iraq policy.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Wichita
Member Avatar
The Adminstrator wRench
benetil
Oct 24 2003, 02:20 AM
Wichita
Oct 23 2003, 09:10 PM
As long as you attribute it to "party loyalists", you will never begin to address the real issue. 

No one has provided a better alternative.

The people who continue to stand by President Bush's Iraq policy remind me of the people who stood by President Clinton in the early stages of the Monica Lewinsky scandal - - until - - oops, the little DNA evidence. Blind loyalty to the Party in the land of the free and the home of the brave.



I'll repeat my point ...

No one has provided a better alternative.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
benetil
Unregistered

"Most Democrats either opposed the war or supported it and are now trying to disown it. That means the only serious opposition can come from Republicans, so they'd better get focussed - because there is nothing about the Bush team's performance in Iraq up to now that justifies a free pass." - Tom Friedman

Senator John McCain is one of the few Republicans in the US Congress who has spoken up about some of the problems with President Bush's policy in Iraq. Maybe with Donald Rumsfeld's "mystery memo" we're starting to see the emergence of a new direction (the opposition that Tom Friedman talks about).
| Quote | ^
 
benetil
Unregistered

Wichita
Oct 23 2003, 09:37 PM
I'll repeat my point ...

No one has provided a better alternative.

Hi, Wichita.

I think that maybe the "alternative" is contained, in some shape or form, in Donald Rumsfeld's memo. I sure hope so, because what I see happening in Iraq right now is distressing.
| Quote | ^
 
Wichita
Member Avatar
The Adminstrator wRench
^^

That's still not the alternative that I am speaking about ...

You still are promoting attack politics ...

Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
benetil
Unregistered

"Either we put in the troops needed to finish the war, and project our authority, or we get the Iraqi Army to do the job - but pretending that we're just "mopping up" is a dangerous illusion." - Tom Friedman

Wichita, this is a meaningful alternative, too. As I see it, our troops are in a no-win situation right now. Winning the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people is a tough proposition when you're surrounded by enemies who are poised to murder you.
| Quote | ^
 
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
ZetaBoards gives you all the tools to create a successful discussion community.
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Politics and World Events Forum · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Tweet
comments powered by Disqus