Welcome to PatsFans.com

Jim Webb's response: We will show him the way

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by mikey, Jan 24, 2007.

  1. mikey

    mikey In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    2,422
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0

    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/24/washington/24webb.html

    Mr. Webb invoked his own biography, and his family’s three generations of military service, as he declared that today’s soldiers could no longer trust the judgment of their commander in chief.

    Democrats would try to work with Mr. Bush to change course.

    “If he does not,” Mr. Webb said, “we will be showing him the way.”


    .
     
  2. wistahpatsfan

    wistahpatsfan Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2005
    Messages:
    15,626
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -1

    #75 Jersey

    Jim Webb for President!
     
  3. All_Around_Brown

    All_Around_Brown In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2005
    Messages:
    3,093
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    My thoughts exactly! This guy should have every neo-con shaking in their fairy boots.
     
  4. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    19,006
    Likes Received:
    322
    Ratings:
    +597 / 24 / -19

  5. PatsFanInEaglesLand

    PatsFanInEaglesLand In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2004
    Messages:
    3,892
    Likes Received:
    60
    Ratings:
    +155 / 10 / -16

    #37 Jersey

    Speak for yourself, Senator, I don't trust party flopping political opportunists either!
     
  6. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    41,746
    Likes Received:
    279
    Ratings:
    +1,152 / 5 / -10

    Yeah, but what about President Obama?
     
  7. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    27,456
    Likes Received:
    327
    Ratings:
    +916 / 7 / -3

    I didn't see either speech, and will probably try to gloss over them later today. If Webb is indeed the traditional democrat, the moderate, sane person people said he was prior to the election, then great. My only fear is that party will derail his principles. These days, they always do.

    At any rate, I'm still waiting for the Democrats plan for Iraq. GW's moves have been rightfully ripped to shreds to this point, but I've yet to see what it is the Dems want to do. When Webb says "we will be showing him the way", am I wrong to assume he means they have a plan? Well, what is it?
     
  8. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    19,006
    Likes Received:
    322
    Ratings:
    +597 / 24 / -19

    I guess you didn't trust Ronnie Reagan. I didn't either.
     
  9. Pujo

    Pujo Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2005
    Messages:
    6,572
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    And don't get PFIEL started on Mitt Romney...
     
    Last edited: Jan 24, 2007
  10. PatsFanInEaglesLand

    PatsFanInEaglesLand In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2004
    Messages:
    3,892
    Likes Received:
    60
    Ratings:
    +155 / 10 / -16

    #37 Jersey

    He switched parties in 1962, and supported Nixon in 1960. Not exactly the same as Webb but nice try by you, good effort.
     
  11. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    19,006
    Likes Received:
    322
    Ratings:
    +597 / 24 / -19

    Always excuses. Maybe you can blame Clinton?
     
  12. All_Around_Brown

    All_Around_Brown In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2005
    Messages:
    3,093
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    The dems plan has been laid out in general terms (deescalation), but I suspect they have withheld alot of detail until they get a sense of whether the Bush cabal is honest in opening themselves up to bipartisanship. Nothing to date suggests they are.

    BTW..the Dems have been given a perfect opportunity to use real bipartisan recommendations...as opposed to the rhetorical that Bush and his neo-con con men have used...by simply supporting what Baker-Hamilton gave them- a defined set of objectives and initiatives to change the Iraq trajectory.

    Seems to me that Webb is a very strong pro-military spokesman, like Murtha, and people like PFEIL seem to really hate that. Hows that for irony? Makes one wonder whether politics is clouding their view of what trouble the military is truly in.
     
  13. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    27,456
    Likes Received:
    327
    Ratings:
    +916 / 7 / -3


    Deescalation is there plan? They've withheld details? Hmm... We're honing in on 4 years, and they're still waiting for what exactly? Are you trying to tell me that the Dems do have a detailed plan, but that they are playing politics with it? Oh, I sure hope that's not true. Soldiers are dying over there, and if the Dems do have a detailed plan and are withholding it, that'd be reprehensible.

    I remember seeing Howad Dean on Hardball the night of the election in November, and Mathews asked him point blank, what is the Dems plan for Iraq, and he refused to answer it. During Dean's response, they cut to Mathews face, and I remember he was shaking his head in frustration. I'm all for people putting idea's forward, but I honestly haven't seen anything put forth by the Dems on this. If their plan is to withdraw, then why don't they all come out and say it? To date, their plan has been to point at how lousy the others guy's is. Sadly, it's worked with the general populace, but has done nothing to help the situation. Remember, I'm for whatever succeeds. GW so far hasn't done to good, but the Dems are non-existent. The war isn't a partisan issue for me. It's an american issue. I don't care if Al Gore ocmes out with a plan, so long as it works.
     
  14. maverick4

    maverick4 Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2005
    Messages:
    7,662
    Likes Received:
    17
    Ratings:
    +17 / 0 / -0

    Would it involve a lockbox of some kind?
     
    Last edited: Jan 24, 2007
  15. PressCoverage

    PressCoverage Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2005
    Messages:
    8,608
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    perhaps their plan is to merely stop firing generals and let them actually dictate the course of action?
     
  16. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    27,456
    Likes Received:
    327
    Ratings:
    +916 / 7 / -3

    What's comical about your agenda driven, and partisan position, is that GW let his generals run the show, and everyone *****ed he wasn't leading. Now, he fires guys cuz he feels he has a plan that will work (he's leading), and wants people in place who believe in it, and you're criticizing him for not letting the generals dictate the course of action. So which is it Agenda boy? Was he wrong before for letting the generals run the show, or is he wrong now for taking the lead? My guess is that, to you, he's wrong period.

    Have a nice day! :D
     
  17. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    19,006
    Likes Received:
    322
    Ratings:
    +597 / 24 / -19

    How can you say Bush is letting the Generals run the show when he dismisses anyone who disagrees with him, such as Generals Garner, Casey, Abizaid, Riggs, and other radical, pinko, commie, liberals. Bush is not letting the Generals run the show, and never has; in fact, the war has mostly been run by Cheney and Rove I suspect. Right now, Bush is simply trying to save face, and if it costs a few thousand more American lives, at least he'll be able to leave the embarrassment of withdrawal to his successor. Bush is taking the lead, true, but ignoring the bipartisan consensus that calls for more focus on diplomatic measures.
     
  18. PressCoverage

    PressCoverage Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2005
    Messages:
    8,608
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    dear plantation owner: please do stop calling me "BOY" before things get truly personal for you...

    anyhow, you righties continue to lose the debate when you create an argument that your opponent never said... the very definition of a strawman argument, which you've perfected, RW....

    Bush NEVER let his generals fully run the show... never.... you remember when they wanted more troops to START the occupation, don't you? you remember what your president directed?
     
  19. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    27,456
    Likes Received:
    327
    Ratings:
    +916 / 7 / -3

    Dude, I said, GW was blasted for letting his generals run the show, then, when he devises a plan, since everyone criticized his "stay the course", and fires the guys that were in control when he was being criticized, to hire guys that agree with his plan, people STILL criticize him.

    You suspect? You are really funny sometimes.

    I don't know why people are so enamored with the Baker Hamilton report. Just cuz two life long political people came up with a report, why would anyone be forced to use it? I really don't understand why, in a country where commissions and reports have had a very checkered history, are we still so demanding of there implementation? I really don't know why people think that Iran and Syria would openly help us.
     
  20. PressCoverage

    PressCoverage Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2005
    Messages:
    8,608
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    yeah, ummm.... show us all where Bush was "blasted for letting his generals run the show", if you could... a link or three from a non-obscure righty blog would be greatly appreciated...

    as for your apparent rejection of commissions, this of course marches right in step with righties' usual stance about the UN... because they've made mistakes, they should merely be ignored from now on... nevermind that such commissions are the best form of independent assessment of a calamity....

    how George Sr. even talks to his son anymore is baffling... He's got to be disgusted...
     
    Last edited: Jan 24, 2007

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>