Posted on 11/12/2006 2:42:23 AM PST by goldstategop
On Wednesday morning right after the election while the losses were still being counted?? The timing of the resignation/firing screamed defeat and worse. What could Bush have been thinking - We are all Spanish now?
bttt
Ouch!, when you consider his oratory skills to begin with. I didn't see or hear his news conferences this week but my brother was saying the same thing you did when I talked to him by phone yesterday.
W doesn't have the faking ability like the Cigar King does. If he doesn't believe in it, he can't sell it. The notable exceptions were on the mound of ruble in NY and his speech before the joint session of congress in September 01. He believed everything he was saying then.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." -Manuel II Paleologus
I was baffled, too. It didn't seem that there would be any good in having Rummy leave when he did; I was wondering too if it was some sort of misguided offer by Rumsfeld himself to fall on his sword, thinking that would take the heat off. All the act did was make it look like an acknowledgement of error and a moment of bungling, particularly with Bush's confused response.
I didn't get the feeling it was part of a long-thought out plan, overall.
Aside from that, I agree 100% with Steyn. That said, I think Rumsfeld would probably have prosecuted the war differently if it had not been from the constant harrassment from the media and the Dems. He and Bush should have ignored them, but instead they allowed themselves to follow a strategy of "almost" and "we could if we wanted to - but we don't."
Agreed. No matter what Pres. Bush says, the anti-war, intellectuals will attack it.
He could tweak his rhetoric and alter his phrasing, but it would make NO difference whatsoever as that would be the new phrase du jour to parse and spin.
Pres. Bush should continue with his approach. It's been extremely effective so far IMO, despite what the propogandists say.
Also agree with you about Rumsfeld. The thought of Rummy being tied up for months in Dem congressional hearings with Carl Levin and Conyers overseeing the inquisition is odious. The stepping down was a good decision IMO.
Where I worked, a similar thing happened. There was a power struggle between two different sales groups, and it did not work out for my two bosses.
They read the writing on the wall. They gave it about four months, but in the end they left. It was the best for the company and for them. It happens. Even offices are political.
Defeat is an orphan. That has been reinforced here on FR since Tuesday.
I couldn't read any further. This is too painful.
Best time IMO. The big story was the elections. It actually diluted the impact.
Any other time and the media would have gone on for weeks about it.
And to the Arabs, it will only confirm what they suspects about us. Something Steyn said so brilliantly. "A civilization that will not stand for anything, is dead already."
I have to mix with Liberals everyday. The trumpets have been sounding retreat since 9/12/01.
I thought that up until a week or two ago. Now I believe that a non-stop media propaganda campaign will fix the blame on Bush, in the public imagination.
Yup... it was a mini-TET for al Qaeda as well.
I am probably in the minority here on FR, but I happen to think that the President is very eloquent and very persuasive. I do not cringe (as many do) when he speaks. I do not care that he mangle his syntax. I do too. He doesn't have to be word perfect for me to understand him. I can follow him easily.
I was on another thread where someone was stating to me that America is anti-war. At first I took the stance that we are reluctantly pro-war. Then I began to think to myself of all the wars and conflicts (public and secret) that America has been involved in from the Revolutionary War up to present day Iraq/Afghanistan. Now I've come to the conclusion that we are actually quite pro-war.
However, maybe it is possible that beginning with the 90's, after our large military build up and the end of the Cold War, that Dems and MSM have successfully made us feel ashamed of our conflict ridden past. While secretly deep within the American mind we still desire the victory. That would explain the 'resurgance' in patriotism after 9/11 and our desire to eradicate the enemy which liberals quickly even within the month tried to make us feel guilty for.
I've quite decided that we are not a peaceful nation that avoids conflict. Our history as a nation just doesn't lend credence to that notion. We just need to not let Dems try to shame us for it. XD
I guess I'm a member of your minority. I would much rather hear Pres. Bush speak than a slick orator.
President Bush may speak ungrammically at times. I don't care a whit. He speaks flawlessly at other times.
Hollywood has influenced too many, including conservatives. I like a plain speaker, especially when I know he means what he says and is a good man. I thank God we have Pres. Bush as our leader rather those slick talking heads I see on TV every day.
They are going on about it and calling it a firing.
Of course they are. But they are also going on about the elections and the new Dem agenda.
Their attention is divided. Good time for the Rummy move IMO.
I agree wholeheartedly.
I can dress a pig up and call it a debutante, but its still a pig.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.