New and Improved Version of 'Bush Did It"

[PoliticalChic]

In his speech last night, President Obama claimed that he was coming to the rescue of embattled American troops in Aghanistan, unlike the naughty and oblivious Bush Administration:

'In his speech to the nation last night, President Obama claimed that ‘Commanders in Afghanistan repeatedly asked for support to deal with the reemergence of the Taliban, but these reinforcements did not arrive.’ '

Upon hearing this, former Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld chanted something about "pants on fire," including phrases such as

"does a disservice to the truth"

" a bald misstatement"

and went on to suggest a verification process:

" I suggest that the Congress review the President’s assertion in the forthcoming debate and determine exactly what requests were made, who made them, and where and why in the chain of command they were denied.”

Did President 'Hope and Change" fib?

Say it ain't so, Joe.

Rumsfeld denies Obama claim - Ben Smith - POLITICO.com

 

[Alvin]

Rummy buggered Iraq, forgot afghanistan, and is famous for "Known unknowns".

You really want to take that guy seriously?

Honestly..

When unarmoured hummers are patrolling every day. When "Hillbilly Armour" is on the menu...Of course this guy feels safe in Iraq. He's in a Rhino.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Rummy buggered Iraq, forgot afghanistan, and is famous for "Known unknowns".

You really want to take that guy seriously?

Honestly..

Welcome to the board, Alvin.

Curious that you inadvertantly used the word 'Honestly..'

Now, I understand that to you this is a mere cliche, meaning 'Isn't my point just brilliant, you know, that Rumsfeld did things that I disagree with, so he has no right to speak, and if he is correct, we should ignore him anyway.'

But just for a moment, let's hypothesize that you were a thinking human being who has the ability to judge the truth, no matter the source... a bit of a stretch, huh?

But just go with it for a moment.

What is the effect that you fear vis-a-vis the respect folks have for a President who would tell any lie to strengthen his own position, or, as the OP states, use the new and improved version of 'Bush did it.'?

And here is the irony that said thinking human being would be aware of:

If the President was not such a small person, and did not fear giving his predecessor some credit, he could have pointed to the same kind of surge he was speaking in support of for Afghanistan, and pointed to its successin Iraq!

Funny, huh?

 

[saveliberty]

Rummy buggered Iraq, forgot afghanistan, and is famous for "Known unknowns".

You really want to take that guy seriously?

Honestly..

When unarmoured hummers are patrolling every day. When "Hillbilly Armour" is on the menu...Of course this guy feels safe in Iraq. He's in a Rhino.

All be it begrudgingly, Obama admited the surge worked to Iraq. I believe that was under some guy whose name starts with R as Secretary of Defense? As far as forgetting Afghanistan, seems he had limited reources to deploy. Has to answer to a Democratic Congress for his funding. Stuff like that.

Honestly? I think you'd be better off breathing some helium and singing Christmas songs.

 

[SFC Ollie]

As much as I disagreed with Rumsfeld in a lot of his decisions, I simply cannot tolerate it when the President Flat out lies on national television. This joker has got to leave Washington. The sooner the better.

 

[Alvin]

Rummy buggered Iraq, forgot afghanistan, and is famous for "Known unknowns".

You really want to take that guy seriously?

Honestly..

Welcome to the board, Alvin.

Curious that you inadvertantly used the word 'Honestly..'

Now, I understand that to you this is a mere cliche, meaning 'Isn't my point just brilliant, you know, that Rumsfeld did things that I disagree with, so he has no right to speak, and if he is correct, we should ignore him anyway.'

But just for a moment, let's hypothesize that you were a thinking human being who has the ability to judge the truth, no matter the source... a bit of a stretch, huh?

But just go with it for a moment.

What is the effect that you fear vis-a-vis the respect folks have for a President who would tell any lie to strengthen his own position, or, as the OP states, use the new and improved version of 'Bush did it.'?

And here is the irony that said thinking human being would be aware of:

If the President was not such a small person, and did not fear giving his predecessor some credit, he could have pointed to the same kind of surge he was speaking in support of for Afghanistan, and pointed to its successin Iraq!

Funny, huh?

Short answer? - No.

This gentleman had his chance to actually test his theories regarding world affairs, and he buggered it up royally. History, and this is the history written by the victors, showed him to be 180 degrees away from the truth. Therefor one should not take his view on the subject of troop increses as anything less than idiotic.

 

[Alvin]

As much as I disagreed with Rumsfeld in a lot of his decisions, I simply cannot tolerate it when the President Flat out lies on national television. This joker has got to leave Washington. The sooner the better.

There is an old saying.
"Amatures discuss tactics, professionals discuss logistics" Obama is discussing logistics.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Bush does share responsibility for the current situation in Afghanistan. He had seven years to accomplish what we went there for. We should have been out of there by now. Had he done his job we wouldn't need to have this discussion. That doesn't mean that I think Obama is going to fare any better. I frankly don't know why he is going to send another 30,000 Americans into harms way when he doesn't have the will to do what is necessary to achieve victory. We are better off just pulling out at this point.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Rummy buggered Iraq, forgot afghanistan, and is famous for "Known unknowns".

You really want to take that guy seriously?

Honestly..

Welcome to the board, Alvin.

Curious that you inadvertantly used the word 'Honestly..'

Now, I understand that to you this is a mere cliche, meaning 'Isn't my point just brilliant, you know, that Rumsfeld did things that I disagree with, so he has no right to speak, and if he is correct, we should ignore him anyway.'

But just for a moment, let's hypothesize that you were a thinking human being who has the ability to judge the truth, no matter the source... a bit of a stretch, huh?

But just go with it for a moment.

What is the effect that you fear vis-a-vis the respect folks have for a President who would tell any lie to strengthen his own position, or, as the OP states, use the new and improved version of 'Bush did it.'?

And here is the irony that said thinking human being would be aware of:

If the President was not such a small person, and did not fear giving his predecessor some credit, he could have pointed to the same kind of surge he was speaking in support of for Afghanistan, and pointed to its successin Iraq!

Funny, huh?

Short answer? - No.

This gentleman had his chance to actually test his theories regarding world affairs, and he buggered it up royally. History, and this is the history written by the victors, showed him to be 180 degrees away from the truth. Therefor one should not take his view on the subject of troop increses as anything less than idiotic.

Now you are repeating a flaccid excuse for not caring as to the veracity of the charges made by the secretary.

Further, you lack understanding of the article referenced in the OP, if you believe that
"one should not take his view ..."

My new friend, it is not Rumsfeld's 'view,' but rather whether he is telling the truth or President Obama is telling the truth.

The truth matters, doen't it, Alvin?

And since Secretary Rumsfeld has called for a Congressional investigation, it seems that the preponderance of hypothesizing should be in his favor, no?

Further, it would show intiative on your part if you were to venture an explanation of why the President might make up history out of 'whole cloth.'

Care to do so?

Or, you can simply shrug your shoulders and wander off.

 

[SFC Ollie]

As much as I disagreed with Rumsfeld in a lot of his decisions, I simply cannot tolerate it when the President Flat out lies on national television. This joker has got to leave Washington. The sooner the better.

There is an old saying.
"Amatures discuss tactics, professionals discuss logistics" Obama is discussing logistics.

Mr Obama is discussing politics. Nothing more and nothing less. It is all he knows.

 

[Alvin]

Welcome to the board, Alvin.

Thank you. It's good to be here.

Curious that you inadvertantly used the word 'Honestly..'

After the "Saddam has links to Al-Queda" then "Weapons of mass destruction" then "Weapons of mass destruction programs" then finally "Saddam was a BAD MAN" Honesty and Donald Rumsfeldt are antonyms.

Now, I understand that to you this is a mere cliche, meaning 'Isn't my point just brilliant, you know, that Rumsfeld did things that I disagree with, so he has no right to speak, and if he is correct, we should ignore him anyway.'

That is not what I mean. Mr Rumsfeld has been proven to be incorrect. Was he not Sec Def. during the intial invasion of Iraq? Did Eric Shensiki (CENTCOM) not demand 500,000 troops? Did Rumsfeld bugger that number up...and BTW fire Shensiki? Was he right?

But just for a moment, let's hypothesize that you were a thinking human being who has the ability to judge the truth, no matter the source... a bit of a stretch, huh?

But just go with it for a moment.

What is the effect that you fear vis-a-vis the respect folks have for a President who would tell any lie to strengthen his own position, or, as the OP states, use the new and improved version of 'Bush did it.'?

And here is the irony that said thinking human being would be aware of:

If the President was not such a small person, and did not fear giving his predecessor some credit, he could have pointed to the same kind of surge he was speaking in support of for Afghanistan, and pointed to its successin Iraq!

Funny, huh?

To tell you the truth, I would welcome any investigation into the deployment of troops and the reasons for same during the last and current administrations.
Just becaue I consider Rumsfeld a muppet and a danger to himself and others, should not be considered as a tacit agreement with the current administration.

I fully understand the current troop deployments in Afghanistan as it may be a factor of the US economy as a whole, and I am fully aware (believe me) of the mission that they are now tasked with.
I've been there.

 

[Alvin]

.

And may I comment on your signature?

Ms. Coulter got it slightly wrong. In the US most people lean Left on issues. It has always been so. Other than Prohabition, can you name me one amendment to the Constitution that did not increase the general freedom of the people?

Is freedom not essentialy a Liberal point of view?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Thank you. It's good to be here.


After the "Saddam has links to Al-Queda" then "Weapons of mass destruction" then "Weapons of mass destruction programs" then finally "Saddam was a BAD MAN" Honesty and Donald Rumsfeldt are antonyms.


That is not what I mean. Mr Rumsfeld has been proven to be incorrect. Was he not Sec Def. during the intial invasion of Iraq? Did Eric Shensiki (CENTCOM) not demand 500,000 troops? Did Rumsfeld bugger that number up...and BTW fire Shensiki? Was he right?



To tell you the truth, I would welcome any investigation into the deployment of troops and the reasons for same during the last and current administrations.
Just becaue I consider Rumsfeld a muppet and a danger to himself and others, should not be considered as a tacit agreement with the current administration.

I fully understand the current troop deployments in Afghanistan as it may be a factor of the US economy as a whole, and I am fully aware (believe me) of the mission that they are now tasked with.
I've been there.

Alvin, enough obfuscation: one of these men is telling the truth.

It matters not what you opinion or history is re: Rumsfeld.

Do you not see that you are essentially saying, because of the past, even if Rumsfeld is tellilng the truth, and President Obama is falsifying, I choose to turn a blind eye.


Don't you see the statement that it makes about you?

 

[rdean]

You have to hand it to Republicans. They are really easy to laugh at. If they say in a "satiric" tone, "Bush did it", then, in their tiny minds, it's somehow means, wink, wink, that Bush can either be excused or that he didn't really "do it". Besides, Obama owns it now. Somehow, in their minds, all the disasters are now Obama's as if he somehow created them.

The truth is, Bush wasn't really the problem. He was the "symptom".

The Republican Party has been subjugated by the Religious Right. Kooks, one and all. They have a litany of disaster and dangerous ignorant ideology.

The fact that a formally mainstream political party could push "magical creation" as a viable alternative to "science" profoundly demonstrates that these people truly live in an alternative universe.

It's no wonder that a group that would push such an over the top, destructive and ridiculous concept in spite of the startling amount of contrary physical and scientific evidence amply proves, beyond a doubt, that they will never believe anything other than what they want to believe. This is a political party that has turned it back on reason. The list of Republican disasters over the last 10 years is endless.

Is it any wonder they refuse even the tiniest bit of responsibility? Instead of a shred of introspection, they shift the blame for their massive ideological failure to those they feel, "refuse to understand". You can almost hear them crying, "It's not us, we're right, it's them who refuse to see "our" truth".

They are so blinded, they see Iraq in one of two ways. Either a "stunning success in democracy" or "ungrateful" for what we did to them.

 

[saveliberty]

.

And may I comment on your signature?

Ms. Coulter got it slightly wrong. In the US most people lean Left on issues. It has always been so. Other than Prohabition, can you name me one amendment to the Constitution that did not increase the general freedom of the people?

Is freedom not essentialy a Liberal point of view?

You might start with the 16th. The third has quartering of troops in wartime that many forget, Eminent Domain is a little restrictive in the 5th and the 22nd has some freedom issues.

 

[Dr Grump]

As much as I disagreed with Rumsfeld in a lot of his decisions, I simply cannot tolerate it when the President Flat out lies on national television. This joker has got to leave Washington. The sooner the better.

If that was the criteria (lying) for being booted out of office, you'd never have a president serve out his first month, let alone first term..

 

[jillian]

As much as I disagreed with Rumsfeld in a lot of his decisions, I simply cannot tolerate it when the President Flat out lies on national television. This joker has got to leave Washington. The sooner the better.

If that was the criteria (lying) for being booted out of office, you'd never have a president serve out his first month, let alone first term..

i figure anyone who tolerated baby bush for eight years really has no standing to do anything but hang their head and shut up.

 

[Article 15]

Rummy buggered Iraq, forgot afghanistan, and is famous for "Known unknowns".

You really want to take that guy seriously?

Honestly..

When unarmoured hummers are patrolling every day. When "Hillbilly Armour" is on the menu...Of course this guy feels safe in Iraq. He's in a Rhino.

All be it begrudgingly, Obama admited the surge worked to Iraq. I believe that was under some guy whose name starts with R as Secretary of Defense? As far as forgetting Afghanistan, seems he had limited reources to deploy. Has to answer to a Democratic Congress for his funding. Stuff like that.

Honestly? I think you'd be better off breathing some helium and singing Christmas songs.

You would be incorrect. Robert Gates was SECDEF for the Surge. Rumsfeld was fired in November of 2006 and the Surge was announced in January 2007.

 

[Article 15]

Oh, and fuck Rumsfeld. That piece of garbage has his hands soaked in blood.

 

[SFC Ollie]

As much as I disagreed with Rumsfeld in a lot of his decisions, I simply cannot tolerate it when the President Flat out lies on national television. This joker has got to leave Washington. The sooner the better.

If that was the criteria (lying) for being booted out of office, you'd never have a president serve out his first month, let alone first term..

i figure anyone who tolerated baby bush for eight years really has no standing to do anything but hang their head and shut up.

I can Promise you that that is not going to happen.