Ornery.org
  Front Page   |   About Ornery.org   |   World Watch   |   Guest Essays   |   Contact Us

The Ornery American Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Ornery American Forum » General Comments » Nancy... we've hardly gotten to know you...

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!    
Author Topic: Nancy... we've hardly gotten to know you...
winkey151
Member
Member # 2910

 - posted      Profile for winkey151   Email winkey151   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
you could at least give us a little kiss before you make advances. [Eek!]

quote:
"Democrats will never cut off funding for our troops when they are in harm's way." Pelosi said in a taped interview with ABC's "Good Morning America," airing on Friday. "The president knows that because the troops are in harm's way, that we won't cut off the resources. That's why he's moving so quickly to put them in harm's way."
That is a pretty bold accusation coming from a little old grandma, wouldn't you say?
http://news.yahoo.com

Posts: 865 | Registered: Jun 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Accusation?

She's admitted that the President would not be putting the troops in harm's way unless he was certain that he'd be able to support and protect them.

I guess that you could read it, literally, as an accusation that Bush is only fighting this war in order to force Democrats to waste resources. But I don't think that even Pelosi is that unreasonable. At worse she left that possible reading in to appeal to the most radical leftoids; I don't think she actually means to convince anyone that Bush principal motive for accelerating the war was to force the Democrats to spend money funding it.

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
DaveS
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I think her meaning is closer to the sense that Bush *is* putting the troops in harms way, because their lives will be in jeopardy. On top of that the policy is going to fail, and Bush is rushing to get them there before Congress can stop him. She won't cut off funding, however, because then they would be in even greater danger. I think this is a reasonable statement from someone who thinks his approach is a complete disaster.

I don't understand what you mean by a "bold accusation"? Can you explain?

[Edited to add: Winkey, you have a habit of dropping links on us with very minimal explanation of what you think the significance is. Why don't you save us all some time and expand with enough background so we don't have to ask.]

[ January 19, 2007, 05:06 PM: Message edited by: DaveS ]

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Daruma28
Member
Member # 1388

 - posted      Profile for Daruma28   Email Daruma28   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I just find it hilarious that Pelosi and Hillary and Durbin and most of the other Dem politicians were for the more troops to get the job done until they were against it....

[Roll Eyes]

Posts: 7543 | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
DonaldD
Member
Member # 1052

 - posted      Profile for DonaldD   Email DonaldD   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I was putting together a response, but what Pete said. It's pretty basic, really. You have to have significant partisan blinders on to get your knickers in a twist over these remarks.
Posts: 10751 | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
A. Alzabo
Member
Member # 1197

 - posted      Profile for A. Alzabo   Email A. Alzabo   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Daruma:
quote:
I just find it hilarious that Pelosi and Hillary and Durbin and most of the other Dem politicians were for the more troops to get the job done until they were against it....

Because, of course, elapsed time isn't a factor...

You'll be happy to know I currently support sending troops to storm the beaches at Normandy to crush the Germans in WWII.

Posts: 2519 | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
winkey151
Member
Member # 2910

 - posted      Profile for winkey151   Email winkey151   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
DaveS...
To me, it sounds like she is saying that Bush's strategy for making the Democrats fund his effort, was to send more troops in harms way.

Like they are little pawns being used to fund "his" war.

I can understand that there are people who do not want our troops to be in Iraq... but to make an accusation like this, to me, is pretty bold.

Posts: 865 | Registered: Jun 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Wayward Son
Member
Member # 210

 - posted      Profile for Wayward Son   Email Wayward Son   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Not exactly. I think she was saying that even though Democrats may oppose Bush's plan of sending more troops to Iraq, they will still fund it, because it would be more harmful to the troops if they didn't. It's basically political cover for when the Republicans will say, "Well, you must have agreed with Bush because you gave him the funds for increased troop strength."
Posts: 8681 | Registered: Dec 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
winkey151
Member
Member # 2910

 - posted      Profile for winkey151   Email winkey151   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by DaveS:
Winkey, you have a habit of dropping links on us with very minimal explanation of what you think the significance is. Why don't you save us all some time and expand with enough background so we don't have to ask.

If I am posting inappropriately, I would greatly appreciate it for a Mod to please let me know.

Other than that... I notice that a lot of the threads I start must be interesting because they get plenty of responses.

Posts: 865 | Registered: Jun 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
winkey151
Member
Member # 2910

 - posted      Profile for winkey151   Email winkey151   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
"The president knows that because the troops are in harm's way, that we won't cut off the resources. That's why he's moving so quickly to put them in harm's way."
Seems pretty cut and dry to me...
Posts: 865 | Registered: Jun 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Daruma28
Member
Member # 1388

 - posted      Profile for Daruma28   Email Daruma28   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by A. Alzabo:
Daruma:
quote:
I just find it hilarious that Pelosi and Hillary and Durbin and most of the other Dem politicians were for the more troops to get the job done until they were against it....

Because, of course, elapsed time isn't a factor...

You'll be happy to know I currently support sending troops to storm the beaches at Normandy to crush the Germans in WWII.

Right. Because things have changed so dramatically since just a few months ago all of the Dems were criticizing Bush for not sending enough troops.

Now he wants to send more troops.

That's the only real factor that has changed during all that elapsed time.

[Roll Eyes]

I guess I forgot that Democrats are simply incapable of hypocrisy or pandering or engaging in pure partisanship. Only Republicans are guilty of that....

Posts: 7543 | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
moodi
Member
Member # 3020

 - posted      Profile for moodi   Email moodi   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:

I guess I forgot that Democrats are simply incapable of hypocrisy or pandering or engaging in pure partisanship. Only Republicans are guilty of that....



With the Reps being so wrong about so many things about the war in Iraq, I think they should take a break from thinking of newer projects to carry on in that part of the world.

It might be time for fresh minds to take over this matter.

Posts: 134 | Registered: Aug 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
A. Alzabo
Member
Member # 1197

 - posted      Profile for A. Alzabo   Email A. Alzabo   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Daruma:
quote:
Right. Because things have changed so dramatically since just a few months ago all of the Dems were criticizing Bush for not sending enough troops.

Yes, but did they want to send more troops a few months ago or were they pointing out that not enough troops were sent in the first place? Time makes a huge difference.

Not really defending the Dems here, most of them voted to give the president a free rein and knew damn well what they were doing.

Besides, I actually disagree with the Dems and support the troop increase.


quote:
Now he wants to send more troops.

That's the only real factor that has changed during all that elapsed time.


That...and a civil war...


quote:
I guess I forgot that Democrats are simply incapable of hypocrisy or pandering or engaging in pure partisanship. Only Republicans are guilty of that....
Oh, no. Just keeping your criticisms honest. [Wink]
Posts: 2519 | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dave at Work
Member
Member # 1906

 - posted      Profile for Dave at Work   Email Dave at Work   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
A. Alzabo asked:
quote:
Yes, but did they want to send more troops a few months ago or were they pointing out that not enough troops were sent in the first place? Time makes a huge difference.
From this article:

quote:
Tough month
On Dec. 5, Newsweek magazine touted an interview with then-incoming House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence Chairman Rep. Silvestre Reyes as an "exclusive." And for good reason.

"In a surprise twist in the debate over Iraq," the story began, Mr. Reyes "said he wants to see an increase of 20,000 to 30,000 U.S. troops as part of a 'stepped up effort to dismantle the militias.' "

"We have to consider the need for additional troops to be in Iraq, to take out the militias and stabilize Iraq," the Texas Democrat said to the surprise of many, "I would say 20,000 to 30,000."

Then came President Bush's expected announcement last week, virtually matching Mr. Reyes' recommendation and argument word-for-word -- albeit the president proposed only 21,500 troops.

Wouldn't you know, hours after Mr. Bush announced his proposal, Mr. Reyes told the El Paso Times that such a troop buildup was unthinkable.

"We don't have the capability to escalate even to this minimum level," he said.


Posts: 1928 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
A. Alzabo
Member
Member # 1197

 - posted      Profile for A. Alzabo   Email A. Alzabo   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Hah! So Reyes is pretty lame if he's calling for withdrawal now.
Posts: 2519 | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
winkey151
Member
Member # 2910

 - posted      Profile for winkey151   Email winkey151   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by A. Alzabo:
Hah! So Reyes is pretty lame if he's calling for withdrawal now.

Wow... I could have had a V8. [Eek!]
Posts: 865 | Registered: Jun 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
DaveS
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I think it's pretty easy to criticize the Dems for their various positions regarding the war in Iraq, but that's not the same thing as saying that they are simply pandering to whims of the electorate or opposing Bush for the hell of it.

Bush has proven his incompetence in this area, and as a result has created a situation that may well be irresolvable. The Dems are looking at all sides and finding they all have a reasonable chance of failing. It looks like they're thrashing because they are. Even though Bush has proven himself wrong every step along the way, he is proud of how well he is sleeping these days.

Reyes earlier said he wanted to increase troop strength. Maybe, now that he has access to a lot more information, he realizes that it simply won't work. I'm not sure why people here delight in the Dems seeming indecision, when it was Gopper hardball single-track party politics that got us into this miserable and avoidable mess in the first place.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
DaveS
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
DaveS: Winkey, you have a habit of dropping links on us with very minimal explanation of what you think the significance is. Why don't you save us all some time and expand with enough background so we don't have to ask.

Winkey: If I am posting inappropriately, I would greatly appreciate it for a Mod to please let me know.

I was trying to make a helpful comment, but as on other threads, you've chosen to respond defensively and sarcastically. You start a lot of threads, often with a link and a one sentence comment. More than once people have responded by asking what you mean and sometimes wonder if you're trolling. You aren't careful about checking your facts and I sometimes get the impression you're hoping to start a food fight by being snarky. I won't go into any deeper analysis, but I hope you'll consider the difference between stimulating discussion and provoking a reaction.
IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
winkey151
Member
Member # 2910

 - posted      Profile for winkey151   Email winkey151   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
DaveS...

Thank you for being concerned about my motivations and posting characteristics.

I guess one man's opinion is another mans defensively spoken sarcasm.

I am just concerned about the safety and welfare of our country. We have just chosen different ways to express it.

Posts: 865 | Registered: Jun 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
You're defending the safety and welfare of our country by posting poorly-sourced links and expressing often unnecessary, context-less alarm and/or disapproval?
Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
A. Alzabo
Member
Member # 1197

 - posted      Profile for A. Alzabo   Email A. Alzabo   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
DaveS:
quote:
Reyes earlier said he wanted to increase troop strength. Maybe, now that he has access to a lot more information, he realizes that it simply won't work. I'm not sure why people here delight in the Dems seeming indecision, when it was Gopper hardball single-track party politics that got us into this miserable and avoidable mess in the first place.
I understand this, and I'm pretty sure it's what happened. But Reyes didn't do a good job of explaining how he got from there to here in so short a space of time. He probably learned that his earlier call for a troop increase couldn't be supported with new troops. I do think saying that 1 congressman represents "The Democrats'" position is hyperbolic.

However, the current "increase" on the table is actually a tour overlap: keeping soldiers who are already there there longer, and sending off-rotation units back earlier.

I don't "delight" in the Dems seeming indecision at all. And many people (not just here) are part of the Spite Right, which should explain the the glee.
But the Democrats need to understand that this is the environment they operate in so that they can be more effective. Beware the Spite Voter .

[ January 20, 2007, 11:27 AM: Message edited by: A. Alzabo ]

Posts: 2519 | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
DaveS
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Those Spite links are spooky. The "delighters" are relatively few here, and I didn't write it to point at you specifically, since I don't think you are one. Perhaps, like Winkey, I should have had a V8 and an outraged smiley instead, though I don't get what her point was. FWIW, I don't "delight" at the failures of the Bush Administration, though I do get a weird and probably unhealthy sort of grim satisfaction when their failures surface and are reported on.
IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
RickyB
Member
Member # 1464

 - posted      Profile for RickyB   Email RickyB   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
you're ok, Winkey... Not the brightest penny in the bowl, but good people. [Razz]
Posts: 19145 | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
A. Alzabo
Member
Member # 1197

 - posted      Profile for A. Alzabo   Email A. Alzabo   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
DaveS:
quote:
I don't "delight" at the failures of the Bush Administration, though I do get a weird and probably unhealthy sort of grim satisfaction when their failures surface and are reported on.
It is frustrating, isn't it? Point out that you didn't think something would work as "advertised" and you got dismissed as a "hater". Finally, often years later, it gets actually reported on and turns out to be like many expected.
Posts: 2519 | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
RickyB
Member
Member # 1464

 - posted      Profile for RickyB   Email RickyB   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
And then you're a bore for even implying that you foretold it.
Posts: 19145 | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
A. Alzabo
Member
Member # 1197

 - posted      Profile for A. Alzabo   Email A. Alzabo   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
And then you're a bore for even implying that you foretold it.
Nah, you'll get told some canned response about "hindsight".
Posts: 2519 | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
DaveS
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Yep, like "revenge of the political nerds". If I went to a political rally, I'd probably shout at all the wrong times [Frown] .
IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
winkey151
Member
Member # 2910

 - posted      Profile for winkey151   Email winkey151   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by RickyB:
you're ok, Winkey... Not the brightest penny in the bowl, but good people. [Razz]

I will rest assured as I sleep tonight, having you by my side in the piggy bank. [Wink]
Posts: 865 | Registered: Jun 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Ornery.org Front Page

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.1