Military Times calls for Rumsfeld resignation

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Dragonfly @ Nov 3 2006, 06:10 PM) [snapback]343604[/snapback]</div>

What good will it do? The damage is done, unfortunately. Who would want to come in and clean up his mess, anyway?

 

Bush cannot function without Rummy and dead eye Dick. They will stay until the end. We only have two more long years!!! B)

 

Schmika calls for the cessation of printing of the Military Times. So what! You can find anyone saying something at any time. Why do we care?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Dragonfly @ Nov 3 2006, 09:10 PM) [snapback]343604[/snapback]</div>

Dude, you do know that the "Military Times Media Group" is part of Gannett right?

Most military folks know that and know where that 'voice' is coming from. The only folks who think opinion pieces in there have any relation to what military people think, are the people who just see the name of the publication and assume.

 

I heard that Rumsfeld will resign ... when Bush is finally elected out of office.

Right now it's like playing poker with a bad hand - you keep bluffing and finally loose it all because you're afraid to admit you were wrong to keep going.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Schmika @ Nov 4 2006, 04:57 PM) [snapback]343936[/snapback]</div>

Let's just burn all the books (except Schmika's bible.) Ideas are just too dangerous for the common folk to be trusted with. Become lifetime members of the Closed Mind Club.

BTW, weren't you glad to see that Bush also said that Cheney, as well as Rumsfeld, would stay on for the next two years also?

Like, what could he do about it if he didn't like Dead-Eye? Cheney is as elected an official as Bush is! He can't be removed short of impeachment. I'm not sure Bush is too clear on a lot of constitutional trivia.

What do we care?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Dragonfly @ Nov 3 2006, 09:54 PM) [snapback]343613[/snapback]</div>

*I* would want to clean up the mess, but I'm not qualified. Can anyone suggest someone who IS qualified? Colin Powell?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Alnilam @ Nov 5 2006, 03:32 AM) [snapback]344029[/snapback]</div>

Where did THAT come from?????? My point, dear sir, is WHO is the "military times" and WHY should we listen to them!!!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Schmika @ Nov 6 2006, 10:44 PM) [snapback]344813[/snapback]</div>

The "Military Times", along with the "Army Times", and the "Air Force Times" are all published by Gannett, owner of USA Today. I'm not sure how much the military has to do with it at all.

 

"WASHINGTON - Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld stepped down as defense secretary on Wednesday, one day after midterm elections in which opposition to the war in Iraq contributed to heavy Republican losses...."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061108/ap_on_...umsfeld_resigns

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Dragonfly @ Nov 8 2006, 11:27 PM) [snapback]346070[/snapback]</div>

Before Gannett bought them, the Military Times (Group) was an independent entity. It did cater to a Military Audience and was the best source for Promotion Lists, Rules Changes and such. It was the only place to get that kind of information. They got a significant portion of their income through subscriptions.

But, since the advent of the web, where all of the info that used to be disseminated via print is now available online and for free, their primary draw dwindled. They found their subscription base shrinking, and they wound up being acquired by Gannett who moved to a more advertising based revenue scheme.

Gannett also started 'content sharing' with the rest of their empire, so the articles wound up being written more and more by USA Today staffers and the like, instead of military oriented correspondents.

This, in turn, led to even more defections from the subscription base, which led to more cost cutting and a viscious circle where the military audience basically gave up on it as a military related publication. Now I see them sitting around in the free-paper bins along with all the other similar tabloids. I do know some folks, however, who have found uses for them. If you're getting transferred, a pile of them from the corner PX makes great packing material

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Dragonfly @ Nov 4 2006, 10:10 AM) [snapback]343604[/snapback]</div>

Well, wish granted. Rummy's gone. Now, if Bush is forced to resign ala Nixon rather than face impeachment, and if Cheney's ticker misses one more time....THEN we have our first female president. It's about time.
Bush certainly ends the myth of white supremacy, eh? (to quote from Charles Wrangel)

 

Timing is everything.

If Bush resigns, Cheney becomes President and appoints a new VP. It won't be Pelosi.

If Cheney kicks off Bush appoints a new VP and it won't be Pelosi.

They'd both have to go at the same time.

I'm not saying it's impossible.

If ever God wanted to show Pat Robertson he exists and is paying attention....this would be it.

 

OOOh, a double impeachment...How fun! I'll get the popcorn, and just in time for my plasma tv, where I can see the beads of sweat on their pale, forlorn and confused faces.

Now I wonder, which would piss off the repubs more, president Pelosi, or president H Clinton? A double feature featuring a double feature!!! I'm getting all wet just at the thought.