Rummy's panties are in a wad

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Bowfinger

Lifer
Nov 17, 2002
15,776
392
126
Originally posted by: Theb
How long before he just sits on the porch mumbling that everyone is Hitler?
"Get off of my grass ya damn fascist whippersnappers! Mumble, grumble ..."

;)

Does anyone even take Rumsfeld seriously anymore? He's been wrong in almost everything he's done. His whining about fascism, aside from demonstrating he hasn't a clue what the word means, is just your typical BushCo blamestorming, rejecting any accountability for their own failures while blaming anyone and everyone else. It can be cute coming from a four year old, not so much from the Secretary of War.
 
Feb 16, 2005
14,058
5,398
136
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
He's upset that he will go down in history as the worthless piece of sh!t who was Secretary of Defense during the Presidency of the another worthless piece of sh!t.

In a battle of incompetence, it's going to be a tough fight, who is the biggest asshole? Who's the bigger liar? Who screwed up the worst? gotta be dumbya, he appointed that inane waste of cellular matter.
 

sierrita

Senior member
Mar 24, 2002
929
0
0
Originally posted by: DickFnTracy
Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
Originally posted by: Jaskalas
Taking a toll? He is saying the clear cut truth, that you consider Americans (him and Bush) the biggest enemy.

saying too many in this country want to "blame America first" and ignore the enemy.

Uh well I think it comes from knowing that terrorists can do very little to hurt us (and that has almost nothing to do with Bush or Rummy). To the contrary, Bush and Rummy can do a lot to hurt America and they have.





Congratulations you just made his point for him. Game, set and match. It is exactly that uninitiated, ignorant mindset that Rummy is talking about. You have no clue who the enemy is, what their capabilities are, what their plans are, etc. You simply sit in the cheap seats criticizing whenever something doesn't go exactly as you think it should but you're clueless and thank God, irrelevant. Stick to what you know, which is being big pharma's b!tch boy in the RTP.

Rumsfeld FTW.





Oh my heavens, we've got a true believer in the room.









 

WHAMPOM

Diamond Member
Feb 28, 2006
7,628
183
106
Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
I guess all of the calls of his resignation and the embarrassment of more and more ethical violations being exposed weekly has finally taken its toll on Rummy.

Bitter...party of one...Bitter....your table is ready.

Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld on Tuesday accused critics of the Bush administration's Iraq and counterterrorism policies of trying to appease "a new type of fascism."

In unusually explicit terms, Rumsfeld portrayed the administration's critics as suffering from "moral or intellectual confusion" about what threatens the nation's security and accused them of lacking the courage to fight back.

In remarks to several thousand veterans at the American Legion's national convention, Rumsfeld recited what he called the lessons of history, including the failed efforts to appease the Adolf Hitler regime in the 1930s.

"I recount this history because once again we face similar challenges in efforts to confront the rising threat of a new type of fascism," he said.



Rumsfeld spoke to the American Legion as part of a coordinated White House strategy, in advance of the fifth anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, to take the offensive against administration critics at a time of doubt about the future of Iraq and growing calls to withdraw U.S. troops.

Rumsfeld recalled a string of recent terrorist attacks, from 9/11 to bombings in Bali, London and Madrid, and said it should be obvious to anyone that terrorists must be confronted, not appeased.

"But some seem not to have learned history's lessons," he said, adding that part of the problem is that the American news media have tended to emphasize the negative rather than the positive.

He said, for example, that more media attention was given to U.S. soldiers' abuse of Iraqi prisoners at Abu Ghraib than to the fact that Sgt. 1st Class Paul Ray Smith received the Medal of Honor.

"Can we truly afford to believe somehow, some way, vicious extremists can be appeased?" he asked.

"Those who know the truth need to speak out against these kinds of myths and lies and distortions being told about our troops and about our country," he added.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was addressing the American Legion convention later Tuesday, and President Bush is scheduled to speak here later in the week. On Monday, Vice President Dick Cheney and Rumsfeld made separate addresses to the national convention of the Veterans of Foreign Wars in Reno, Nev.

Rumsfeld made similar arguments in Reno about doubters of the administration's approach to fighting terrorism, saying too many in this country want to "blame America first" and ignore the enemy.

What? Is he rewriting history? Chamberlain disregarded the rearming of Hitler's Germany and manufactured reasons that supported his appeasement policies. Just like they manufacture propaganda in the White house now. The rest is just whinning from a politician who cannot have everything his own uncontested way.
 

daveymark

Lifer
Sep 15, 2003
10,573
1
0
Originally posted by: Rainsford
I don't understand this "either-or" viewpoint Rummy and other Bush supporters have. I do not find any ideological conflict in thinking we need to fight terrorism AND thinking Bush is an idiot who's putting us in more danger. In fact, I consider taking a non-Bush approach to be one of the key actions we can take to do a better job in fighting terrorists.

That's the problem though. this policy of "anybody but Bush" or, as you put it, a "non-Bush" approach isn't enough. You need to lay out a better plan, a better method.

The republicans will continue their control until you come up with a more precise way of getting things done. Continuing with the "non bush" diarreah of the mouth diatribes will only make you hug the tar baby that much tighter...

 

WHAMPOM

Diamond Member
Feb 28, 2006
7,628
183
106
Originally posted by: Rainsford
Originally posted by: Jaskalas
Taking a toll? He is saying the clear cut truth, that you consider Americans (him and Bush) the biggest enemy.

saying too many in this country want to "blame America first" and ignore the enemy.

I don't understand this "either-or" viewpoint Rummy and other Bush supporters have. I do not find any ideological conflict in thinking we need to fight terrorism AND thinking Bush is an idiot who's putting us in more danger. In fact, I consider taking a non-Bush approach to be one of the key actions we can take to do a better job in fighting terrorists.
It is a tactic to narrow the choice to either FOR or AGAINST THEM. A tactic of control. To put you on the defensive and weaken your position.
 

straightalker

Senior member
Dec 21, 2005
515
0
0
It is a tactic to narrow the choice to either FOR or AGAINST THEM. A tactic of control. To put you on the defensive and weaken your position.
Excellent comment by WHAMPOM.

Everything, and i do mean everything said by Rumsfeld is something manufactured to decieve the American people. His agenda is the Neocon agenda.

So let me ask everyone in the World then...

..."have you been Neoconned?"