Jim Webb, who BEAT G. Allen, & the ONLY Senator w/ a Son in Iraq, to give SOTU REPLY

[LoungeMachine]

Tuesday, Jan. 16, 2007 12:39 a.m. EST
Sen. Jim Webb to Give State of the Union Response



Freshman Sen. Jim Webb, a Vietnam War veteran, will deliver the official Democratic response to President Bush's State of the Union Address, where the war in Iraq is expected to be a central topic.


As a combat veteran, Webb, D-Va., "understands personally how crucial it is to find a new direction in Iraq and begin to bring the war to a close," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Tuesday in announcing their choice of Webb to respond to Bush's Jan. 23 address to Congress.


Webb, 60, a former Marine who served as Navy secretary in the Reagan administration, upset incumbent Sen. George Allen, R-Va., in the November election, helping the Democrats capture a slender majority in the Senate.

[LoungeMachine]

God you just KNOW this is going to be classic.

Jim will pull no punches, calling out all of Bush's rhetoric.

Bring him on.

[Guitar Shark]

That's fine, but I'd like to see him also offer some ideas of his own. The Dems need to do a better job of this.

[FORD]

Of course, the whore media networks didn't even broadcast the Democratic response to Chimpy's "surge" infomercial. If they pull that shit again, it won't matter what Webb says, because the sheeple will never hear a word of it, and it certainly won't be quoted in their Murdoch newpapers the next morning.

But I'll be looking forward to Webb doing verbally what he should have done to Chimpy a few weeks ago..... kick his ass from here to Crawford and back.

[LoungeMachine]

Originally posted by Guitar Shark
That's fine, but I'd like to see him also offer some ideas of his own. The Dems need to do a better job of this.


:rolleyes:


Yeah, they've offered no alternative plans.

As if sending in more troops is a new "plan" :rolleyes:

The problem isn't the lack of Dem plans...

The problem lies in the fact in order to implement any of them, BushCO would have to admit they've been wrong all along.

[Guitar Shark]

Originally posted by LoungeMachine
:rolleyes:


Yeah, they've offered no alternative plans.

As if sending in more troops is a new "plan" :rolleyes:

The problem isn't the lack of Dem plans...

The problem lies in the fact in order to implement any of them, BushCO would have to admit they've been wrong all along.

I don't necessarily disagree with your bottom line, but seriously... what alternative plans have been offered by the Dems?

[LoungeMachine]

Originally posted by Guitar Shark
I don't necessarily disagree with your bottom line, but seriously... what alternative plans have been offered by the Dems?

Setting benchmarks, drawing down, and FORCING the fucking Malaki "government" to stand up for themselves, and to stop pussyfotting around with the militias just like the ISG put forth, was FIRST offered up by the Dems.

But of course it was spun as "anti-troops" and weak on terror.

Typical NCSB rhetoric.

And now we come to find Malaki has been getting on the phone to Cent-Com and telling them which arrests to make, and which neighborhood militias to leave alone.

This "war" [read: occupation] has been a complete FAILURE all along.

Failures include, but not limited to....

Failures of intel.
Failures of planning
Failure to secure ammo stores
Failure to keep track of the Iraqi Army [disbanding]
Failure to stop the looting
Failure to listen to Generals on the ground
Failure to control torture and murder
Failure to hire locals to rebuild their own infrastructure
Failure to track 9BILLION in stolen US funds.


And now we're supposed to trust this new "plan", brought forth by a paper tiger of a president?


Imperialistic Nation building and strengthening the Islamic coalititon against us will be BushCO's legacy.

[ODShowtime]

Originally posted by Guitar Shark
I don't necessarily disagree with your bottom line, but seriously... what alternative plans have been offered by the Dems?

I believe I heard something about talks with Iraq's neighbors. But then again, we don't negotiate with terrorists...

:rolleyes: