Oh thank goodness the Democrats have power - Page 2

Undertoad · 11-20-2006, 06:10 PM

Uh, yes, why yes it is. Math in avoidance of any actual discussion or advancing the topic one iota, while pretending to be smart, it is in fact math.

Flint · 11-20-2006, 08:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Undertoad

...in avoidance of any actual discussion or advancing the topic one iota, while pretending to be smart, it is in fact math.

Okay, you go now, it's your turn. You're a politician: advance the topic one iota, through discussion. (Careful! Don't sound smart!)

Happy Monkey · 11-21-2006, 12:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Undertoad

Uh, yes, why yes it is. Math in avoidance of any actual discussion or advancing the topic one iota, while pretending to be smart, it is in fact math.

Uh, OK? Whatever that means.

People are acting as if Rangel just came up with this. He's been proposing this bill for three years, and it has no better chance of passing now than it did then, but he's been saying all along what only recently seems to have gotten the snazzy catch phrase "go big, go long, or go home."

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jebediah

I think Rangel should be first to be drafted.

He's a Korean War veteran.

Undertoad · 11-21-2006, 07:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Happy Monkey

and it has no better chance of passing now than it did then

Which is my original point; it's non-leadership politics of fear.

No better chance now: then why the math? Last time, the Rs, in charge of the rules and committees, said immediately ok Charlie, if you're just making a point, let's put it to a vote. And it lost, 402-2. Thus the point was dismissed.

This time the Ds are in charge of the house rules and committees, which means Rangel can play his game longer than a couple days.

Happy Monkey · 11-21-2006, 02:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Undertoad

No better chance now: then why the math?

Because the then and still current plan doesn't add up, and there needs to be a discussion on the Hill about what needs to be done.

He made the initial proposal at the onset of the war, to protest the cavalier attitude with which our troops were tossed into Iraq. And now there are a lot of people saying we can win this thing if we just ramp it up more, so Rangel proposed it again.

Flint · 11-21-2006, 02:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Happy Monkey

Because the then and still current plan doesn't add up, and there needs to be a discussion on the Hill about what needs to be done.

He made the initial proposal at the onset of the war, to protest the cavalier attitude with which our troops were tossed into Iraq. And now there are a lot of people saying we can win this thing if we just ramp it up more, so Rangel proposed it again.

God, that sounds logical... Makes sense in every way possible... But, nah.

Democrats are c-razy! Tax and spend! Tax and spend! :::does boogedy-boogedy dance:::

WabUfvot5 · 11-20-2006, 07:32 PM

I think Rangel should be first to be drafted.

Undertoad · 11-20-2006, 08:23 PM

I started the thread, dude.

Flint · 11-20-2006, 08:43 PM

Yes, but you were just "pretending to be smart" . . .

Undertoad · 11-20-2006, 08:44 PM

Ah well, good point.

Flint · 11-20-2006, 09:05 PM

Quote:

...good point...

xoxoxoBruce · 11-20-2006, 09:50 PM

At least we're hearing some ideas being thrown around beside's stay the course. We already know that isn't working.
Don't forget the noobs have been elected, but they haven't taken office yet.

Ibby · 11-21-2006, 07:31 AM

I think his point is simply, 'draft or get outta there, and YOU WONT DRAFT, so lets get out'... pretty damn stupid way to do it though

Undertoad · 11-21-2006, 07:50 AM

Including the Army, National Guard, Reserve, and Marines, there are about 1,200,000 troops in total. A lower number can be made available at any given time and the country has other responsibilities to face, as well as the overall strategy of being capable of fighting two wars at the same time.

There are currently about 130,000 troops in Iraq.

If you want to do a little math, there's your starting points.

Griff · 12-01-2006, 08:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Undertoad

...1,200,000 troops in total.
There are currently about 130,000 troops in Iraq.

If you want to do a little math, there's your starting points.

What is our current tail to tooth ratio? At 10 : 1 we'd already be over-committed.

11-20-2006, 08:43 PM	#9
Flint Snowflake Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Dystopia Posts: 13,136	Yes, but you were just "pretending to be smart" . . . __________________ **************** There's a level of facility that everyone needs to accomplish, and from there it's a matter of deciding for yourself how important ultra-facility is to your expression. ... I found, like Joseph Campbell said, if you just follow whatever gives you a little joy or excitement or awe, then you're on the right track. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Terry Bozzio**

11-20-2006, 09:50 PM	#12
xoxoxoBruce The future is unwritten Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 71,105	At least we're hearing some ideas being thrown around beside's stay the course. We already know that isn't working. Don't forget the noobs have been elected, but they haven't taken office yet. __________________ The descent of man ~ Nixon, Friedman, Reagan, Trump.

11-21-2006, 07:31 AM	#13
Ibby erika Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: "the high up north" Posts: 6,127	I think his point is simply, 'draft or get outta there, and YOU WONT DRAFT, so lets get out'... pretty damn stupid way to do it though __________________ not really back, you didn't see me, i was never here shhhhhh

11-20-2006, 06:10 PM	#1
Undertoad Radical Centrist Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Cottage of Prussia Posts: 31,423	Uh, yes, why yes it is. Math in avoidance of any actual discussion or advancing the topic one iota, while pretending to be smart, it is in fact math.

11-20-2006, 07:32 PM	#7
WabUfvot5 Operations Operative Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 634	I think Rangel should be first to be drafted.

11-20-2006, 08:23 PM	#8
Undertoad Radical Centrist Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Cottage of Prussia Posts: 31,423	I started the thread, dude.

11-20-2006, 08:44 PM	#10
Undertoad Radical Centrist Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Cottage of Prussia Posts: 31,423	Ah well, good point.

11-21-2006, 07:50 AM	#14
Undertoad Radical Centrist Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Cottage of Prussia Posts: 31,423	Including the Army, National Guard, Reserve, and Marines, there are about 1,200,000 troops in total. A lower number can be made available at any given time and the country has other responsibilities to face, as well as the overall strategy of being capable of fighting two wars at the same time. There are currently about 130,000 troops in Iraq. If you want to do a little math, there's your starting points.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)