|
I'm not sure if it's funnier if that's the first time Gates ever saw the President and the Cabinet talk politics or if a guy who was Deputy DCI for Reagan, DCI and NSC for H.W. Bush, and SecDef for W. Bush actually thinks we'll believe that he's outraged and shocked at witnessing such behavior.
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2014 03:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 19, 2024 22:22 |
|
|
I will admit his endorsement makes me like Hilary even less than before.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2014 03:56
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:Translation: Biden actually has morals and knows not to trust the structure that got us into Iraq and hosed up Afghanistan. Quoting myself from the GOP thread. Joementum posted:I'm not sure if it's funnier if that's the first time Gates ever saw the President and the Cabinet talk politics or if a guy who was Deputy DCI for Reagan, DCI and NSC for H.W. Bush, and SecDef for W. Bush actually thinks we'll believe that he's outraged and shocked at witnessing such behavior. Wasn't he probably involved in Iran contra as well for maximum hilarity?
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2014 03:56
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:Wasn't he probably involved in Iran contra as well for maximum hilarity? Yup, and I also forgot that he was on the NSC for Ford as well. But I'm sure there was never any disagreement between Ford and his chiefs of staff, Messrs. Cheney and Rumsfeld.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2014 04:01
|
|
|
Joementum posted:Yup, and I also forgot that he was on the NSC for Ford as well. But I'm sure there was never any disagreement between Ford and his chiefs of staff, Messrs. Cheney and Rumsfeld. Well to be fair it's hard to argue with the former as you can't make eye contact with him without smelling brimstone and seeing visions of your own death.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2014 04:05
|
|
|
Captain_Maclaine posted:Well to be fair it's hard to argue with the former as you can't make eye contact with him without smelling brimstone and seeing visions of your own death. You: I'm surprised to hear you make a political argument, Mr. Secretary Cheney: *booming tritone-harmonized voice* THE ONLY POLITICS IS THE POLITICS OF ENERGY You: gently caress *black oil seeps from your hairline*
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2014 04:16
|
|
|
Joementum posted:Yup, and I also forgot that he was on the NSC for Ford as well. But I'm sure there was never any disagreement between Ford and his chiefs of staff, Messrs. Cheney and Rumsfeld.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2014 04:30
|
|
|
He really did a pretty good job here as president considering what he was working against. Certainly all the ol boy Ags who fear change, but I can't say I can recall if Bush's regents were as bad as Perry's have been, and there'd have still been a number of them around in Gates' time here.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2014 04:41
|
|
|
ReidRansom posted:He really did a pretty good job here as president considering what he was working against. Certainly all the ol boy Ags who fear change, but I can't say I can recall if Bush's regents were as bad as Perry's have been, and there'd have still been a number of them around in Gates' time here. He made a quite detailed plan that was swiftly abandoned the moment he left the presidency, so he was probably doing some good.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2014 04:46
|
|
|
OAquinas posted:Glowing treatment of longtime friend Hillary, biting resentment towards Biden? I'm sure there's no ulterior motive here. Either that or Biden really does come off as a jackass who is consistently wrong on foreign policy issues. Gates isn't exactly the first person to bring either of those up.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2014 08:30
|
|
|
Cliff Racer posted:Either that or Biden really does come off as a jackass who is consistently wrong on foreign policy issues. Gates isn't exactly the first person to bring either of those up.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2014 08:33
|
|
|
Cliff Racer posted:Either that or Biden really does come off as a jackass who is consistently wrong on foreign policy issues. Gates isn't exactly the first person to bring either of those up. Have any of them ever said why he's wrong? Because without knowing details being considered wrong on foreign policy by neo-cons seems like a plus to me.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2014 08:34
|
|
|
Well the obvious go to is his opposition to the Gulf War but support of the Iraq War. He chose opposite sides both times and both times he picked the wrong answer. His opposition to the surge/awakening was another area where he was proven wrong.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2014 08:53
|
|
|
I don't think it's controversial to say that Biden sometimes speaks uncomfortable truths in an indelicate way. Problem is that isn't terribly constructive in situations where not doing something isn't an option and your only real choice is to try to navigate the least bad path through a field of poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2014 08:58
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:Have any of them ever said why he's wrong? Because without knowing details being considered wrong on foreign policy by neo-cons seems like a plus to me. Yea Biden doesn't have any neocon supported ideals at all. You know, like being super gung-ho for 'dethroning' Saddam and calling him "a long term threat and a short term threat to our national security". What a noble peacemaker. He was against Afghanistan but he rang the war bell real hard for Iraq and he was a major voice in the 'the inspectors saw WMDs' camp to the point that Ritter called his efforts a 'total sham' I believe, then when poo poo went bad he went 'woah idiots why are you in Iraq we should use robots instead of soldiers to do this!' He also wanted to send troops to Darfur. He's also said 'you don't need to be a Jew to be a Zionist', and said that if anything Bush's term left Israel WEAKER, and when the peace talks most recently broke down he said 'yea well it's Palestine's fault really'. Oh hey looking at his wiki page he's also pro-embargo on Cuba. Whew good thing this guy isn't a neocon or something. These are all just the truth and the hawks can't handle his realness.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2014 09:42
|
|
|
Tatum Girlparts posted:These are all just the truth and the hawks can't handle his realness. I hope that's not directed at me, I've never been a huge fan of Biden on policy outside a few domestic social and economic issues. He's pretty bad on a lot of stuff. Just spitballing on what Gates' problem with him might be, given all the common ground and without knowing what specific poo poo he's talking about. In any case, I'm interested in seeing a bit more of what he has to say.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2014 10:23
|
|
|
Tatum Girlparts posted:These are all just the truth and the hawks can't handle his realness. There's a pretty good chance that he's a neocon and still too real for the chicken-hawks.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2014 11:05
|
|
|
Biden rather famously thought that the Bin Laden raid was a bad idea. Also, Gates is hardly alone in thinking Biden a bit of a blowhard who never tires of his own voice. The real surprising thing is Gates' seeming acceptance of Hillary. They were reportedly on very opposite sites regarding Syria strategy. Though Gates probably has a sense of which way the wind is blowing and he didn't get where he got by insulting the next boss.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2014 13:26
|
|
|
Tatum Girlparts posted:Whew good thing this guy isn't a neocon or something. These are all just the truth and the hawks can't handle his realness. Haha welp didn't know that about Biden. However, my point was more in that article/book quotes and some other previous article from a few months ago the writers just went 'Biden is wrong on everything' without providing any evidence at all. Hence due to the lack of supporting evidence all these articles were 'neo-imperialist/neo-con thinks Biden is dumb' which by itself isn't what I would consider a mark against him, your post about him on the otherhand....
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2014 17:53
|
|
|
Oh, hey, Chris Christie's people shut down traffic on a major bridge just to gently caress with some guy and then lied about it! http://gothamist.com/2014/01/08/top_christie_aide_emailed_time_for.php
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2014 18:03
|
|
|
Don't forget gloated that they had school children stuck in the traffic since they were probably kids of people that voted Democratic.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2014 18:13
|
|
|
And as Frank Rich noted, this might have been the kind of stuff Romney's team was bothered by, when they were vetting VP candidates.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2014 18:52
|
|
|
showbiz_liz posted:Oh, hey, Chris Christie's people shut down traffic on a major bridge just to gently caress with some guy and then lied about it! But but but Benghazi!
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2014 18:54
|
|
|
showbiz_liz posted:Oh, hey, Chris Christie's people shut down traffic on a major bridge just to gently caress with some guy and then lied about it! So how bad is this gonna hurt his 2016 stock? The yelling at a schoolteacher stuff you can spin but shutting down traffic on a major road out of spite is a whole different level of petulant and childish.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2014 19:44
|
|
|
axeil posted:So how bad is this gonna hurt his 2016 stock? [I posted this in the GOP thread too, but it's probably more appropriate here.] The main question is how Republican party actors react to the Christie situation. In order to run in 2016 he's going to need the backing of a lot of these folks. Do they distance themselves from Christie? Ignore the situation? Are they going to play wait-and-see? Watch statements from his fellow Republicans closely. For example, John McCain said on the Sunday shows this weekend that he thought the Republicans had some impressive Governors who could run in 2016, including Christie. Would he include Christie in that list today? We'll have to see. And whatever happens to Christie in his own party, the media, and public opinion, I doubt he'll be getting much cooperation from the legislature for a while.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2014 19:46
|
|
|
axeil posted:So how bad is this gonna hurt his 2016 stock? The yelling at a schoolteacher stuff you can spin but shutting down traffic on a major road out of spite is a whole different level of petulant and childish. The major road in and out of New York City. I wouldn't be surprised if de Blasio and Cuomo give it a go.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2014 21:02
|
|
|
axeil posted:So how bad is this gonna hurt his 2016 stock? The yelling at a schoolteacher stuff you can spin but shutting down traffic on a major road out of spite is a whole different level of petulant and childish. The idea of impeachment or a recall drive is already being floated and Christie is at war with the Republican legislative caucuses, so probably a lot.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2014 21:11
|
|
|
I wonder what it would be like having Kim Guadagno take the governor's office. Honestly don't have the slightest idea what her views are on anything.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2014 21:26
|
|
|
jeffersonlives posted:The idea of impeachment or a recall drive is already being floated and Christie is at war with the Republican legislative caucuses, so probably a lot.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2014 21:35
|
|
|
Teddybear posted:The major road in and out of New York City. I wouldn't be surprised if de Blasio and Cuomo give it a go. It's a huge piece of infrastructure.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2014 21:55
|
|
|
jeffersonlives posted:The idea of impeachment or a recall drive is already being floated and Christie is at war with the Republican legislative caucuses, so probably a lot. Jesus I thought this guy was on a roll. Are the articles popping up at nytimes just the war bubbling to the top or something?
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2014 22:05
|
|
|
OneThousandMonkeys posted:Jesus I thought this guy was on a roll. Are the articles popping up at nytimes just the war bubbling to the top or something? The Lonegan wing of the party has always virulently hated Christie, dating back to his tenure as USA and even earlier. Christie then alienated Schundler and all of Schundler's allies in 2010 when he threw Schundler under the bus and rolled over him a bunch of times over the Race for the Top filing. Christie then pissed off the legislative caucuses and a lot of the county organizations by cutting deals with the Democratic machine trying to run up numbers for his 2013 reelect, which really hurt efforts to make Christie's victory a big statewide win for Republicans in general. This backfired when Christie a few days after the election tried to engineer a coup in the state senate Republican caucus to get his buddy as the minority leader and failed because he didn't have enough friends to sway left - and the failed coup was against Tom Kean Jr., which turned many of the Kean Republicans, who were some of Christie's strongest allies, on him, including the Keans themselves. So basically he's significantly more popular among the local Democratic cognoscenti than the Republican cognoscenti, but the vast majority of those Dems will roll on him faster than dice on a craps table if it becomes to their political benefit. eta: Oh I forgot one of the key parts of the coup on Kean which was that Christie was attempting to install as minority leader a total RINO who is actually part of a local Democratic machine that also controls parts of majority leadership. He was basically trying to turn the Republican legislative caucuses into straight up rumps. oldfan fucked around with this message at 22:18 on Jan 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2014 22:12
|
|
|
Anyone who actually supports Christie will not care about what his staffers did. If he is not actually issuing orders in the incriminating email thread, Republican standards of accountability dictate that he was out of the loop and not responsible. Even teabaggers who want to destroy Christie will have a hard time using it against him because it was done with a noble purpose (punishing Democrats). It might gain some traction if he makes it to the general but other than that I think it's going to be a dud, as corrupt and damning as it looks to anyone who pays attention.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2014 22:12
|
|
|
I don't know how much national play it'll end up getting, but he comes off like a local thug instead of a serious national candidate. This is the kind of thing that comes off like the "Chicago-style" politics people were yelling about a few years ago.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2014 22:20
|
|
|
It would have been way more relevant to his chances if it had been revealed before the gubernatorial election. The sheer commuter rage could have been enough to boot him out.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2014 22:22
|
|
|
jeffersonlives posted:The idea of impeachment or a recall drive is already being floated and Christie is at war with the Republican legislative caucuses, so probably a lot. Impeachment?  I thought the NJ GOP loved Christie. Is there any chance that actually ends up happening? Obviously the NJ Dems would be on-board but wouldn't they need a good chunk of the NJ GOP to go along with it?
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2014 22:35
|
|
|
axeil posted:Impeachment? Impeachment of the governor requires a majority vote in the Assembly to start the investigation, and then the conviction in the Senate requires a 60% majority. The Senate's currently 24-16 Democrats which is exactly 60% and the Assembly's 48-32 Democrats, again 60%.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2014 22:41
|
|
|
If you're Christie, you're also going to have a really hard time getting the state senate minority leader to really fight for you when you stuck a shiv in his back two months ago. It's unlikely to happen but this is why you don't go to war with your own legislative caucuses unless you know you'll win, and Christie's been openly antagonizing them for about a year.
oldfan fucked around with this message at 03:12 on Jan 9, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2014 22:43
|
|
|
Install Windows posted:Impeachment of the governor requires a majority vote in the Assembly to start the investigation, and then the conviction in the Senate requires a 60% majority. The Senate's currently 24-16 Democrats which is exactly 60% and the Assembly's 48-32 Democrats, again 60%. I believe conviction requires a 2/3 majority (i.e. 27 votes) in the NJ Senate. This would require at least 3 Republican votes, assuming all the Democrats are on board.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2014 22:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 19, 2024 22:22 |
|
|
Xandu posted:This is the kind of thing that comes off like the "Chicago-style" politics people were yelling about a few years ago. I thought that was just code for "Obama sucks".
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2014 22:50
|
|