Political Bloodbath at the White House is Imminent (1 Viewer)

[danarhea]

There is about to be a huge shakeup inside the Bush administration. Bush's new White House Chief of Staff, Joshua Bolten, is about to roll some heads in a very big way.

Question - Does this also signal a shift in policy? I would suggest that, with Bush's recent hostile attitude toward the Neocons in his administration, a change in direction appears very likely, which in my opinion, would be a very good move.

Article is here.

 

[cherokee]

bloodbath?....damn you like to hype up the stories dont you?...:roll:

 

[Iriemon]

An administrative shake up cannot hurt and is long overdue. But I doubt it will have any significant on the two major Bush Admin fiascos, the mistaken war in Iraq and the tax cut driven deficits/debt. Bush is too proud or stupid to admit his policies are wrong, and will stubbornly stay the course in both these areas, and pass the buck to the next president to deal with them.

What we really need is not a shake up inside the Bush Administration, but a shake up of the entire Administration, president and all, and the rest of the folks who have been running our government the last 5 years. Their running of the government has been an incompetent debacle. We need need new ideas in Government; not stay the same disasterous course.

 

[lily]

Real shakeup? I doubt it........but it's going to have the appearance of doing something. Appearances are everything, with mid-term elections coming up. It's not going to look good, if the Republican candidates leave town, when Bush comes to campaign for them.

 

[KCConservative]

What we really need is not a shake up inside the Bush Administration, but a shake up of the entire Administration, president and all, and the rest of the folks who have been running our government the last 5 years. Their running of the government has been an incompetent debacle. We need need new ideas in Government; not stay the same disasterous course.

I predict they'll all be gone by 2008.

 

[danarhea]

I predict they'll all be gone by 2008.

So how does Bush's decision to put John Bolten in charge affect the direction that the administration is going to take at this time? What affect is this going to have on Neoconservatism? Is Bush returning to the pragmatism he had when he was Governor of Texas? Surely, you must have an opinion on these questions. I'd like to hear it.

 

[Thorgasm]

So how does Bush's decision to put John Bolten in charge affect the direction that the administration is going to take at this time? What affect is this going to have on Neoconservatism? Is Bush returning to the pragmatism he had when he was Governor of Texas? Surely, you must have an opinion on these questions. I'd like to hear it.

First off, I thought the press conference shed some light on the administration. I would think if George were in charge, he would be the one to say, "If you are going to leave, do it now". He didn't though. It kind of shows him to be the puppet/figurehead.

I don't think the administration is going to alter their course. They will just have new faces. The man who campaigned on being a Washington outsider keeps promoting from within. He has kept people who only agree with Rove's agenda. This won't affect neoconservatism. The voters will be the ones affecting that. I don't think Bush is returning to pragmatism. Rove is so full of himself that he doesn't see any problems with their philosophy. He is so used to the smear game that he has never had to be accountable. So, there you go Dan, there are my opinions.

 

[danarhea]

First off, I thought the press conference shed some light on the administration. I would think if George were in charge, he would be the one to say, "If you are going to leave, do it now". He didn't though. It kind of shows him to be the puppet/figurehead.

I don't think the administration is going to alter their course. They will just have new faces. The man who campaigned on being a Washington outsider keeps promoting from within. He has kept people who only agree with Rove's agenda. This won't affect neoconservatism. The voters will be the ones affecting that. I don't think Bush is returning to pragmatism. Rove is so full of himself that he doesn't see any problems with their philosophy. He is so used to the smear game that he has never had to be accountable. So, there you go Dan, there are my opinions.

Your opinion is appreciated, although I do disagree with you to a small extent. I believe that we are seeing Bush returning to the pragmatism he used to have until he got caught up with the Neocons. Bush is not ever going to say that it was wrong to go to Iraq, but I believe at this time, he might be thinking "OK, we broke it, now we have to fix it". Some of the Neocon departures from the Bush administration lead me to believe this. Also, the fact that he is distancing himself from Cheney, and also allowing Rice to crush Rumsfeld's balls on foreign policy, shows that a different direction on policy had already started long before this latest shakeup.

Now whether this change in direction is genuine or only for political purposes is something I cannot answer, and neither can you. Time will tell, and I am willing to wait, and also willing to once more give Bush the benefit of the doubt, while seeing how this plays out. We will know the truth once we see what happens with Federal spending over the next few months.

 

[Thorgasm]

Now whether this change in direction is genuine or only for political purposes is something I cannot answer, and neither can you. Time will tell, and I am willing to wait, and also willing to once more give Bush the benefit of the doubt, while seeing how this plays out. We will know the truth once we see what happens with Federal spending over the next few months.

Unfortunately, I am not as forgiving as you. The ship has sailed for me giving Bush the benefit of the doubt. "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me". Time will tell, you are right. Although I think we shall see how we handle the Iran situation. In addition to federal spending we shall see if the tax cuts are made permanent or not.

 

[danarhea]

Unfortunately, I am not as forgiving as you. The ship has sailed for me giving Bush the benefit of the doubt. "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me". Time will tell, you are right. Although I think we shall see how we handle the Iran situation. In addition to federal spending we shall see if the tax cuts are made permanent or not.

I am not that forgiving either. I do not forgive Bush for the mess he has made of my country, but it is not that hard to take a logical look at what is going on at this time, and by doing so, make the deduction that things are definitely changing. This is the reason that I am hanging back at this time, and waiting to see the eventual outcome. It is no secret that I strongly believe the Neocons to be traitors to America and all it stands for. I may be a heavy Bush basher, but my beef has never been so much with Bush as it has been with the parasites which took over the Republican party. If this is what is changing, then I am all for letting the GOP start over with a plan that, this time, is a sane one. It is better than putting the Democrats back in and getting more of the same that we are getting now.

 

[Thorgasm]

I am not that forgiving either. I do not forgive Bush for the mess he has made of my country, but it is not that hard to take a logical look at what is going on at this time, and by doing so, make the deduction that things are definitely changing. This is the reason that I am hanging back at this time, and waiting to see the eventual outcome. It is no secret that I strongly believe the Neocons to be traitors to America and all it stands for. I may be a heavy Bush basher, but my beef has never been so much with Bush as it has been with the parasites which took over the Republican party. If this is what is changing, then I am all for letting the GOP start over with a plan that, this time, is a sane one. It is better than putting the Democrats back in and getting more of the same that we are getting now.

Why put either party in? They are both lap dogs to special interests.

 

[danarhea]

Why put either party in? They are both lap dogs to special interests.

Amen to that.

 

[KCConservative]

Why put either party in? They are both lap dogs to special interests.

It must be nice to not have allegience to either party. You don't have to support the dems or the republicans and you can just bash whoever you please. How very...safe.

 

[Thorgasm]

It must be nice to not have allegience to either party. You don't have to support the dems or the republicans and you can just bash whoever you please. How very...safe.

It has nothing to do with being or appearing safe. It has to do with being an American. I stated why I am not aligned with a party. If you can't accept that then too bad. Keep voting for corruption, it's easier than thinking!

 

[Deegan]

It has nothing to do with being or appearing safe. It has to do with being an American. I stated why I am not aligned with a party. If you can't accept that then too bad. Keep voting for corruption, it's easier than thinking!

I respect that thinker, I am now there, and it's not that fun, is it?

 

[disneydude]

Independent:

You go! I completely support your independence to not pledge "allegiance" to either major party. Some people on these boards, myself included, tend to allign rather polarly to one side or the other.
There was a time (about 20 years ago) that I considered myself "independent". However, as the Republican party drifted more and more to the right I found myself voting less and less for GOP candidates. During the last 10 years or so as the Republican party has completely sold out to the radical right I find it extremely difficult to support any Republican candidate. However, I have supported some moderate Republicans in local races (Yes, here in California we actually do have some Republicans that truly are "moderate").
In an ideal world we would all be independent and vote for the best person. However, under the current administration we have become so divided that I am not sure when or if there will ever be a mending of that divide.
I for one would love to see it because I would love to once again support a variety of candidates from either major party or from a viable third party.

 

[danarhea]

Independent:

You go! I completely support your independence to not pledge "allegiance" to either major party. Some people on these boards, myself included, tend to allign rather polarly to one side or the other.
There was a time (about 20 years ago) that I considered myself "independent". However, as the Republican party drifted more and more to the right I found myself voting less and less for GOP candidates. During the last 10 years or so as the Republican party has completely sold out to the radical right I find it extremely difficult to support any Republican candidate. However, I have supported some moderate Republicans in local races (Yes, here in California we actually do have some Republicans that truly are "moderate").
In an ideal world we would all be independent and vote for the best person. However, under the current administration we have become so divided that I am not sure when or if there will ever be a mending of that divide.
I for one would love to see it because I would love to once again support a variety of candidates from either major party or from a viable third party.

The right is not that bad, if it is the sane right we are talking about. I am proud to be a Conservative, and when I say Conservative, I mean a real one, not a donkey in an elephant suit who chooses to sell out Conservative values while having the unmitigated audacity to call himself Conservative.

Whats wrong with less taxes?
Whats wrong with less government?
Whats wrong with individual responsibility?

These are the reasons I used to call myself a Republcan. These are also the values which have been sold down the river by the phoney Conservatives. When Gingrich led the GOP 1994 revolution, Conservatism was on a roll. Today, under Bush, it is up in smoke. The parasites running the Republcan party today are not the sane right. They are as mad as hatters.

 

[disneydude]

Danarhea:

I agree with you 100%. The type of Republican that you are talking about is the type of Republican that I can respect. That is the type of Republican that even though I am very liberal, could support in an election.

The problem is, I don't see that type of Republican very much anymore. I started seeing the change about 10 years ago with the Pat Buchanons of the GOP.

The GOP today has pandered to the radical right to such an extent that they have now become the party of the radical right which is one of the main reasons (coupled with all the scandals) that the Republican party is struggling today.
People in America are beginning to recognize that the GOP which once stood for smaller government now represents a philosophy of big government spending, big government involvement in social affairs, isolationist policies and government involvement into everyones bedrooms.

IF and I think its a big IF....If the Republicans can ever regain control of their party they may be able to rebuild it into what it once was.

 

[KCConservative]

It has nothing to do with being or appearing safe. It has to do with being an American. I stated why I am not aligned with a party. If you can't accept that then too bad. Keep voting for corruption, it's easier than thinking!

Don't get me wrong. I can accept it. You have every right to think as you choose. It makes for interesting forum posts, though, when one doesn't have a partisan position, that's all.

 

[Thorgasm]

I respect that thinker, I am now there, and it's not that fun, is it?

No, it isn't fun at all. It is very sad to see what our elected officials have become.

 

[Thorgasm]

The right is not that bad, if it is the sane right we are talking about. I am proud to be a Conservative, and when I say Conservative, I mean a real one, not a donkey in an elephant suit who chooses to sell out Conservative values while having the unmitigated audacity to call himself Conservative.

Whats wrong with less taxes?
Whats wrong with less government?
Whats wrong with individual responsibility?

These are the reasons I used to call myself a Republcan. These are also the values which have been sold down the river by the phoney Conservatives. When Gingrich led the GOP 1994 revolution, Conservatism was on a roll. Today, under Bush, it is up in smoke. The parasites running the Republcan party today are not the sane right. They are as mad as hatters.

Unfortunately the Republican party is more loyal to their party than they are to their country or constituents. I used to give republicans credit for their solidarity. That solidarity is what let the Neo-cons run amok. All of the republicans supported bush every step of the way, without questioning a thing. It would seem that the sane conservatives are finally starting to come to their senses. I think it is too late though. They should be held accountable and tossed out of office.

The Democrats still don't have their act together. They can't get together on a platform. They don't seem to have any alternative ideas of their own. I applaud them for challenging the status quo. Unfortunately they don't have an alternative to the status quo. They also should be held accountable and tossed out of office.

 

[KCConservative]

Unfortunately the Republican party is more loyal to their party than they are to their country or constituents. I used to give republicans credit for their solidarity. That solidarity is what let the Neo-cons run amok. All of the republicans supported bush every step of the way, without questioning a thing. It would seem that the sane conservatives are finally starting to come to their senses. I think it is too late though. They should be held accountable and tossed out of office.

The Democrats still don't have their act together. They can't get together on a platform. They don't seem to have any alternative ideas of their own. I applaud them for challenging the status quo. Unfortunately they don't have an alternative to the status quo. They also should be held accountable and tossed out of office.

Assertions like "more loyal to party than constituents" and "run amok" are opinions, of course, and that's fine. You get your chance to hold them accountable in November. Couldn't agree more with you regarding the democratic alternatives and lack of platform.

 

[Thorgasm]

Assertions like "more loyal to party than constituents" and "run amok" are opinions, of course, and that's fine.

Well, if you think the republicans are for small government and fiscal responsibility the facts show otherwise. You would be better served to judge people by their actions and not their words.

 

[KCConservative]

Well, if you think the republicans are for small government and fiscal responsibility the facts show otherwise. You would be better served to judge people by their actions and not their words.

Again, your opinion, which is a wonderful thing. It's all good. It's humorous, though, that you would judge me about being judgemental. That was clever, to be sure.

 

[Thorgasm]

Again, your opinion, which is a wonderful thing. It's all good. It's humorous, though, that you would judge me about being judgemental. That was clever, to be sure.

Yes, that is how I would respond if I didn't have any facts to refute that they haven't shrunk the size of govt. or been fiscally responsible.