Guest Tyler McClelland Posted August 4, 2003 Report Posted August 4, 2003 http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A...A16856-2003Aug3 I can't say I'm incredibly surprised, especially with the US News "Bullshit" story (that is, the story that he called evidence to be used in the UN presentation as such). Anyone think this will effect Bush-Cheney 2004?
Guest Vyce Posted August 4, 2003 Report Posted August 4, 2003 I'll miss him. Anyone think this will effect Bush-Cheney 2004? I don't know. I can practically feel the waves of glee from you, though. Maybe if you wish really hard upon a shooting star, it will.
Guest NoCalMike Posted August 4, 2003 Report Posted August 4, 2003 I am sure Powell is gonna try to sneak out with just giving some explanation like, "It was my time to go"
Guest Powerplay Posted August 4, 2003 Report Posted August 4, 2003 I am sure Powell is gonna try to sneak out with just giving some explanation like, "It was my time to go" Kinda like Al Gore?
Guest NoCalMike Posted August 4, 2003 Report Posted August 4, 2003 I am sure Powell is gonna try to sneak out with just giving some explanation like, "It was my time to go" Kinda like Al Gore? yah, exactly like Al Gore.
Guest Vern Gagne Posted August 4, 2003 Report Posted August 4, 2003 I am sure Powell is gonna try to sneak out with just giving some explanation like, "It was my time to go" It was is time to go. The story says he promised his wife he would only serve one term and leave the administration.
Guest DARRYLXWF Posted August 4, 2003 Report Posted August 4, 2003 Powell has indicated to associates that a commitment made to his wife, rather than any dismay at the administration's foreign policy, is a key factor in his desire to limit his tenure to one presidential term. It's believable, I know a few friends who've had to leave the political arena because of family.
Guest Texas Small Arms 09 Posted August 4, 2003 Report Posted August 4, 2003 Family is the reason Powell will never run for President.
Guest Tyler McClelland Posted August 4, 2003 Report Posted August 4, 2003 I can practically feel the waves of glee from you, though. Maybe if you wish really hard upon a shooting star, it will. Not really, I simply mentioned it because it's widely believed that Bush's early announcement that Powell would be on his cabinet was a huge boost in 2000.
Guest Vyce Posted August 4, 2003 Report Posted August 4, 2003 Family is the reason Powell will never run for President. Which is too bad, since he'd make a pretty good 2008 candidate.
Swift Terror Posted August 4, 2003 Report Posted August 4, 2003 Deputy Secretary of State, (the Wash. Post says he will step down along with Powell) Richard L. Armitage has denied the story. The author of the article also made allegations a while ago that Jim Baker was going to be in charge of the Iraq rebuilding process--which came as a surprise to Mr. Baker, since the story was inaccurate. Powell himself has also denied it in a radio interview. More major media slop, when will they learn.
Guest Texas Small Arms 09 Posted August 4, 2003 Report Posted August 4, 2003 He would make a good candidate, but he will never run. I believe he doesn't want to put his family in the spotlight and wants to be there all the time for them.
Guest Tyler McClelland Posted August 4, 2003 Report Posted August 4, 2003 Deputy Secretary of State, (the Wash. Post says he will step down along with Powell) Richard L. Armitage has denied the story. The author of the article also made allegations a while ago that Jim Baker was going to be in charge of the Iraq rebuilding process--which came as a surprise to Mr. Baker, since the story was inaccurate. Powell himself has also denied it in a radio interview. More major media slop, when will they learn. He denied having the conversation, not that it isn't true. It would be no surprise if he did, because people like Janet Reno -- that is, people who stay on for both terms -- aren't exactly common.
Swift Terror Posted August 5, 2003 Report Posted August 5, 2003 Both Powell and Armitage have denied everything about the story. This includes the part of the story that asserts they are planning on leaving office if Bush is re-elected. They both have spoken on this directly, not through spokespersons. They say the entire story is baseless and inaccurate.
Guest Crazy Dan Posted August 5, 2003 Report Posted August 5, 2003 That is too bad Powell is more than likely stepping down as Secretary of State. He is actually a cabinet memember that I like and respect. Now, if John Jackass, er, Ashcroft announces that he is stepping down, then life would be good.
Guest Spicy McHaggis Posted August 5, 2003 Report Posted August 5, 2003 What I love: Powell has indicated to associates that a commitment made to his wife, rather than any dismay at the administration's foreign policy, is a key factor in his desire to limit his tenure to one presidential term. That's what I mean by liberal bias.
Guest Tyler McClelland Posted August 5, 2003 Report Posted August 5, 2003 What I love: Powell has indicated to associates that a commitment made to his wife, rather than any dismay at the administration's foreign policy, is a key factor in his desire to limit his tenure to one presidential term. That's what I mean by liberal bias. How is that bias? It's stating that anger ISN'T a part of his stepping down.
Guest TheMikeSC Posted August 5, 2003 Report Posted August 5, 2003 What I love: Powell has indicated to associates that a commitment made to his wife, rather than any dismay at the administration's foreign policy, is a key factor in his desire to limit his tenure to one presidential term. That's what I mean by liberal bias. How is that bias? It's stating that anger ISN'T a part of his stepping down. Powell is stating that he ISN'T stepping down, period. If I were Bush, I'd stick Rice in as VP nominee next time and have Powell as Nat'l Security Advisor. -=Mike --- who realizes that Bush's cabinet more "looks like America" than his predecessor's.
Guest Tyler McClelland Posted August 5, 2003 Report Posted August 5, 2003 What I love: Powell has indicated to associates that a commitment made to his wife, rather than any dismay at the administration's foreign policy, is a key factor in his desire to limit his tenure to one presidential term. That's what I mean by liberal bias. How is that bias? It's stating that anger ISN'T a part of his stepping down. Powell is stating that he ISN'T stepping down, period. If I were Bush, I'd stick Rice in as VP nominee next time and have Powell as Nat'l Security Advisor. -=Mike --- who realizes that Bush's cabinet more "looks like America" than his predecessor's. Why would he even CONSIDER putting Rice in more of a power situation than she's already botched?
Guest TheMikeSC Posted August 5, 2003 Report Posted August 5, 2003 What I love: Powell has indicated to associates that a commitment made to his wife, rather than any dismay at the administration's foreign policy, is a key factor in his desire to limit his tenure to one presidential term. That's what I mean by liberal bias. How is that bias? It's stating that anger ISN'T a part of his stepping down. Powell is stating that he ISN'T stepping down, period. If I were Bush, I'd stick Rice in as VP nominee next time and have Powell as Nat'l Security Advisor. -=Mike --- who realizes that Bush's cabinet more "looks like America" than his predecessor's. Why would he even CONSIDER putting Rice in more of a power situation than she's already botched? What has Rice botched to this point? -=Mike
Guest Tyler McClelland Posted August 5, 2003 Report Posted August 5, 2003 What I love: Powell has indicated to associates that a commitment made to his wife, rather than any dismay at the administration's foreign policy, is a key factor in his desire to limit his tenure to one presidential term. That's what I mean by liberal bias. How is that bias? It's stating that anger ISN'T a part of his stepping down. Powell is stating that he ISN'T stepping down, period. If I were Bush, I'd stick Rice in as VP nominee next time and have Powell as Nat'l Security Advisor. -=Mike --- who realizes that Bush's cabinet more "looks like America" than his predecessor's. Why would he even CONSIDER putting Rice in more of a power situation than she's already botched? What has Rice botched to this point? -=Mike http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/artic...-2003Jul26.html
Guest Spicy McHaggis Posted August 5, 2003 Report Posted August 5, 2003 What I love: Powell has indicated to associates that a commitment made to his wife, rather than any dismay at the administration's foreign policy, is a key factor in his desire to limit his tenure to one presidential term. That's what I mean by liberal bias. How is that bias? It's stating that anger ISN'T a part of his stepping down. Why should anger even be a possibility? What has Rice botched to this point? -=Mike http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/artic...-2003Jul26.html 1. Your source just printed a false story. 2. The uranium thing is a non-issue that has been completely blown out of proportion by ratings-hungry networks and platform-lacking democrats.
Guest Cancer Marney Posted August 5, 2003 Report Posted August 5, 2003 What I love: Powell has indicated to associates that a commitment made to his wife, rather than any dismay at the administration's foreign policy, is a key factor in his desire to limit his tenure to one presidential term. That's what I mean by liberal bias. How is that bias? It's stating that anger ISN'T a part of his stepping down. Because that sentence implicitly postulates that the Secretary of State is "dismay[ed]" by our foreign policy. It's like talking about a man charged with murder, and saying "He didn't kill his wife because she was having an affair. He didn't care about that." It's deliberately ambiguous duplicitous doubletalk.
Guest Vyce Posted August 5, 2003 Report Posted August 5, 2003 To paraphrase Tom Daschle, I'm both saddened and dismayed you had to explain that to him, Marney.
Guest TheMikeSC Posted August 5, 2003 Report Posted August 5, 2003 What I love: Powell has indicated to associates that a commitment made to his wife, rather than any dismay at the administration's foreign policy, is a key factor in his desire to limit his tenure to one presidential term. That's what I mean by liberal bias. How is that bias? It's stating that anger ISN'T a part of his stepping down. Why should anger even be a possibility? What has Rice botched to this point? -=Mike http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/artic...-2003Jul26.html 1. Your source just printed a false story. 2. The uranium thing is a non-issue that has been completely blown out of proportion by ratings-hungry networks and platform-lacking democrats. COMPLETELY off the point --- but if it were Republicans or talk radio attacking a black member of a Democratic cabinet, wouldn't there have been charges of racial insensitivity by this point? -=Mike
Guest TheMikeSC Posted August 5, 2003 Report Posted August 5, 2003 He would make a good candidate, but he will never run. I believe he doesn't want to put his family in the spotlight and wants to be there all the time for them. Would he make a good candidate? Maybe. Remember, though, that he's REAL popular because he hasn't been forced to take stands on any controversial issues. Take some stands and NOBODY remains highly popular. -=Mike
Guest SideFXs Posted August 5, 2003 Report Posted August 5, 2003 What I love: Powell has indicated to associates that a commitment made to his wife, rather than any dismay at the administration's foreign policy, is a key factor in his desire to limit his tenure to one presidential term. That's what I mean by liberal bias. How is that bias? It's stating that anger ISN'T a part of his stepping down. Leave it to a liberal like Tyler and the liberal media to believe there is something more devious to Powell leaving. Can't Powell's previous commitment to his wife be the truth? I respect Powell. He was not afraid to tell President Bush that he felt we needed to give the U.N. more time with its multiple resolutions to Hussein. And Bush was a fair enough man to allow more time. But when it came time for Pres. Bush to give the order, Powell's commitment to the military action was 100 percent. Powell has great character. He is not afraid to say what he believes is right. So I believe him when he says he is committed to his family. That should be it, right? But no, the media can't accept this. They have to speculate and spin something negative about President Bush. Leaving us to speculate that Bush wants him out of there. "The current administration has been characterized by fierce policy disputes, often between Powell and more hawkish members," says the Washington Post. See how this wording doesn't require any proof, yet it leads the reader to infer Powell is leaving because of policy differences. OK Tyler?! Oh, and the Post has to fire another volley about the 16 words in the "State of the Union" speech, when speaking of Condolezza Rice. And then fire another volley at conservatives, mentioning "Another dark horse is former House speaker Newt Gingrich. And on, and on..... What liberal stroking this whole article is. Where is the white stain at the bottom of this trash?
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now