Modern Dinosaurs
November 23, 2004 2:17 PM   Subscribe

Rummy talks straight for once, (nyt) although he probably didn't mean to: "I'm a part of this administration. If I didn't want to support the president's position, I wouldn't be in the administration, and I do intend to support him," Rumsfeld added.

Oh yeah, the article is about Rumsfeld secretly lobbying agaist Bush's intelligence overhaul.
posted by zekinskia (8 comments total)

This post was deleted for the following reason: political reuters wire feed -- pretty boring stuff

I need to get Rumsfeld to submit his meaning of life. Seriously, that guy is pretty wild, nobody even remembers how he got the "heat" for Abu Ghraib. He handled that beautifully.
posted by echodolphin at 2:19 PM on November 23, 2004

He goes on to say: "But the president's position is evolving as the negotiation evolves," Rumsfeld said, without explaining how Bush's position is changing.

If you'd like to make your call on the length of his tenure, by all means, feel free.

My own prediction? January 18th, 2005... for "personal reasons." (wink wink)
posted by zekinskia at 2:21 PM on November 23, 2004

[this is crap]
posted by Seth at 2:26 PM on November 23, 2004

[Seth is grumpy.]
posted by Optimus Chyme at 2:28 PM on November 23, 2004

Here is a recent interview with Paul Wolfowitz that I didn't feel really warranted a thread of its own.
posted by biffa at 2:29 PM on November 23, 2004

Optimus. Yeah... its just me. Obviously you, along with the poster, are completely oblivious of the fact this kind of crap isn't being tolerated anymore.

On an unrelated note, is there any policy in place for Matt to be noting when old users paid $5 to make a troll account, such as I suspect "Optimus Chyme" did. Something tells me that a completely new person would already have felt comfortable trolling a person. And from your posting history, we can learn more.

So I am grumpy for calling "crap" a single link to NYT in which the poster is trying to make a mountain out of a mole hill. Hell, I'm still trying to figure out what this poster found interesting by the cited portion in bold. It isn't even explicitly controversial. Just pointless tinfoil hat shit that has come to ruin this site the past year.
posted by Seth at 2:36 PM on November 23, 2004

of course, it was a typo in the fifth sentence. I mean to type "wouldn't." Thought I would point that out before some oh-so-clever snarker commented on it or before someone linked that statement to another as some sort of important "behind the curtains" view of my real feelings...
posted by Seth at 2:38 PM on November 23, 2004

I wish zekinskia's judgment was as good as yours, biffa.
posted by Galvatron at 2:40 PM on November 23, 2004

« Older The Okinawa digital archive   |   Was it Lakoff, or the Trytophan ? Newer »

This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments