February 20, 2007
Mark debates the issues of the week with Republican strategist Mike Lane
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Mike Lane looks like an idiot February 21, 2007 9:50 am
Lemming-face Mike Lane insulted America’s intelligence by trying to create the visual of troops in the field being cutoff logisticly because the funding of the impending military appropriations bill might be voted down
He insults our military which are well-trained in ordered withdrawals
Mike might look to the British troops as they stand down–to see how it is done–as Tony Blair sees the wisdom that Mike doesn’t–in leaving the land of diminishing returns
Robt February 16, 2007 2:43 pm
Does Mike still feel the same now that the Libby trial has provided damaging insight to this Administrations demeanor and willful disgust for the American system that they graced themselves as above our laws (just as God tells Jerry Falwell he is)?
Why do Repoblicans place “Their” Religion above our Constitution?
Example; Faith based initiative…………..
Robt February 16, 2007 2:33 pm
Questions for you and Mike;
-When the Repubs controlled, they stood on “principal” of the UP OR DOWN VOTE. They threatened to use the nuclear option to hinder the minority voice of this country.
Question-Do the Repubs regret not detonating the
nuclear option for the up or down vote
when they had the majority?
-If the Repubs are so principaled and
so strongly believing in the “up or
down vote”. Why are they now flip/
flopping on their principals now that
their in the majority?
-If the Dems threatened the
nuclear option rules change. Would
the Repubs now reverse their principals
and resist? If so, Why?
-When will the Repubs accept their place
as the minority? (It was the repubs
that often rudely espoused the
overbearing dictatory partisanship
as a majority).
-What has the Republicans learned from
their sad tenor that was imposed with
detrement on this country?
-Why are the Repubs so afraid to debate
the Iraq occupation?
-Does Mike think that the American
people had a right to hear such debate
before the war and and certainly do
deserve to hear it now from our
“representatives” NOT our ruling class?
(Please leave out the rhetoric of how
such debate hurts the troops and
aids the enemy, for myself a veteran
I know this not to be true).
-Does Mike see his Repub party in
Government as not providing the
transparency that “WE the People ”
Demand? Does he see any provlems
with secretive governments?
If you have time to hit on these Queastions or at least in this line of debate with Mike. I would be so much amused by hearing the Repub side with your counter, of course Mark.
End run around neo-con escalation February 16, 2007 9:23 am
I love how Rep. Murtha is proposing a “back-door” drawdown of troops by instituting rules of combat service–including a mandatory one-year stand-down from combat zones and limits on the amount of mandatory combat tours
He’s a true grunt who knows how to deal with the on-going injustice pragmatically
With Murtha’s rules–combat troop levels will subside with no fuss or muss–and then we will probably see the neo-cons knee-jerk with a call for the draft in some form