The exchange between Bush and Webb in this article is characterized as "pointless." I question that. First of all, in every version I read of it, Webb replied to Bush "I want HIM home (from Iraq)," not "THEM" as it's put here.

If Webb had been making a political point in response to a well-intended personal question, which is what it sounds like if he said "them," then indeed he was picking a pointless fight. But if he said "him," a perfectly reasonable response to Bush's question, then it was BUSH, by responding "that's not what I asked you," who picked the fight. Peggy Noonan of the Wall Street Journal, for one, saw it that way and she has been a past supporter of both Bush and the Iraq War.

My apprehension about Webb has nothing to do with his temperament and more to do with the fact that I have no sense of where he stands on most important issues -- taxes, abortion, business regulation, the whole laundry list. His GI bill proposal was a lot more than simply outmaneuvering McCain -- it was the right thing for the government to be doing for the people who got stuck with fighting this fucking war, which was way overdue.

As for his temperament, I think that might actually turn out to be positive. After all, the guy saw combat in Vietnam and served in Reagan's cabinet. How the hell are you going to swift-boat HIM? You can't. You have to deal with what he says without ad hominem attacks, which is something Republicans don't do well. Gore and Kerry were polite men and look where it got them. Joe Lieberman was so nice to Dick Cheney that he neglected to point out that the man was about as far right as any politician in America, and John Edwards didn't do any better. Maybe it's time to trot out somebody who knows how to snarl a little.

Yeah, I agree. What is so pointless about standing up to a guy that needs to be challenged? I thought it was a nice shot across the bow to signal to Bush that he wasn't going to be fawned over anymore.

Then, of course, the Dems caved. But it was still a nice gesture!

Webb is an environmentalist, pro-choice, pro-gay rights, pro tax the crap out of anyone or any business that knows how to make a buck so he can spend it willy-nilly, and pro strict business regulation. If it can be regulated he wants it done. More than once he has said that after reading Andrew Jackson that he knew he was a populist liberal Democrat, which is why he switched parties.

“You have to deal with what he says without ad hominem attacks, which is something Republicans don't do well.”

Then you don’t know very many Republicans.

“Gore and Kerry were polite men and look where it got them.”

They lost because they were unqualified. Gore is a New World Order activist with no loyalty to the United States and Kerry is a traitor to his country for meeting with the enemy (North Vietnamese) in Paris without government sanction. The only reason the elections were so close is because Bush is a lame duck as well. The fact that they were polite is irrelevant.

“Joe Lieberman was so nice to Dick Cheney that he neglected to point out that the man was about as far right as any politician in America, and John Edwards didn't do any better. Maybe it's time to trot out somebody who knows how to snarl a little.”

Agreed, neither man is very forceful, but then I was happy with the outcome. But if you snarl too much then you just end up looking and sounding like an ass.

Cassandra

bananaboat: I don't think you know what the term "lame duck" means. I think you just mean "lame". Also, if you're trying to scare democrats off Webb, I'm not sure that pointing out his pro-choice, pro-gay rights stance is the way to do it.

"But if you snarl too much then you just end up looking and sounding like an ass."

You're right, and I have no doubt Webb is an ass. But then again Cheney's perma-snarl doesn't seem to bother many republicans.

Slasher: If you're uncomfortable about where Webb stands on the issues, look at his new book, A Time to Fight, his countless op-eds in major newspapers, his record in the Reagan administration, his campaign debates with George Allen, and his Senate record.

What you'll find is someone not nearly as conservative as people make him out to be, who takes nuanced complex sides on the issues. (He just loves guns.) Pro-choice, pro-civil unions, for class based affirmitave action, an economic populist, and a foreign policy realist. What's more, is his remarkable consistency, when speaking out about any foreign policy issue. His undestanding of the military, from the bottom up, and his foretelling of the Iraq mess is quite remarkable.

I'm rather surprised you don't like Webb, since a good friend of mine who is a feminist lawyer cut me a new one last night when I praised him, pointing out his record of overt sexist statements over the years is really pretty horrible. He has repented of them, of course, but her feeling was that McCain would crucify him with them if Obama named him.

And your definition of loyalty to the United States seems to be to support blindly those men who send our soldiers out to be killed in futile wars. If you're so loyal, friend, why aren't you demanding massive tax increases and a draft so we can actually win the war in Iraq, instead of the half-assed, just-enough-troops-to-lose approach of the alleged patriots you think are so terrific? When it comes to put up your money, you and the rest of the Republican anti-tax traitors are out to lunch. You love the war as long as you aren't caused any inconvenience by it.

jyunis: Look, I've been pushing Webb for months now as the logical running mate from an electoral standpoint, almost regardless of his political positions, But a good friend of mine who is a feminist lawyer pointed out to me last night that he has a long record of some seriously sexist statements in his past, and although he appears to reversed those positions, she feels that McCain could use them to peel off Clinton supporters to his side. It's not an argument I could easily ignore.

Her feeling was that an equally solid choice would be PA governor Rendell, her only caveat being that he's Jewish and would thus be perceived as a second minority on the ticket.

I'd value your opinion of this strinctly from the standpoint of how the ticket would be helped/hurt by either man.

bananaboat:

Webb is an environmentalist, pro-choice, pro-gay rights, pro tax the crap out of anyone or any business that knows how to make a buck so he can spend it willy-nilly, and pro strict business regulation. If it can be regulated he wants it done. More than once he has said that after reading Andrew Jackson that he knew he was a populist liberal Democrat, which is why he switched parties.

“You have to deal with what he says without ad hominem attacks, which is something Republicans don't do well.”

Then you don’t know very many Republicans.

“Gore and Kerry were polite men and look where it got them.”

They lost because they were unqualified. Gore is a New World Order activist with no loyalty to the United States and Kerry is a traitor to his country for meeting with the enemy (North Vietnamese) in Paris without government sanction. The only reason the elections were so close is because Bush is a lame duck as well. The fact that they were polite is irrelevant.

“Joe Lieberman was so nice to Dick Cheney that he neglected to point out that the man was about as far right as any politician in America, and John Edwards didn't do any better. Maybe it's time to trot out somebody who knows how to snarl a little.”

Agreed, neither man is very forceful, but then I was happy with the outcome. But if you snarl too much then you just end up looking and sounding like an ass.

Cassandra

I was going to rip into you for the numerous blatant lies in your post but what would be the point .I'll just get to what would have been at the end of my response.....IDIOT!!!!

re Sen. Webb. I read the citation for his Navy Cross, the man has big brass ones, and as the PL he protected his Marine. My personal opinion is he should have received the Medal of Honor for his actions.

Having said that, this doesn't translate into political acumen. After his service he became a lawyer, which makes him uniquely unqualified to be in Congress. Law is too important to be left to mere attorney's. As to his service with Pres. Reagan, President Reagan remarked upon his resignation: "No one in the Navy Department will miss him."

Patterning himself after Andrew Jackson, that's a good one, Jackson owned 300 slaves, who he routinely flogged. Good choice. Then there is the questionable senate election. Democrats being what they are, you have to question some of the status of the voters, i.e. like being alive, voting only once and being citizens of the US.

So if he goes into combat again, I would be happy to be a squad leader or platoon sergeant with him, but as far as voting for him-never.

jackg