Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: steve harris who wrote (147767)	11/19/2005 11:28:32 AM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 793671

In my opinion, removing all troops within "six months" is immediate. There were two differences in the proposals. One was all troops vs. certain troops. The other was immediate vs as soon as practicable. I think the first is more significant that the second, but both are significant. The straw man was a cut-and-run option. The Murtha proposal was a change of tactics. They really aren't at all comparable in either substance or spirit. As gimmicks go (and unfortunately Congress seems to have devolved into dueling gimmicks), this was an interesting one. Great drama to watch. But the whole thing was surely tongue in cheek. The Republican leadership could not possibly have thought they were presenting a fair paraphrase of Murtha's proposal. The whole thing was tongue in cheek. Apparently some partisans followers are missing that.