Point: The Late Show with Donald Rumsfeld

The holidays are a time to be thankful for many things. Here at Point vs. Point, we are thankful for family, friends, and excuses not to leave the house.

The holidays are also a time to recognize the U.S. military, and the tremendous bravery that it takes to serve our country. These men and women make our country safe, and defend the very freedom that makes the United States the greatest country in the world.

Many of these men and women cannot be home for the holidays, as they are spread all over the world. They are deprived the chance to seeing their loved ones. Some of them are defending other countries; some of them are forced to fight in a war they may not believe in.

I have written posts in opposition of this administration's policies; this piece will not rehash that. Today's entry is about the respect that the men and women of the United States army deserve, and do not always get.

On December 9th, Secy. of Defense Donald Rumsfeld held a town meeting for military personnel in Kuwait. Rumsfeld spoke about Iraq and Afghanistan, and said that there is much work left to be done in both places. He then conducted a question and answer period. What followed was easily one of the most disrespectful comments I've heard in a long time. I've quoted it directly from an AP article on Dec. 10, so that none of my right-wing pals think I've altered this.

"One soldier asked pointedly why, nearly three years into the war, troops who are being sent into Iraq have to scrounge in junkyards for scrap metal and broken bulletproof glass to armor their vehicles."

Apparently he was not the only soldier who felt that way, as his question was followed by a "roar of cheers". Now, I would assume that most politicians, regardless of party, would either dodge the question, or spin it so far off topic that he would end by talking about how he helped Mrs. Smith from Smalltown keep her job at the bank.

Not Rummy though. Donald Rumsfeld is nothing if not blunt. Heaven forbid he have to explain his decisions to the very people he is endangering. Rumsfeld unleashed a true gem, "You go to war with the Army you have, not the Army you might want or wish to have."

Apparently this Army is good enough to die for our people, but isn't good enough to have the state of the art weapons to fight with. I'm not the only one that thinks that either. Senator Susan Collins, R-Maine, a member of Senate Armed Service Commmittee, wrote a scathing letter to Secy. Rumsfeld in which she said "I am very concerned that it appears the Pentagon failed to do everything in its power to increase production."

This issue is very simple; If you're going to send troops over to fight a war, you give them the best equipment that money can buy. It doesn't matter if it's with China or with Chad; to do otherwise is irresponsible.

Domestically, Secy. Rumsfeld had done a great job of alienating both the Democrats, and his own party. Former Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott, R-Mississippi, said "I'm not a fan of Secretary Rumsfeld...I don't think he listens enough to his uniformed officers...I would like to see a change in that slot in the next year or so."

Trent Lott is not left-leading Howard Dean or even a centrist a la Sen. Joseph Lieberman; this is a politican who grew up idolizing Strom Thurmond! For conservatives like Lott to come out publically against a cabinet member signals deep trouble for the Bush admistration. At this point, the "Rumsfeld" issue has started to delay progress for the department of defense. How long until the Republicans throw Rumsfeld under the bus?

I say "The Late Show with Donald Rumsfeld" needs to take a curtain call.

We owe the soldiers at least that much.

paul.

FYI -- Point vs Point has reached 100 hits. After agonizing calculations, I can safely estimate that Chris and I have logged on at least 90 times, leaving at least ten people that have read this web site. To those 10 people, thank you. Please continue to check in with us, and voice your opinions.

Point: When in doubt, invade another country

FROM THE DESK OF SENIOR WHITE HOUSE OFFICIAL --

I think I've solved our problem of not being able to capture Osama Bin Laden. Let's take over another country. We'll start by accusing them of something we can't prove, and then call up thousands of young men and women to risk their lives to push our ideals on someone else. When we can't find any weapons of mass destruction (of which we have plenty), we'll spin it a different way and talk about how we liberated the people. After we "win" a war that costs billions of dollars and more importantly, thousands of lives, we don't even have to leave! We can stay as long as we want, and send MORE troops over to make sure that our junior varsity U.S. has fair elections. Of course, we need to stay at least a couple years past the elections, just to make sure that their new government runs just the way we intended it to. In the interim, we can take as much oil as we want, setting all of us up quite nicely for plush private sector jobs in the future. I think this could be a GREAT diversion, let me know.

BACK ON PLANET EARTH --

I have no idea whether or not the people of Iraq feel liberated or not.
I have heard, through one of the soldiers there, that the people are angry, confused, and frustrated with the way the United States has taken over their country. I don't think that anyone can make the argument that Iraq isn't a better place now that Saddam Hussein is out of power. That is not the point. The issue here is how does any one country have the right to just breeze into another, and enforce their wills and policies onto the weaker? Imagine for a second if this was North Korea, and they decided to invade Japan and run their country without just cause. The United Nations, led by the U.S., would go crazy and declare war. How is this case any different?

Quick Points

Here’s a segment we like to call “Quick Points”. We like to call it that because we’re not that witty and couldn’t think of anything else.

On the College Football’s Bowl Championship System (BCS):

C: Okay here’s the thing about the BCS. It sucks and everyone knows it sucks. But for some reason schools make insane amounts of money when "Blaine", the hair and beauty school, can be a "consensus #1"

P: I agree -- it just doesn't make sense that it's the only sport that they don't have a playoff situation. Imagine if the NFL did this: "yea New England, it turns out that we're going to have beat writers from Slovakia vote on if Charlie Weis is slim enough to win a head coaching gig…

C: I just don't understand what the holdup is: Tostitos is still going to have lime chips AND a fiesta bowl.

P: “Tricky” Dick Vitale would have a field day with this if it was college basketball
Then again, Dick Vitale has a field day choosing between sonic and burger king while on tobacco road.

C: It’s Sonic baby the ice cream is Better!!!! I love their ice cream its awesome babyyyyyyy!!!!

P: Dick Vitale is one of the biggest media whores going: he would endorse an ulcer if given the right payout

C: not unlike the BCS

On Presidential Candidates for 2008

P: The democrats have a real problem: they have lost complete touch with the American public

C: I agree with you but here’s the thing: they never had touch with the American public.

P: I can't understand how the south votes for GW just because he talks with an accent or that he hunts

C: ergo we need someone who is going to appeal to that audience, and we by I mean Democrats: I’ve lost all bias.

P: By that rationale, Howard Dean – out, Sen. Clinton: out. There's no way Hillary can carry the south, even southern women think SHE should be in the kitchen

C: I think Hillary will end up being the choice: the problem is we need someone strong not someone historic.

P: I honestly think Kerry is going to run again, but I don’t think he gets out of the primary. They didn’t like him now, why in four years?

C: I agree; I don’t think Kerry realizes it though.

P: The Republican race is more interesting: You’ve got Giuliani, Gov. George Pataki (NY), Gov. Mitt Romney (MA), Sen. Bill Frist (TN), and possibly Gov. Jeb Bush (FL) although he says he won’t run.

C: I think either Rudy or Pataki won’t go; they will cancel each other out.

P: I agree about the New Yorkers, both won’t run. I initially thought that Romney is too Mormon to win, but maybe that will appeal to the Bible belt.

C: As we are both fans of the Kennedy family, Jeb is an interesting subject: clearly the teddy of the family…but he hasn’t driven a car off a bridge yet

P: I think there has been a lot of patient Republicans waiting their turn, and I can’t see Jeb cutting the line...

C: It really says something when two Democrats find more interest in the Republican race.

P: The sad fact about Senator Ted Kennedy is that history will say he was one of the most effective legislators, championing bills for Medicare, Special Needs Funding, and Social Security.

C: Unlike jeb bush.

P: And george w bush for that matter.

C: but paul, didn’t you see all those great photos of Jeb giving out water during the hurricanes? it was moving.

Top three sports you'd be a pro in if possible

C: this is an interesting one and a topic I feel to be telling about people in general.

P: do you take a solo sport, which illustrates a lack of sharing the glory, or do you take a sport less watched by the general public, or a sport that will not able you to walk by age 35

C: I think it’s tough to say football is appealing to me if for no other reason then to do the “lambeau leap” just once. but then again I have deep seeded needs for acceptance. the sheer electricity of 70,000 fans is not to be overlooked or understated.

P: Especially football fans, who piss themselves in -30 weather to keep warm, unlike baseball fans, who are too busy sleeping to see all of the 4 hours plus of action.

C: I’d have to go 1.surfing 2. Golf 3. Basketball

P: Basketball fans are busy getting a pedicure during the game.

C: Basketball fans are too busy getting BEAT UP during the game.

C: What about hockey fans? Get it, hockey fans!

P: Yeah it’s an oxymoron

C: a good point, like the owners... morons

P: Great idea by the NHL; let's price out our demographic. Somewhere PT Barnum is turning over in his grave.

The Death of Saturday Night Live

C: I am a loyal solider of the SNL army, and have never thought of cancellation before this year. You and I are both students of the show. How did this happen?

P: Last night's show was so painful that I had to see it through to watch the train completely implode. It was so bad that they are repeating unpopular characters;
The cast has really gone downhill. I really feel like the writing is always either the savior or the problem.

C: How is it they haven’t gotten better talent? Going to SNL has to be only slightly below getting your own sitcom for a comic. Now, the better talent is too busy trying to get a role in "pitch black" and a lot of the times it LEADS to a sitcom.

P: i don't know – I just don't get it -- but I DO feel like it's devaluing the franchise.

C: What was the last REALLY innovative thing they did? fake commercials? I’m not pro drugs but I’d pay to put drugs back in 30 Rockefeller if that creativity came back.

P: SNL just had a real sense of camaraderie that washed away with the 80s.

C: Can’t they at least get some red bull up there or something?

C: I wonder how much of the show not being cancelled is because it runs in pretty much the worst time slot in television.

P: That’s interesting, especially because people use to stay home to watch the show. What a dream that must have been.

C: If only it was on at 830...we'd have something.

Point: Can Rudy Fail?

The White House continued to have Cabinet-related failures over the weekend, as nominee Bernard Kerik, former police commissioner of New York, withdrew after admitting he had employed an illegal immigrant.

This is an amazing story to me for several reasons. I fail to understand how, in an era of the government tracking our every move, the White House dropped the ball on vetting Bernard Kerik. In the age of the internet, I can find out how many bowties Tucker Carlson owns, how many people in Tokyo watched Super Bowl XXIII, or what country Donald Rumsfeld is insulting the troops in. How did the White House fail to vet Kerik? Do they need to borrow a couple acne-addled interns for the Howard Stern show to work background checks? I mean, give me a hour with Google and I'll figure it out.

The official reason for Kerik withdrawing his name was that he employed a illegal immigrant as a nanny. This offense has become commonplace for nominees in the past ten or fifteen years, notably in the case of Zoe Baird, President Clinton's nominee for Attorney General in 1993. Now, we don't run a think tank here at Point vs Point, but you'd assume that those with political aspirations would want to stay on the straight and narrow. Especially if your aspiration is to run Homeland Security, which oversees immigration.

Unfortunately for Bernard Kerik, news sources like CNN and Fox News are better at research than the leader of the free world and his staff, as they've uncovered a laundry list of his mishaps in the last few days. Kerik, who also served as a Senior Policy Advisor, had an arrest warrant issued in 1998 after failing to pay maintenance fees on a condominium in New Jersey. To make matter far worse, CNN is reporting that while NYC Police Commissioner, Kerik allegedly took cash payoffs from a construction company with ties to the mafia.

So Kerik's pretty much screwed. Next week that will be old news. The important question is where does this leave Rudy Giuliani? Giuliani, who lobbied hard for Kerik's appointment, is now in a bit of a fix. His name has been dragged through the mud a little, which seems to be a problem as all indications point to a presidential run in 2008. Will this scandal bog down his aspirations, or will the immense popularity from 9/11 carry him through it? This writer thinks that this is just the beginning of a series of blemishes that Giuliani will reminded of. Once election talk starts up again, the New York media will trot out Rudy's "greatest" hits, including living with another woman in the Mayor's house while married, and using questionable force against criminals while District Attorney of New York City.

Rudolph Giuliani is to be commended for his strong leadership during the country's most difficult time of the past century. Unfortunately, his good friend Bernard Kerik has proved that national politics will magnify any mistake made. I still feel that Giuliani has the tools and moxie to win in 2008. The red states of this country vote on only two issues: homeland security and the war, and George W. Bush has proved that someone with a questionable background can be elected (twice). This bodes well for Giuliani, who has had Bush's job in his radar since his post-9/11 heroics.

We'll all have to wait four years to see if "Rudy Can't Fail"...

"Stop, Loss" Point: you can't go home again

the past week brought some of the most disturbing news i've read in a long while. it was announced that the first class-action lawsuit challenging the army "stop, loss" orders was filed in federal court. the "stop, loss" order means that troops who have already fufilled their service obligation are forced to stay in combat, or be re-deployed instead of going home. This seems to be just the latest in a string of seemingly unconstitutional issues that the bush administration is trying to blow past us.

This bush-led policy is not so much as mishap but an unmitigated disaster. Thousands of people who are supposed to be home are not. More and more troops are dying in a war that has all but faded from the media as we shift into holiday mode. Instead of leading off with war related stories, national newspapers like the New York Daily News are leading off with earth shattering tales like that of "Pale Male". Pale Male, who those are you who are blissfully unaware, is a red-tailed hawk who has been relocated from his rooftop on Fifth Avenue because he's defecating on passerbyes.

Hey, I love a good hawk-interest story as much as the next heterosexual male, but this is the FRONT PAGE! I went on to look for any war-related story, and didn't find one until page 9. For those of you with a scorecard, that's after: Supreme Court allows hallucinogenic tea (page 2), Gisele stiffs her dog's rescuers on the reward (page 4), and my favorite: councilman demanding an apology for a collegue using the term "drunken sailor" (page 3).

This blatant disregard for the war is at best dishearting, and i'm coming from the perspective of not having any family or close friends in combat. I can only imagine how it must be for the children, spouses, and parents waiting for their loved ones to come home, something they were supposed to already have done. Generally when the U.S. Armed Forces tells you something, you tend to believe it. At least, that was B.R. (before rumsfeld)

Here's the confession in today's post: I didn't vote for george w. bush. Anyone who finished the 9th grade figured that out already. I don't understand where we, as a country, got the right to police the rest of the world, corrupt as it may be. I do believe that the U.S., as world superpower, should feel the duty to help less-developed countries. By help, I mean economic and social aid and cooperating with the United Nations. I do not mean blowing into Iraq like the outlaw josey wales, poised six shooter in each hand, with evidence as flimsy as a lindsay lohan tube top. What kills me is that the voters that went to the polls for g.w. are the demographic fighting this underfunded, underappreciated war.

Your stance on the war here is irrelevant. Rules should be rules, and those brave enough to protect freedom should not be toyed with. Bring the overdue troops home, and do it now.

bring the rest home too.

paul.

Steroids Point: hey barry, would you mind passing the lotion...

The first issue on point vs point is major league baseball's steroid controversy. For those of you who live under a rock, the ongoing steroid investigation reached new heights last week as yankee slugger jason giambi admitted to juicing and BALCO CEO Victor Conte went down faster like a democrat on election day.

point vs. point's question is this: does major league baseball REALLY want a firmer drug policy, or do they just want the whole thing to go away, so jacked-out superheroes like barry bonds can continue his onslaught on the record books, thus driving in more fans.

Do people really want to go back to the days where a "slugger" hit 20 home runs, and was built like avril lavigne? Maybe the avid fans of the game, but certaintly not the casual ones, a.k.a, the very people that MLB is trying to win over. No one I know wants to pay upwards of $50 to see a 1-0 game. That era of Clark Kent, nightly newspapers and watching some guy named lefty pitch every day is long over.

The baseball fan of today is half as intelligent and twice as inattentive. They grew up on a culture of Nintendo, big gulps, and silicone, and are far more entertained by the quick bursts of destruction and risque entertainment otherwise known as professional football.

Simply put, baseball is your father's game. I don't see rappers and actors, the sad "leaders and role models" of our zeitgeist, championing MLB 2004 for their xbox; it's all about the hits of Madden 2005 and watching Fight Club. Thus, this is what the kids of middle america try to emulate.

(Quick side note on Victor Conte, by the way. I found it amazing how after slinging sports crack for the better part of a decade, he decides to go all benedict arnold, going on 20/20 and making it seem like athletes like Marion Jones are the problem. Actually, Vic, you're the guy that created this stuff, and although i doubt you had to force it on them, you're the one who should be moving into a small cell.)

By this point, I'm about two times zones away from the topic, which should illustrate why MLB is in the crapper -- the game's target audience is inattentive and worse, fickle. As bad as steroids are for the game of baseball, MLB can hardly afford to leave ANY of their fans behind, which is exactly what will happen if Congress pushes ahead with this one. Baseball should try and recapture the steroid issue and police it in-house, so the game can stopped being dragged through the proverbial mud.

Let Barry continue his run, and just drop the old * on his career stats. It's not like they've never done it before...

paul.

Contact Info

We're happy to bring you Point vs Point on a almost daily basis. We are always looking for more bloggers, and other ways to grow the website.

To contact us:

For opinion feedback: please post a response below the specific entry.
For advertising or development opportunties: please e mail us at ptvspt@yahoo.com.

thanks for reading.

point vs point
paul, chris

Introduction

here's the thing:

we've been thinking about doing this for a while, our biggest deterrant being our incessant need to procrastinate far too much to update this daily. Once we realized we didn't have to, a blog was a no-brainer. (very appropriate for the co-creators here)

here at point vs. point, we'll focus on current events, and welcome idea topics. Whether it's debating the merits of the Army stop-loss policy to why listening to Justin Timberlake doesn't make you gay, we'll touch on pretty much everything.

this blog is NOT called the more obvious point vs. counterpoint for a simple reason: we agree far too much. however, we think we can present the topics to you in a thought-provoking but humerous manner. If you like the smugness of Max Kellerman, the writing of Tina Fey, and think your news should come from The Daily Show, you'll like this. Think of us as a homeless man's Jon Stewart.

Please take a minute to give your $0.02 about this blog, and to suggest topics. After we post our first topic, we hope to get other people in on the debate. You can post by clicking on "comments" in the bottom right hand of the page. Thanks.

"jacks of all subjects, experts at none".

point vs. point
paul, chris