The White House hasn't publicly mentioned possible commission members, but lawmakers and intelligence experts have suggested Brent Scowcroft, national security adviser for Bush's father, and former Sen. Warren Rudman, R-N.H. Definitely don't need Scowcroft.
To: Lance Romance
How about BillCohen, the RINO Secty of Defense under Clinton?
I agree Scowcroft is a bad choice. He's got a high 'weenie/wimp' factor, he was one of the IDIOTS who let saddam stay in power in 1991 when saddam was killing kurds and shiites (now we are left to dig up those mass graves of the tens of thousands killed)... and the lefties wouldnt trust the decision anyway if it was headed by Bush's father's friend.
Rudman sounds okay. What would be cool is if Newt gingrich was on it. He's been right about state dept, someone like him would actually have the cohones to name names at who is really causing the bad intel for years (it aint the Bush admin for sure).
... If they can find an honest Democrat somewhere that would be best as the head ... ah, that's a needle in a haystack!
2 posted on
02/03/2004 9:40:03 AM PST by
WOSG
(I don't want the GOP to become a circular firing squad and the Socialist Democrats a majority.)
To: Lance Romance
In one week, Bush has gone from dismissing the need for a review to discussing what form such a panel should take. Of course. If this investigation goes into how our intelligence has been undermined since the Carter Administration and was handcuffed by 'Rat Congresses, of course Bush would be willing to allow an investigation. Let 'er rip.
3 posted on
02/03/2004 9:59:23 AM PST by
My2Cents
("Well...there you go again.")
To: Lance Romance
It would be in our best interest not to close the WMD question and assume Saddam did NOT have any.
6 posted on
02/03/2004 10:12:28 AM PST by
cake_crumb
(UN Resolutions = Very Expensive, Very SCRATCHY Toilet Paper)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson