Skip to comments.
Sins of Commission
The Wall Street Journal ^
| March 22, 2004
| Masthead Editorial
Posted on 03/21/2004 9:41:42 PM PST by neverdem
Edited on 04/23/2004 12:06:39 AM PDT by Jim Robinson.
[history]
It was always a terrible idea for the September 11 commission to drop its report in the middle of a Presidential election campaign, and we are now seeing why. That body is turning into a fiasco of partisanship and political score-settling. To be precise, Democrats are using the commission as a platform to assail the Bush Administration for fumbling the war on terror, implicitly blaming it even for 9/11. That's the clear message of the testimony to be offered this week to the commission by former Clinton officials, who conveniently leaked their opinions to the New York Times in advance. Conveniently, too, former anti-terror aide Richard Clarke has chosen this week to begin the media tour for his new book pushing the same anti-Bush theme. He's also scheduled to meet the commission this week.
(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...
TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Editorial; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: District of Columbia; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: 911commission; sep11commission
1
posted on
03/21/2004 9:41:43 PM PST
by
neverdem
To: neverdem
bttt
2
posted on
03/21/2004 9:52:25 PM PST
by
lainde
(Heads up...We're coming and we've got tongue blades!!)
To: neverdem
I guess it took this guy, Clark, three years to get his story straight. You know, rationalize how he could divert blame from Clinton to Bush.
Funny, isn't it, that this guy was supposed to be such an important terror fighter in the Clinton administration, and no one has ever heard of him? until now. Convenient, eh?
3
posted on
03/21/2004 10:18:55 PM PST
by
singfreedom
("Victory at all costs,...for without victory there is no survival. -Churchill)
To: neverdem
"Democrats are using the commission as a platform to assail the Bush Administration for fumbling the war on terror, implicitly blaming it even for 9/11"
John Kerry is the leader of the party of lies and cowardice.
Kerry should be on trial for his war crimes, and Clinton for his. Bush should be re-elected on the strength of his decisions and leadership in the face of extreme adversity; they struck two towers and we humbled two terrorist nations. All the lies the Domocrats could conjure cannot reduce the strength of Bush's proven character nor tarnish the sacrifices and valor our of (volunteer) forces.
4
posted on
03/21/2004 11:16:13 PM PST
by
Darheel
(Visit the strange and wonderful.)
To: neverdem
In order to take such a detached view, the Pearl Harbor inquiry waited until after World War II to publish its findings.
This war is almost defined to be never ending. When would the author prefer a commission to start? Never?
5
posted on
03/21/2004 11:59:59 PM PST
by
lelio
To: lelio
This war is almost defined to be never ending. When would the author prefer a commission to start? Never?How about after the election? Is that too much to ask? The libs on the commission keep on whining that they don't have enough time to complete this -- well, let's give them until November 3.
6
posted on
03/22/2004 1:53:18 AM PST
by
NYCVirago
To: Molly Pitcher
[WARNING WILL ROBINSON ALIENS APPROACHING]
ping for coming Democratic propoganda
7
posted on
03/22/2004 2:25:02 AM PST
by
The Raven
To: NYCVirago
There's another little piece of the left wing party plan. Let me see if I can put it here.
Some Anti-Bush Groups to Run Ads Until Election Day
By LIZ SIDOTI, AP
WASHINGTON (March 22) - Right up to the day before the Nov. 2 election, voters could see television ads accusing President Bush of limiting abortion and spoiling the environment. Four groups - nonpartisan but distinctly liberal - say the rules of the campaign finance law don't apply to them, a claim no one is disputing.
Having an "MCFL" status meant little in practice until this year, the first presidential election season where there are limits on outside group ads. Those groups with the status can do what others can't: run ads when the airwaves are less crowded; pay for commercials with soft money and without disclosing donors; and tell the public to "vote for" or "vote against" particular candidates.
"It's the first year where this can make a demonstrative difference," Shipp said.
To claim the status, groups have to meet the criteria and identify themselves as an "MCFL" organization when they report independent expenditures with the FEC. The commission doesn't routinely review whether such groups meet the criteria unless it audits them or investigates them because of a complaint.
Conservative groups, such as the Club for Growth, National Right to Life and the National Rifle Association, have considered trying to qualify for the exemption.
"It's looking more likely that we will make the conversion. It makes sense because you have fewer restrictions," said David Keating, executive director of the Club for Growth. He acknowledged that his soft-money organization, classified under the tax code as an independent political group, may be hindered by its acceptance of corporate money in the past.
NARAL and Planned Parenthood, two abortion-rights groups that oppose Bush's policies, have touted their ability - and plans - to run ads in the 60-day window in hopes of raising more money from supporters for commercials.
"It's just another tool in our arsenal, which I think makes our case even more compelling to those donors who want to help us," said David Williams, Planned Parenthood's political director.
The Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund, which says it is focused on "stopping the anti-wildlife, anti-conservation" policies of the administration and Congress, is considering running ads in certain swing states late in the general election season, a decision that depends on fund raising, said Rodger Schlickeisen, the group's president.
The League of Conservation Voters, which endorsed Kerry in the Democratic primary, plans to run heavy levels of ads to "vigorously argue our case against George Bush," said Mark Longabaugh, the group's political director.
03/22/04 04:12 EST
8
posted on
03/22/2004 6:56:38 AM PST
by
Just Lori
(I used to be a Democrat. Now I'm an American!)
To: Spanaway Lori
Right up to the day before the Nov. 2 election, voters could see television ads accusing President Bush of limiting abortion and spoiling the environment. Four groups - nonpartisan but distinctly liberal - say the rules of the campaign finance law don't apply to them, a claim no one is disputing. Wow, I'm glad they passed McCain/Feingold so they could stop these kinds of ads. (/sarcasm) I guess John McCain's too busy bashing the president to actually look into these ads.
9
posted on
03/22/2004 11:20:21 AM PST
by
NYCVirago
To: neverdem
10
posted on
03/22/2004 11:22:52 AM PST
by
Fiddlstix
(This Space Available for Rent or Lease by the Day, Week, or Month. Reasonable Rates. Inquire within.)
To: Destro
PING
More proof of your "thesis" -- there is definitely an organized effort afoot to keep Bush from being re-elected and the tentacles of this effort are everywhere.
11
posted on
03/23/2004 11:17:33 PM PST
by
FairOpinion
(If you are not voting for Bush, you are voting for the terrorists.)
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson