Posted on 06/13/2004 2:13:12 AM PDT by lainde
Edited on 06/13/2004 5:03:34 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/2004/la-na-diplo13jun13,1,1142936.story?coll=la-home-headlines THE RACE TO THE WHITE HOUSE Retired Officials Say Bush Must Go The 26 ex-diplomats and military leaders say his foreign policy has harmed national security. Several served under Republicans. By Ronald Brownstein Times Staff Writer
June 13, 2004
WASHINGTON ? A group of 26 former senior diplomats and military officials, several appointed to key positions by Republican Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, plans to issue a joint statement this week arguing that President George W. Bush has damaged America's national security and should be defeated in November.
The group, which calls itself Diplomats and Military Commanders for Change, will explicitly condemn Bush's foreign policy, according to several of those who signed the document.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
I hit auto-excerpt...I think too much remained. I don't know what happened. Sorry.
Big deal. Most of the names on the list are hacks serving with the Carter and Clinton administrations. 'Nuff said.
It always easier to shoot the enemy when they show themselves!
I saw this list a couple weeks ago.
Nobody anybody ever heard of except Weasley.
Now where was the press when Kerry's miliary commanders submitted an article saying he was unfit to bo head of the military???
There are a few I recognize who served under Reagan and Bush I. Basically though, the vast majority of these former diplomats and national security people served Democratic Presidents. Ronald Brownstein is making much ado about nothing.
That's what I was looking at too. Mainly partisan Carter and Clintoon hacks and has beens. However, how many of the sheeple will notice this?
The liberal media continues to throw as much crap as it can against the wall until something sticks. Abu Garib didn't work, so they are trying a different tactic now.
Stansfield Turner was a disaster!
I thought we could have a 24 hour honeymoon phase after the funeral. It just never ends. This, Abu Ghraib and Gitmo will be be part of the talking points for Monday. The useful idiot Reagan and Bush appointees will be highly courted and flattered by the elitist media whores.
So?
Just serched the LA Slimes site for ANY reference to the Swiftboater's against Kerry - guess what, not one hit for the keyword SWIFTBOAT or for "John O'Neill". I guess that's fair and balanced.
It is a fact that America was hated prior to 9/11. I have often wondered what we as Americans did to be hated so much. Could be that these ambassadors need to do some explaining.
McPeak? He was a disaster for the AF. The worst CS of the AF in its history.
It may not technically be "explicitly endorsing" Kerry, but what else do they mean by wanting Bush to be defeated? What, are they suggesting people vote for Nader?
Good point. The Blame-America-First ambassadors are either on the take or diehard cultural relativists. Wish the President would listen to Newt and purge Foggy Bottom!
Why is this even a news story, besides the fact it is an opportunity for the LA Times to print a bunch of anti-bush bs. If a group of 26 Kerry haters formed a group it would not be a story.
Issuing polemical joint press releases publicly condemning the foreign policies of a sitting president doesn't seem very "retired" to me.
Looks to me like some beggars, betting on an outside straight, no less, have their hands out for plumb appointments in a potential Kerry administration. "Remember that we stood behind you John. See? It's right here in black and white. Oh, and by the way, we have never forgotten that you served in Vietnam."
However, it's a pretty fair bet that come November, the political retirement status of the signatories of the above statement will indeed become permanent, at least as far as government employment is concerned.
Filed under "Ash Heap of History".
I've noticed it's a favorite tactic. They get groups of elitist "experts" (economists, scientists) to all sign a letter and buy space in the NYT or LA Times. To bolster its legitimacy, there should preferably be a prize winner in the bunch...Nobel or Pulitzer. Then they drag out the usual suspect ex-presidents, politicians and religious leaders. I'm bracing myself for the letter signed by a group of "eminent" scientists with a very vulnerable Mrs. Reagan used as a weapon.
beat me to it.
that was the first question that crossed my mind when I saw the headline.
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.