Skip to comments.
Powell Won't Attend Republican Convention [AP thinks there's something significant about it]
AP ^
| August 10, 2004
| BARRY SCHWEID
Posted on 08/10/2004 10:57:04 AM PDT by ejdrapes
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-22 next last
Interesting that AP fails to mention that Condi and Rummy won't be at the convention either. Or that cabinet secretaries usually aren't part of the sitting President's re-election campaign. What's the point of this article other than implying Powell's not attending because he doesn't agree with Bush or doesn't want to see him be re-elected.
1
posted on
08/10/2004 10:57:06 AM PDT
by
ejdrapes
To: ejdrapes
Maybe because he invited the UN to monitor the election--- hopefully that has made the GOP durn tootin' mad.
Maybe mad enough not to welcome people who are so eager to violate our sovereignty to please the global elites.
To: ejdrapes
Deliberate misinformation.
Ah, there is no end to their hateful lies.
3
posted on
08/10/2004 11:01:13 AM PDT
by
OldFriend
(WAR IS THE REMEDY OUR ENEMIES HAVE CHOSEN)
To: ejdrapes
Apparently the AP, is just doing its bit for the Kerry campaign.
Way back....Well, you Decide.
Bush to Rumsfeld, Powell: Stay Out of the Campaign
US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld says President George W Bush has ordered him and Secretary of State Colin Powell to stay out of the US presidential campaign.
Appearing on the CBS Face the Nation program, Mr Rumsfeld said though he and Mr Powell may be drawn into discussions regarding US foreign policy and military issues before the November 2 face-off between Mr Bush and Democrat John Kerry, "We will be doing it in a manner that is not campaign-style at all".
"There won't be a role. The president has specifically asked Colin Powell and me not to be involved in the campaign," Mr Rumsfeld said.
"He thinks that it's best that the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defence tend to their responsibilities and not allow their departments to become enmeshed in the campaign."
4
posted on
08/10/2004 11:01:33 AM PDT
by
hobbes1
(Hobbes1TheOmniscient® "I know everything so you don't have to" ;)
To: ejdrapes; hedgetrimmer
Powell, Rumsfeld and Rice will be ready to keep the war effort running should the enemy succedd in what they desperately want to do.
5
posted on
08/10/2004 11:02:20 AM PDT
by
BenLurkin
("A republic, if we can revive it")
To: ejdrapes
Also the fact that not the entire Executive Branch is present in the same place/time: not even at the State Of The Union Addresses. Ther are at least two Cabinet members absent, to ensure the succession of the office.
Rumsfeld, as SecDEF, and Colon Bowell as SecSTATE, would be absent. Rice is Nat'l Security Advisor, and NOT Cabinet, so she could be present.
6
posted on
08/10/2004 11:02:44 AM PDT
by
Old Sarge
(My military service is honorable - whether you agree or not...)
To: ejdrapes
I see it as a security measure.
Looks who's not attending:
Sec of State
Sec of Defense
and National Security Advisor
Actually, not to be a tin foil hat type, but I think it's a little worrisome, as far as a possible terror threat for the convention.
Obviously, Bush and Cheney have to be there (at least for one night) so if you're expecting a terror incident, which cabinet members would you not want to be there...the three they've named.
Just my 2 cents.
7
posted on
08/10/2004 11:03:43 AM PDT
by
dawn53
To: hobbes1
8
posted on
08/10/2004 11:04:05 AM PDT
by
hobbes1
(Hobbes1TheOmniscient® "I know everything so you don't have to" ;)
To: ejdrapes
Let's see, the last sitting President to run for re-election was Clinton in 1996. His SoS was Warren Christopher. Warren Christopher did not attend the 1996 DNC. What did AP report about it 8 Years ago?
9
posted on
08/10/2004 11:10:17 AM PDT
by
So Cal Rocket
(Fabrizio Quattrocchi: "Adesso vi faccio vedere come muore un italiano")
To: BenLurkin
Powell, Rumsfeld and Rice will be ready to keep the war effort running should the enemy succedd in what they desperately want to do.Exactly. It would be beyond stupid to have the President, Vice-President & Secretary of State in NY City at the same time...especially during the convention with the whackos on the street.
The AP still thinks terrorism is a political joke perpetuated by the VRWC.
To: dawn53
11
posted on
08/10/2004 11:12:45 AM PDT
by
TheDon
(The Democratic Party is the party of TREASON)
To: hedgetrimmer
12
posted on
08/10/2004 11:15:13 AM PDT
by
truthandlife
("Some trust in chariots and some in horses, but we trust in the name of the LORD our God." (Ps 20:7))
To: ejdrapes
AP, please name one "black" cabinet level appointee in the Clinton administration. Exactly, so shut your pie-hole regarding the Bush Administration and their "black" appointees.
To: ejdrapes
Interesting that AP fails to mention that Condi and Rummy won't be at the convention either. Or that cabinet secretaries usually aren't part of the sitting President's re-election campaign. What's the point of this article other than implying Powell's not attending because he doesn't agree with Bush or doesn't want to see him be re-elected.Good point.
14
posted on
08/10/2004 11:18:16 AM PDT
by
The Ghost of FReepers Past
(Legislatures are so outdated. If you want real political victory, take your issue to court.)
To: madison10
Yes, I thought succession immediately. But the media "knows" the threat is all a political ploy, so what the heck, why not try to make a little political hay out of this?
15
posted on
08/10/2004 11:18:21 AM PDT
by
livius
To: livius
Good grief...even Drudge has this up on his site. Is he that stupid to fall for this crap?
16
posted on
08/10/2004 11:23:27 AM PDT
by
ejdrapes
To: livius
Kerry didn't have his "presumptive" SoS Sandy Berger at his convention himself.
17
posted on
08/10/2004 11:24:14 AM PDT
by
Sybeck1
(Kerry: how can we trust him with our money, if Teresa won't trust him with hers!)
To: ejdrapes
Incidentally, I will not be attending the RNC either.
18
posted on
08/10/2004 11:39:46 AM PDT
by
Radix
(I would like to thank everyone here for playing this home version of Free Republic.)
To: ejdrapes
contrary to popular belief, i do not even think powell is a repub. if he is repub he is too moderate, no repub belives in affirmative action.
To: dawn53
20
posted on
08/10/2004 11:45:37 AM PDT
by
roaddog727
(The marginal propensity to save is 1 minus the marginal propensity to consume.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-22 next last
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