This article has been posted to DoctorZin’s New News Blog!
Posted on 08/11/2004 4:28:18 AM PDT by kattracks
(CNSNews.com) - House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi stands opposed to the nomination of Rep. Peter Goss (R-Fla.), an eight-term congressman and chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, to head the CIA, but just two months ago, Pelosi pledged to support Goss for the position.
On Tuesday, Pelosi suggested Goss is too "political" to be named director of the Central Intelligence Agency.
"But I will say what I said before is that there shouldn't - a person should not be the director of central intelligence who's acted in a very political way when we're dealing with the safety of the American people," she told CNN.
"Intelligence has to be the gathering and analysis and dissemination of information, of intelligence, without any political, any politics involved at all," Pelosi added.
But on June 5, 2004, the Chattanooga Times Free Press reported Pelosi saying that if Goss were nominated for the post, she would support him, having worked closely with Goss during the congressional investigation into the Sept. 11 attacks.
The newspaper reported Pelosi as saying whoever replaces CIA Director George Tenet "needs to be independent of political pressure" and Goss, having worked for the CIA before being elected to the House of Representatives, has shown that ability as chairman of the House Intelligence panel.
See Earlier Story:
Bush Nominates Goss to Head Central Intelligence Agency (Aug. 10, 2004)
Send a Letter to the Editor about this article.
In other words:
"I was for Goss's nomination before I was against it."
Flip flopping must be catching among the Dims.
What a pity that, as a House member, she has no say whatsoever on Goss's confirmation.
How do these waffling idiots get into positions of power in the first place?
Even the democrats must be able to put up someone with more integrity and intelligence than their current 'leadership'.
How can they, when Democrats have no integrity. Almost all that had integrity and honesty became Republicans. :-)
A lying rat....who'd a thunk it?
Toopartisantoopartisantoopartisantoopartisan. So much easier than serious analysis of the man's qualifications. Just repeat McAuliff's buzzword and moveon...
However, considering all of the possible alternatives, Goss was probably the next best choice that President Bush could have made.
Pelosi needs to shut her trap and go back to doing what she's best at. Namely, making her party look even more ridiculous than it already is.
I would agree, Yazid.
I shudder to think of the confirmation witch-hunt (hearing). I'd even wager that Goss won't get confirmed before Turkey Day.
On the other hand, picking a Floridian was a wise choice, if you ask me.
The more that they try to delay this confirmation, the more they are going to tick off a great number of voters living in a vital "swing" state, not to mention, every other "swing" voter who is concerned with our nation's national security.
Pelosi's fax machine was apparently down for a little while and she missed the talking points from DNC/HQ.
I don't think the Rats see it that way. I honestly think that they'd consider fierce opposition to Goss' nomination, or even a filibuster, to be a political plus for them. By their thinking, not allowing Goss to be confirmed would fire up their base even more and win them all kinds of media praise and plaudits (as if they don't have enough of that already).
My guess is that they will probably try to go about this the sneaky way at first, by targeting Florida Senator Bob Graham. Right now Goss and Graham have a good working relationship that goes back a long way, and Graham has indicated that he will support Goss, as will Bill Nelson, our junior senator. If they can flip Graham, that would almost certainly kill any chance of getting Goss confirmed, as it would give the Rats all the cover they'd need to oppose the noimination outright.
Daschle and the Kerry campaign have almost certainly at least scheduled a sit-down with Bob Graham by now, in an attempt to get an idea about what Graham's price would be to flip on his support for Goss. Just because he's retiring fromn the Senate doesn't mean that he would turn down some cushy job in the Kerry administration (if Lurch wins). If Graham's price is deemed to be too high, I wouldn't even rule out a Torricelli-style sit-down with Bill Clinton to "persuade" Graham that he's being offered a pretty good deal to withdraw his support.
Given Goss and Graham's relationship, this would be a backstabbing of monumental proportions. But we're talking Rats here, so stabbing people in the back comes just as naturally to them as does lying about their war records and boinking the interns in the Oval Office.
Geez, I don't even want to imagine that catastrophe.
Hopefully, they can use this as yet another salvo to be launched against Tom Daschle, who is already on thin ice with the voters of South Dakota, despite what the New York Times Magazine may want us believe.
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.