Jane Harman as top spook?

Worldnetdaily ^ | 12/10/2004 | Joseph Farah

[dirtboy]

Is Rep. Jane Harman, D-Calif., really under consideration by the White House as the first director of national intelligence?

Cripes, if that happens, we all might as well huff mustard gas and get it over with.

[Rummyfan]

This has got to be a joke!

[bushisdamanin04]

Well, she sure spooks me!

[bushfamfan]

I wouldn't put it past Bush. That's his style.

[alloysteel]

This is even worse than Norman Mineta as Secretary of Transportation. Any serious intelligence gathering could only be done without telling the boss ANYTHING.

[ken21]

ick!

i remember her, she's from palos verdes estates in los angeles county.

this does not compute!

[concretebob]

Well, time for a major FreepMail event, if this is true.

Homeland Security PING

[CTpatriot]

President Bush, Liberal Democrat...surprise!

[NutCrackerBoy]

You know the rules. Pictures!!

[KiloLima]

president@whitehouse.gov

Also, contact your representative. In my case, it's . . . Jane Harman! Oops.

[TommyDale]

The terms "Democrat" and "intelligence" together are an oxymoron, aren't they?

[Political Junkie Too]

We already saw how the Democrats on the Senate Intelligence Committee abused their powers to use intelligence for partisan gain. How can we be sure that Harmon won't be tempted to do the same thing, given how desperate the Democrats are to regain power.

-PJ

[Fitzcarraldo]

why pussy-foot around - let's nominate Gorelick and be done with it /sarcasm

[StoneColdGOP]

Harman has been a first-class failure as a Member of Congress.

She was against the immigration/asylum measures in the 9/11 bill.

She's already said she's against bringing them up again next year.

She's an open-borders globalist.

Of course Bush would consider her.

[nanak]

...why not Ralph Nader or Gray Davis.

[CTpatriot]

Sandy Berger... even better.

[Freebird Forever]

You know the rules. Pictures!!

When did the Coulter rule get amended to include rat traitors?

[Freepdonia]

Jane Harman is not being seriously considered. I don't care what is being bandied about, there is no way that she will be in charge.

[NutCrackerBoy]

It's time for us to engage in one of our pastimes: guessing why President Bush does something that liberals approve of.

Here's my rationalization: this appointment (maybe even just the rumor of it) forces Establishment liberals to come out of the fog and face some reality. Like Alan Dershowitz' guidelines on the use of torture, I think it is actually healthy for civil liberties radicals to openly take a tough position either way. The current electoral climate with national security moms won't permit more fiascos like Torricelli Amendment to happen.