Posted on 04/23/2006 9:18:06 AM PDT by Dr. Marten
They believe that only the sacrifice of one or more of the big beasts of the jungle, such as Cheney or Donald Rumsfeld, the defence secretary, will convince voters that Bush understands the need for a fresh start.
Fred Barnes of the Weekly Standard magazine and author of Rebel in Chief, a sympathetic new biography of Bush, said: There are going to have to be sweeping personnel changes if people are going to take a second look at the Bush presidency.
Barnes, who is close to the White House, said he believed Cheney would be willing to stand down in order to help Bush. Its unlike Bush to dump somebody whom he likes and respects, he cautioned. But the president needs to do something shocking and dramatic such as putting in Condoleezza Rice.
Cheney appeared to have beeen caught napping during a visit to the Oval Office by Chinas president, Hu Jintao, on Friday, although he claimed he had been looking down at his notes. It has often been said that he would cite medical reasons should he ever resign.
The best scenario, Barnes added, would be for Bush to announce that Dick Cheney will be around as an outside adviser and I can call him on the phone, but Id like to anoint somebody who I think will be the next leader of the United States.
Tom Edmonds, a leading Republican consultant, said the White House had failed to grasp that the party was in desperate straits. I have never talked to so many disenchanted Republicans, he said. The president even stonewalled the minor changes he made by talking about how he was really perfectly happy with his team. He didnt even give himself wiggle room.
One Republican strategist, who did not want to be named, said: If I were Bush I would think of changing Cheney. It is one of the few substantial things he can do to change the complexion of his administration. The rest is nibbling around the edges.
Bushs new chief of staff, Joshua Bolten, quickly put his stamp on the inner workings of the White House last week by stripping Karl Rove, Bushs most powerful adviser, of his policy-making role and ordering him to concentrate on his forte: winning elections.
Bolten also obtained the resignation of the White House spokesman, Scott McClellan, who was nicknamed Piggy in a recent Vanity Fair article because of his resemblance to the hapless victim of the feral boys in Lord of the Flies.
Tony Snow, a Fox News broadcaster who is favoured to replace McClellan, has previously described the Bush administration as listless and in dire need of change.
But a new communicator cannot reinvent an old team. Edmonds believes Rumsfeld should go. The president is loyal to a fault, he said. His loyalty shouldnt be to Rumsfeld but to the troops in Afghanistan and Iraq. We need a new, strong face on the war, such as Senator John McCain or Joe Lieberman (the pro-war Democrat senator).
Bob Schieffer, a CBS news television presenter, said Bush may yet drop Rumsfeld despite his strong declaration of support. It was also this president who said, Brownie, youre doing a heck of a job and that was just before Brownie got canned, Schieffer said, referring to Michael Brown, who directed the Federal Emergency Management Agencys much-criticised response to Hurricane Katrina.
John Snow, the Treasury secretary, has been left twisting in the wind while replacements for him are openly discussed, and Rob Portman has been brought in to replace Bolten as budget director. Suggestions that Harriet Miers, Bushs White House counsel who was dropped as his supreme court nominee, would be next to go were denied last week.
Supporters say Bush should live up to his bold claim that he is the decider made while rejecting recent calls for Rumsfelds resignation from half a dozen senior generals and start firing senior people rather than backroom staff.
If the Democrats win either the House of Representatives or the Senate it will be death and torment. It will be horrible for Bush, said Barnes. A Democrat win could lead to moves to impeach Bush for leading the country to war on allegedly false pretences, or at the very least, to bog down the presidents legislative programme until he leaves office in 2008.
Rove has been privately warning party activists to expect some losses in the mid-term elections. One insider said: Ive heard him say at several party gatherings that the president wasnt supposed to win in 2000, but he did. Weve increased our margins of victory time and again. We cant just keep winning on top of winning so were bound to slip back, but were still doing better than you would historically expect.
Only one two-term victor has been more unpopular than Bush at a similar six-year stage in his presidency Richard Nixon in the months before he was impeached.
"The vice president is an elected official of the USA. It is not like firing a cabinet member."
So if Cheney did go, who would move in succession..Hastert?
"What does it say about the judgment of someone who votes for such an obvious idiot?"
let's see, I could have either voted for John Kerry or Bush..hmm..
I don't have to say or believe anything I hear about Bush from others, he makes the case himself every time he opens his mouth or entertains a foreign dignitary.
http://www.zonaeuropa.com/20060422_2.htm
Yeah, you go with that.
I see that rather than refute my previous statements about Bush, you choose to engage in ad hominem attacks.
YOU said: "Bush is an idiot and it shows at all levels of his administration"
===
Do you consider THIS "rational, logical" discussion of the issues?
You sound exactly like the people in the article I mentioned in my earlier post.
"The premise follows a scheme previously found most often on talk radio programs: a liberal activist calls a conservative radio host, such as Rush Limbaugh or Laura Ingraham, and delivers the line: Ive been voting Republican for 30 years, but Ive finally had it and Im not voting this year. Or my favorite: Im a Reagan Republican, but Im fed up and voting for John Kerry. (Because that is what Reagan Republicans would do, vote for John Kerry.) At this point, the host usually asks a couple of questions and it becomes painfully obvious that the supposed Reagan Republican has probably never voted for anyone left of Michael Dukakis. "
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1613957/posts?page=87#87
Well, I stated a fact. Bush is an idiot.
Since you like to follow links:
http://www.zonaeuropa.com/20060422_2.htm
"Well, I stated a fact. Bush is an idiot. "
===
It is most certainly NOT a fact. It is YOUR OPINION.
Repeating that "Bush is an idiot" only makes it clearer and clearer that perhaps you don't belong in this forum.
The Times Online piece is at
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-2148000,00.html
It's a British news outlet! ...wishful thinking in Britain.
Exactly right - These weak-kneed GOPers simply need to stand up and fight back on the DEM's / MSM - They need to stand shoulder to shoulder with our CIC / SecDef on the WOT / Iraq, they need to tout our robust economic success....they need to take the issue of high gas prices to the DEMs pointing out the facts that 30 years of wrong-headed environmental policies have costs!..we are bearing those costs at the pump today.
"Then you give a link to what others say about him!"
I've already stated my thoughts about the man. As for the link I provided, Roland does not offer his own thoughts on the matter. He did however translate several articles from other sources relating to how the meeting was perceived in China, Taiwan and Hong Kong.
Of course, the protest that was allowed by an ET reporter was not broadcasted in China. If there were any competence among those handling this visit by Hu Jintao, none of these mistakes would have even taken place.
I agree. Name these GOPers who want Chaney to go. Too bad about them. They have done nothing to inspire the confidence of the public. Chaney is the best VP we ever had and Condi has pro-abortion baggage that cannot be disregarded. Let's show the integrity and support our President and VP.
"The interpreter made mistakes. Simultaneous interpreting is not easy. But why call Bush an idiot? The mistakes were not his."
Can you find an American source for your opinions?"
What makes this "theory", ha, ha, so plausible is the fact, that when Vice-President Agnew was found to have taken payoffs (while a governor, I believe).........full bore, to the hilt, ______to the wall attack by the big liberal media, but, when President Clinton was found to have taken payoffs (also, while a governor, I believe) the sounds of silence, and, of............crickets.
Yet another perfect example of the double standard, hypocritical, biased, lefist, lying socialist MSM.
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.