An Administration Ally Goes Off-Message

Washington Post ^ | 11-01-06 | WestVirginiaRebel

[WestVirginiaRebel]

Sensing GOP vulnerability, the Democrats' campaign ads focus on voter unhappiness with the Iraq war. The Republicans, in turn, prefer to talk about keeping us safe from terrorism.

So eyebrows popped up last week when none other than Richard Perle, former Reagan assistant secretary of defense, former Bush brain-truster on the Defense Policy Board, and a key promoter of the war to find Iraq's weapons of mass distruction, blistered the administration as "dysfunctional" when it comes to stopping someone from bringing "a nuclear weapon or even nuclear material into the United States."

[WestVirginiaRebel]

He's right...the level of incompetence we've seen in homeland insecurity is mind-boggling.

[KMAJ2]

If one of your favorite things is making liberals cry, you failed when you posted this article. Instead, you have allowed yourself to be a puppet of the Washington Post agenda. You don't think they had any motives in posting such an article so close to the election ? Would the democrats have done anything better if they were in power ? How many of the shortcomings are due to democrat delaying tactics in Congress ? How have the leaks to the media hurt our security ? You allowed the partisan Post to get away with a hit piece while you merely bobbled your head in support.

[endthematrix]

WaPo link says:

"We are unable to locate the page you requested.
The page may have moved or may no longer be available"

[WestVirginiaRebel]

Correct link.

[endthematrix]

Thanks. No comment on that loser, Perle.

[balch3]

another turncoat. Don't these guys sign nondisclosure agreements when they leave government?

[NurdlyPeon]

And I'm sure this man also included all sorts of concrete, practical, implementable, workable solutions along with his rant (ones that would not be sabotaged by the RATS, the MSM, and the ACLU). He didn't? Well then, 1)what a surprise, and 2)piss on him.

[Dane]

Yawn, you still ain't going to win the elkection DUmmie troll.

[AmeriBrit]

bttt

[WestVirginiaRebel]

I kind of figured that would be your reaction. Never mind the fact that this guy worked for Reagan, supported the invasion of Iraq, supports the idea of preemptive first strikes, and doesn't like the role that veto power has in the UN Security Council.

And of course I'm a troll for thinking that competence is a requirement in wartime, for believing in actually doing something about border security instead of paying lip service to it, and for believing that Islamic Nazis who want to blow us up are actually a bigger threat to our way of life than gay marriage. And for daring to disagree with the GOP party line on some issues, for believing that they are nanny-staters and big-government spenders and NOT true conservatives-yeah, for all of these things, I'm a troll.

Or maybe I'm just where the Republican Party used to be.

[Dane]

You did read the rest of the article, didn't you. He blamed the entrenched beauacracy and not Bush himself, but you already knew that but decided not to disclose it.

[NetLiberty]

I'm with you. My demand for brains and competence in public service rises above Republican/Democrat. If "our side" is dropping the ball, as it plainly is, then they need to be called to account for it.

As I see it, border security is a minimal requirement of government. If you aren't controlling the borders (and amazingly this doesn't seem to be a priority for Bush), then you aren't really doing the job of government. Especially under our current threat.

Oh, and one more thing--it is truly moronic to think that these issues should be hushed up during an election season, or that those who bring them up are DU disruptors.