Posted on 03/11/2007 5:25:34 AM PDT by Alas Babylon!
I saw today that Petraeus is even asking for more troops.
I know Pres. Bush said yesterday that he was sending about 3500 more to Iraq...but, today, I saw a report that Petraeus is asking for more.
I don't know if that is along with the ones Pres. Bush mentioned or not.
That tells me that Gen. Petraeus has been given the green light to ask for what he needs...and I have read that the ROE have changed under his command also...good news.
That's a nicely written summary. It would be a great introduction to Clintonian behavior in a future history book for high school students.
I was wondering that myself.
....(darned mind reader)...,mumble, mumble
Somebody posted a thread this afternoon that had a poll from somewhere asking people to vote for who they want to be the GOP candidate.
THAT poll had Colin Powell #1!!!!!!
Blech, ptoooooey!!!
Here's a partial transcript of the Thompson interview.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,258222,00.html
He also has several other things going for him. He has lots of experience fighting the legislative battles and knows how to fram arguments in that context (if not in the context of a presidential campaign). He also has lots of folks on the Hill who still remember him positively from both sides of the aisle. They know how he acts when he's actually able to lay down positions that have the likelyhood of being agreed to and, more importantly, stuck to. Finally he has literally nothing to lose and this offers him a fantastic opportunity to build a lasting legacy, perhaps one more significant than if he had won the Presidency, and certainly a better one than his being the loser to Bill Clinton in 1996.
As you say, he has a stake in the outcome, if not for his own treatment but for the treatment of his brothers (and sisters) in arms.
Shalala, on the other hand, will be at the table representing AFSCME and the bureaucracy. She'll also be all about protecting the Clintonistas from any hint that this might have been a problem prior to 2000 or, perish the thought, could be the result of the slash and burn policies of the Clinton administration in treating the US Defense budget as their private piggy bank.
Thank you for posting that Fred Thompson transcript from today...I missed the interview.
You're welcome. As some have mentioned, he might not be ideal on abortion, but then again neither was Reagan. On EVERYTHING else he is very strong and he has name recognition.
At this point I think it would almost be a miracle to get someone that not only could most Republicans/conservatives could get behind...but that could also beat Hillary/Obama.
Exactly right, I believe. While there are certainly a contingent of close-minded conservatives, I think (hope?) the bulk are relentlessly open-minded and constantly exploring and reviewing facts and opinion on lots of issues. At least that is how I became a conservative. So I like people who tell the truth. I can deal with that. That is the attraction of Giuliani, in addition to his strength as a leader.
I think that ultimately the GOP nominee will have the necessary support and it won't be Rudy because he will not survive the nomination process. And I am becoming more convinced every day that either Algore or Edwards will be the 'Rat nominee and the running mate will either be Edwards (if Algore is the nominee) or Richardson. The 'Rats are terrified of Hillary being the nominee and Obama is plummeting as fast as he rose.
All true, but she'll also be there to make sure that, one way or another, this commission will be perverted into a weapon to be used against the Republicans in the upcoming elections, like the 9/11 "Commission" was. If she can't steamroll Dole and the Iraq veterans on the panel into making the commission report a political hatchet job against the Bush Administration, she'll walk away from it and claim the panel is trying to "whitewash" Bush and Rumsfeld, thereby discrediting it.
..I didn't watch Fox News Sunday because I was going to watch tonight...
&&&&
So was I going to watch Fred Thompson. When I surfed away from FNS I landed on a local baseball channel which was replaying the night that Cal Ripken broke Lou Gehrig's record. What a thrilling night. The O's fans gave him a 22 minute standing ovation!
Watching Cal reminded me of the president's T-ball games on the South Lawn, and how he had Cal Ripken as "Commissioner" of the White House "league."
That memory made me sad and angry all over again at our despicable media - the only people who saw Cal at the White House were the people on the lawn, the photographers who were there and the freepers who look at the Dose!
Everyone in America should have been made aware of the T-ball at the White House ... and they would have been informed if the president to host it was a democrat!
and MNJohnnie repliedMy problem with what he said is that the War on Terrorism has been going on for the past 24 years since Hezzbollah
Back in the late 1960s or early 1970s the PLO, at Yassar's direct orders, murdered a US diplomate. May have even been the Ambassador. This war has been going on now for almost 40 years.
We certainly also have to add Bobby Kennedy's assassination in 1968 by a Palestinian protesting America's support for Israel, so there's a firm anchor for a date at least 39 years ago. But that's only the most recent manifestation. You both know as well as I do that this war has been going on for 1300 years.
The clash of civilizations started when Mohamed declared that the purpose of Islam was to covert, enslave or kill everyone else in the world. They have never altered that goal as the central tenet of their civilization. We choose to ignore it from time to time and pay a heavy price for that willful act of delusion.
We cannot coexist with them so long as their purpose on this planet is to wipe us out.
The reason to do it now has nothing to do with political advantage (except in a negative sense, as you state, probably). The reason to pardon him now is because it's the right thing to do.
There are times when you do the right thing despite the political consequences.
I admit that the President may have more information than I do about what the real cost of suffering those consequences now may be and I still trust him to make that judgement. He and Libby both would put off doing the right thing by Libby if it were to be at too high a price to the country.
I harbor the same fond hope as RodGuy911 that a pardon, now, would be the opening salvo in an aggressive campaign to stomp the traitorous bastards on the other side into the ground (my characterization, not his). And I certainly agree with him that it would fire up the base.
From a quick google: Of course the top link goes to a New York Times article. Basically John Glenn played defense for the Clintons, not agreeing to subpoenas and witnesses, using the tried and true "move along, nothing to see here" attitude. As I recall, he played Thompson for a sucker almost in a Lucy and the football pattern. The hearings were live on cspan and were infuriating to watch.
Chairman Offers Defense of Senate Hearings
July 14, 1997, Monday
By LIZETTE ALVAREZ (NYT); National Desk
Late Edition - Final, Section B, Page 8, Column 1, 1154 words
DISPLAYING ABSTRACT - Sen Fred Thompson, head of committee holding hearings on campaign finance abuses, stands by his opening statement that China had tried to influence last year's elections; Ty Cobb, lawyer for Democratic fund-raiser John Huang, says his client may have violated some 'complicated' campaign finance laws; Sen John Glenn says he has access to same classified documents as Thompson, but has come to less certain conclusion about China
Thanks for the background.
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.