Posted on 12/05/2006 6:50:29 AM PST by Mo1
FROM THE SENATE Hearing on Robert Gates
The Senate Armed Services Cmte. holds an open hearing on the nom- ination of Robert Gates to replace Donald Rumsfeld as Sec. of De- fense. CIA director from 1991-93 under Presidents Bush & Clinton, Gates is currently President of Texas A&M University. Senators are expected to call for a new Iraq strategy during the hearing.
NOW ON C-SPAN2 & C-SPAN3
Very bad advice from somewhere.
Frankly, I hope it wasn't Papa Bush. He needs to get out of the picture, and take his cronies with him.
I wish we could withdraw Rummy's resignation and just keep him for another two years. It won't happen, I know. Replacing Rummy at all made me very nervous. But Gates sounds like he has no idea what's going on.
Reminds me of the 9/11 Commission. Don't confuse them with the facts. These people operate in an ivory tower filled with like minded numbskulls who are sure the rest of us are dumb. Kind of like Powell, thinking he was the President. Blech double blech.
Powell doesn't think he's president. He thinks he's God. He's not even in the administration anymore and he's still telling everyone what to think.
Saw an interview on CSPIN. A woman who wrote a book on Powell. He was quite miffed that the entire cabinet didn't ignore the President and take his advice. LOLOL......this man was more trouble than he was worth. What a mistaken appointment. Thankfully, my guess is that there were a few people who kept him out of the loop.
Gates is a consummate Washington insider. He knows how to work with people and work the system.
Doing what Levin says would not be a "consensus", by definition of the word.
I took my cue from Imhofe and Sessions. They are very conservative, and not the cut and run types. Unless I missed it, they seem ok with Gates while most among us FReepers seem worried sick about him. And the way Gates dealt with the ridiculous but in your face ego of Bob Byrd.
Levin is Levin, just like Murtha is Murtha. Following the exact course of either of these two men would not be a consensus. (But I repeat myself...sorry.)
Make no mistake, Gates is very different in his personality and background and way of working than Rumsfeld. My point is, that's why I think he's there. Really. That's IT. It's what the President wants at this point. Don't think he's any more into cutting and running though than Rumsfeld.
Tough nougies, Levin and Murtha et al.
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20061205/D8LQP8H00.html
http://www.thenewstribune.com/24hour/front/story/3438941p-12612271c.html
Before the Liberation, Sunni Baghdad had lots of electricity. The rest of the country had perhaps an hour a day. The total kilowatt hours produced now is the highest in Iraq's history, and people with jobs have money to buy more items that come plugs and electric cords.
Remember how the cry of the Left before 2003 was all about thousands of Iraqi children dieing monthly as a result of UN sanctions. That mantra seems to have been completely erased from the memory of those who have to make everything Bush's fault.
Are you sure that production used to be as high as you claim, or is that more propaganda from the leftist press?
Thank you for your supportive words, Miss Marple. You made my day.
He clarified his answer in the afternoon session. He said he agreed with the exact words of General Pace, who has said we are not winning or losing right now, in his view. Gates added that our military has not lost a single battle in the Iraq War.
So he AND General Pace are defining winning and losing the way the President does, and that is MORE than winning military engagements. An Iraq that can govern itself, defend itself and sustain itself, and is an ally in the WOT.
In my post I explained why I believe the President chose Gates. I support the President's choice as long as he carries out the President's policies, and I take the President at his word that he wants to achieve his goals in Iraq and will not settle for less.
Thanks for being a voice of reason amid the tantrums on this thread today. Gates is tough and knowledgable, and he will do well.
I am not happy about him either...but, unfortunately, after the Bolton thing...and as hard as they have been on Rummy.
I don't think that anyone WE would like would get confirmed....
I am going to listen to you...you have a cool head about this.
Just wanted to once again thank everyone to decided to stay home last month.
Thank you for your thoughtful analysis. I am inclined to believe you are probably right because I just do not believe that President Bush would nominate someone who would turn around and crush every thing we have worked so hard for these past three years. It just doesn't make sense.
I like your "take" on this.
"Frankly, I hope it wasn't Papa Bush. He needs to get out of the picture, and take his cronies with him."
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1748938/posts?page=32#29
"Bush acknowledged, however, that he did consult with the 41st president before nominating Robert Gates, CIA director under his father, to replace Donald Rumsfeld as defense secretary. But he said the elder Bush had no advance knowledge of the appointment.
Asked to comment on widespread view that his father's influence was coming to bear on his administration, Bush insisted: "I am the commander-in-chief." "
"I'm going to listen to you..."
Uh oh...
Fox news just reported, in my time zone , that Gates' nomination was unanimously approved by the Senate Armed Services Committee.
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.