Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

A tale of two memos: Hugh Hewitt exposes Democrats' lack of concern for U.S. security
WorldNetDaily.com ^ | Wednesday, November 12, 2003 | Hugh Hewitt

Posted on 11/12/2003 2:32:41 AM PST by JohnHuang2

A tale of two memos

Posted: November 12, 2003
1:00 a.m. Eastern

© 2003 WorldNetDaily.com

The tale of two memos illustrates much that divides Republicans from Democrats.

The first memo was authored by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. It was leaked from the Pentagon, and it was characterized by its focus on the enemy that threatens the United States. Rumsfeld pushed his colleagues to focus on the long-range problem presented by the madrassas and by the need to continually push the government to innovate in the war that cannot be lost.

The second memo was authored by the staff to the Senate's Democrats sitting on the Senate Intelligence Committee. Its focus was on how to attack President Bush – how to manipulate the Committee's rules and its investigations so that both would serve partisan, short-term goals of wounding the president during an election year.

The Republican memo focused on defeating the country's enemies. The Democratic memo focused on defeating the Republicans.

In a nutshell, that is the crucial difference between the parties: The Republican Party priority is national security. The Democratic Party priority is Democratic Party power.

Democratic Sen. Zell Miller described the memo as a "first cousin to treason," and Republicans announced that the Senate Intelligence Committee's tradition of bipartisan work on behalf of the national security was dead.

Good. It is time for Senate Republicans to recognize that the Pat Leahys and the Jay Rockerfellers, the Barbara Boxers and the Carl Levins are not there to help the Republicans advance the national security interests of the United States. The refusal by Levin to denounce the memo on Sunday during his appearance with Tony Snow on Fox News Sunday was an opportunity to show himself as a genuine advocate for national defense by demanding an investigation into the staff who composed the hit plan on the president. Instead, Levin fumed on national television that the memo had been swiped.

Levin was more concerned with having his staff found out that with having his staff vetted for hyper-partisan hacks.

This is not treasonous behavior, just extremely selfish, churlish behavior – the sort associated with win-at-all-costs partisanship. The Democratic Party is so desperate to return to power that they have abandoned any sort of mooring to the traditional role of the loyal opposition during wartime. Indeed, it is difficult to escape the conclusion that the Democrats really don't believe it is a war.

So Howard Dean surges and Joe Lieberman fades. Al Gore appears from the shadows to denounce the Bush administration's drift toward Orwellian control, and Carl Levin contorts before a national audience. The serious people, including the president and the secretary of defense, go about their jobs defending the country and the gap between the parties grows wider every day.

I cannot believe the election of 2004 will be close. To vote for a Democrat after the past two-plus years is to vote for disarmament in the war on terrorism. They are a mediocre bunch, comfortable with playing D.C. games while enemies continue to bomb and kill.

How anyone can support them is baffling, and the evidence of their fecklessness overwhelming. We can only hope that between now and November of 2004 they remain consistent about their motives and outspoken about their beliefs.

What is really needed is a 60-seat majority for the GOP in the U.S. Senate. Visit the National Republican Senatorial Committee and send money. It is the best investment in the national security an ordinary citizen can make.



TOPICS: Editorial; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 2004memo; ccrm; dems; hughhewitt; memogate; presstitutes; rumsfeldmemo
Wednesday, November 12, 2003

Quote of the Day by Interesting Times

1 posted on 11/12/2003 2:32:41 AM PST by JohnHuang2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: xm177e2; mercy; Wait4Truth; hole_n_one; GretchenEE; Clinton's a rapist; buffyt; ladyinred; Angel; ..

Hugh Hewitt MEGA PING!!


2 posted on 11/12/2003 2:33:59 AM PST by JohnHuang2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
I cannot believe the election of 2004 will be close.

Is this your take, too John?

3 posted on 11/12/2003 2:38:58 AM PST by Aeronaut (In my humble opinion, the new expression for backing down from a fight should be called 'frenching')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Aeronaut
Yep. Though we can't be complacent. We need to work like we're 10 points behind.
4 posted on 11/12/2003 2:41:30 AM PST by JohnHuang2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
I have been waiting for someone to compare the latest memo leaks in an article and fianlly someone hit on it. One made the front page of the New York Times while the other was relegated to a blurb on page A14.
5 posted on 11/12/2003 2:42:59 AM PST by KC_Conspirator (This space for rent)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
Though we can't be complacent. We need to work like we're 10 points behind.

Amen! I suppose you heard that twit Franken plans to run for Senate against Coleman in 5 years. That'll be a train wreck!

6 posted on 11/12/2003 2:44:17 AM PST by Aeronaut (In my humble opinion, the new expression for backing down from a fight should be called 'frenching')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: KC_Conspirator
And yet the liberal media still maintains -- in the teeth of all the evidence -- there's no liberal media bias.
7 posted on 11/12/2003 2:44:23 AM PST by JohnHuang2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Aeronaut
That'll be a train wreck!

hehehe -- very true!

8 posted on 11/12/2003 2:44:55 AM PST by JohnHuang2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
The Republican Party priority is national security. The Democratic Party priority is Democratic Party power.

Tag line material.

9 posted on 11/12/2003 2:50:25 AM PST by Cannoneer No. 4 (Brave Rifles! Veterans! You have been baptized in fire and blood and have come out steel.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Cannoneer No. 4
Bump!
10 posted on 11/12/2003 2:51:53 AM PST by JohnHuang2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Aeronaut; JohnHuang2
Maybe he'll bring all his Harvard helpers to aid him in his speech writing.
11 posted on 11/12/2003 2:58:56 AM PST by DeuceTraveler ((wedgie free for all))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
I think a 60 seat majority in the Senate will just give the RINOS the power that the Crats have now.The rinos will join the remaining Crats to block conservative judges and legislation, especially repeals and rollbacks.
12 posted on 11/12/2003 3:00:01 AM PST by arthurus (When the other shoe drops, look out for the cleats!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2; *CCRM; *Presstitutes; yall
This is not treasonous behavior, just extremely selfish, churlish behavior – the sort associated with win-at-all-costs partisanship. The Democratic Party is so desperate to return to power that they have abandoned any sort of mooring to the traditional role of the loyal opposition during wartime. Indeed, it is difficult to escape the conclusion that the Democrats really don't believe it is a war.

I think it may be treason !!

Hey, John ! Question for you. I don't watch the Alphabet News (ABCNNBCBS, etc.), but I have heard that they have not mentioned the 'RAT MemoGate memo. True or not ??

And what about the major print media ? (LAT/WP, etc.) ...

Anyone ??


13 posted on 11/12/2003 3:02:01 AM PST by MeekOneGOP (Will work for tagline)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
I cannot believe the election of 2004 will be close. To vote for a Democrat after the past two-plus years is to vote for disarmament in the war on terrorism. They are a mediocre bunch, comfortable with playing D.C. games while enemies continue to bomb and kill.

BINGO!

Hugh nailed this one

14 posted on 11/12/2003 3:04:21 AM PST by Mo1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MeeknMing
G'morning backatya, amigo

re: Alphabet News ... I haven't followed all of them, but I'd wager they haven't mentioned it; or if they have, only in passing.

re: LAT/WP ... The WP did a little write up. That's about it.

15 posted on 11/12/2003 3:04:31 AM PST by JohnHuang2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: arthurus
I think a 60 seat majority in the Senate will just give the RINOS the power that the Crats have now.The rinos will join the remaining Crats to block conservative judges and legislation, especially repeals and rollbacks.

The Rinos best not be so complacent .. Because even though we will be shooting for a 60 seat Majority .. we will also be looking to replace those Rinos come primary time

Did ya hear that Specter

16 posted on 11/12/2003 3:08:59 AM PST by Mo1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2; *CCRM; *Presstitutes; yall
Man ! They sure gave enough coverage to the Rummy memo that was leaked. No bias here, nosiree !

Thanks ! ...


17 posted on 11/12/2003 3:25:20 AM PST by MeekOneGOP (Will work for tagline)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: MeeknMing
They sure gave enough coverage to the Rummy memo that was leaked.

And, to top it all, the Rummy memo was seized by the media as evidence -- DAMNING EVIDENCE -- we're losing the War on Terror. Go figure.

18 posted on 11/12/2003 3:30:15 AM PST by JohnHuang2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Mrs Zip; BOBWADE
ping
19 posted on 11/12/2003 3:30:44 AM PST by zip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
Yep ! All he was doing was trying to get things churning to get ideas to better combat Terror ...

Take THAT, you biased bozos !! ...


Click HERE or on the pic to hear the Rolling Thunder !


20 posted on 11/12/2003 3:38:20 AM PST by MeekOneGOP (Will work for tagline)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland; ALOHA RONNIE; DLfromthedesert; PatiPie; flamefront; onyx; SMEDLEYBUTLER; Irma; ...
"The Republican memo focused on defeating the country's enemies.
The Democratic memo focused on defeating the Republicans.

In a nutshell, that is the crucial difference between the parties:

The Republican Party priority is national security.
The Democratic Party priority is Democratic Party power."
- Hugh Hewitt
Wow.
Hugh certainly knows how to frame this important issue!
.

If you listen to Hugh Hewitt, or read his WND commentaries,
this PING list is for YOU!

Please post your comments, and BUMP!

(If you want OFF - or ON - my "Hugh Hewitt PING list" - please let me know)

21 posted on 11/12/2003 4:06:35 AM PST by RonDog (Republican Party priority is national security; Democratic Party priority is Democratic Party power.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
The second memo was authored by the staff to the Senate's Democrats sitting on the Senate Intelligence Committee.

Its focus was on how to attack President Bush – how to manipulate the Committee's rules and its investigations so that both would serve partisan, short-term goals of wounding the president during an election year.

From www.hughhewitt.com:
Posted at 9:50 AM, Pacific

Here is the text of the memo sent by Democratic Staff of the Senate Intelligence committee:


Transcript of a memo written by a Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee staff suggesting how to make the greatest gain off of intelligence data leading to the war against Iraq.

We have carefully reviewed our options under the rules and believe we have identified the best approach. Our plan is as follows:

1) Pull the majority along as far as we can on issues that may lead to major new disclosures regarding improper or questionable conduct by administration officials. We are having some success in that regard. For example, in addition to the president's State of the Union speech, the chairman has agreed to look at the activities of the Office of the Secretary of Defense as well as Secretary Bolton's office at the State Department. The fact that the chairman supports our investigations into these offices and co-signs our requests for information is helpful and potentially crucial. We don't know what we will find but our prospects for getting the access we seek is far greater when we have the backing of the majority. (Note: we can verbally mention some of the intriguing leads we are pursuing.)

2) Assiduously prepare Democratic "additional views" to attach to any interim or final reports the committee may release. Committee rules provide this opportunity and we intend to take full advantage of it. In that regard, we have already compiled all the public statements on Iraq made by senior administration officials. We will identify the most exaggerated claims and contrast them with the intelligence estimates that have since been declassified. Our additional views will also, among other things, castigate the majority for seeking to limit the scope of the inquiry. The Democrats will then be in a strong position to reopen the question of establishing an independent commission (i.e. the Corzine amendment).

3) Prepare to launch an independent investigation when it becomes clear we have exhausted the opportunity to usefully collaborate with the majority. We can pull the trigger on an independent investigation at any time-- but we can only do so once. The best time to do so will probably be next year either:

A) After we have already released our additional views on an interim report -- thereby providing as many as three opportunities to make our case to the public: 1) additional views on the interim report; 2) announcement of our independent investigation; and 3) additional views on the final investigation; or B) Once we identify solid leads the majority does not want to pursue. We could attract more coverage and have greater credibility in that context than one in which we simply launch an independent investigation based on principled but vague notions regarding the "use" of intelligence.

In the meantime, even without a specifically authorized independent investigation, we continue to act independently when we encounter foot-dragging on the part of the majority. For example, the FBI Niger investigation was done solely at the request of the vice chairman; we have independently submitted written questions to DoD; and we are preparing further independent requests for information.

Summary

Intelligence issues are clearly secondary to the public's concern regarding the insurgency in Iraq. Yet, we have an important role to play in the revealing the misleading -- if not flagrantly dishonest methods and motives -- of the senior administration officials who made the case for a unilateral, preemptive war. The approach outline above seems to offer the best prospect for exposing the administration's dubious motives and methods.


22 posted on 11/12/2003 4:17:57 AM PST by RonDog (Republican Party priority is national security; Democratic Party priority is Democratic Party power.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
Good. It is time for Senate Republicans to recognize that the Pat Leahys and the Jay Rockerfellers, the Barbara Boxers and the Carl Levins are not there to help the Republicans advance the national security interests of the United States.

Heehee! He said Rockerfeller...as in "off his rocker"?

Well, I agree with Hewitt and I hope the pubbies play hard ball with this issue. The dems are being downright unpatriotic and obstructing the will of the people. They're traitorous! They want to win at all cost, like school yard bullies, and that is far too high a price to pay.

It is so very unflattering as well, hee hee, and it reveals so clearly, their ugly partisan selfish-interested underbelly.

Isn't that Zell Miller a God-send? He's a godly man full of winsome character...so unlike that crappy Jeffords who sold his party out for a temporary leadership position. Jeffords didn't know a thing about godly character.

I'm encouraged!

23 posted on 11/12/2003 4:22:59 AM PST by ThirstyMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

From www.dictionary.com:
smoking gun
n. Informal
Something that serves as indisputable evidence or proof, especially of a crime

24 posted on 11/12/2003 4:24:01 AM PST by RonDog (Republican Party priority is national security; Democratic Party priority is Democratic Party power.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
The refusal by Levin to denounce the memo on Sunday during his appearance with Tony Snow on Fox News Sunday was an opportunity to show himself as a genuine advocate for national defense by demanding an investigation into the staff who composed the hit plan on the president.

Instead, Levin fumed on national television that the memo had been swiped...

See also, from www.ukar.org:
What was the reason that impelled The Times to publish this material in the first place?  The basic reason is ... that we believe "that it is in the interest of the people of this country to be informed...."  A fundamental responsibility of the press in this democracy is to publish information that helps the people of the United States to understand the processes of their own government, especially when those processes have been clouded over in a hazy veil of public dissimulation and even deception.

As a newspaper that takes seriously its obligation and its responsibilities to the public, we believe that, once this material fell into our hands, it was not only in the interests of the American people to publish it but, even more emphatically, it would have been an abnegation of responsibility and a renunciation of our obligations under the First Amendment not to have published it. 
(Excerpt from a New York Times editorial of June 16, 1971, in The Pentagon Papers, 1971, p. 644)
Sauce for the goose?
25 posted on 11/12/2003 4:35:00 AM PST by RonDog (Republican Party priority is national security; Democratic Party priority is Democratic Party power.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
This is not treasonous behavior

I wonder what his defination would be?

26 posted on 11/12/2003 4:50:27 AM PST by The Mayor (Through prayer, finite man draws upon the power of the infinite God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
We need to work like we're 10 points behind.

Darn straight, John! If we build up an impressive momentum going into 2004, then we can give Bush longer coat-tails for other elections that year. In addition, we set up the '06 election and prepare the ground from the republican presidential candidate in '08.

27 posted on 11/12/2003 6:04:12 AM PST by WileyC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: RonDog
He does have a way of getting to the nut of it all. Sure wish I could hear his radio program out here. I miss it.
28 posted on 11/12/2003 7:10:31 AM PST by anniegetyourgun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: anniegetyourgun
You can still LISTEN ONLINE to Hugh's show from one of the websites listed HERE:
www.hughhewitt.com/pages/listen_online.htm

29 posted on 11/12/2003 7:39:18 AM PST by RonDog (Republican Party priority is national security; Democratic Party priority is Democratic Party power.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: RonDog
You're a dear....especially since none of the FL stations that carry his program are streaming.
30 posted on 11/12/2003 7:56:30 AM PST by anniegetyourgun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
Hugh Hewitt at his best!
31 posted on 11/12/2003 8:58:26 AM PST by blackie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: RonDog; JohnHuang2; MeeknMing
It is impossible for me to improve your post or Hugh's words.

"The Republican memo focused on defeating the country's enemies.
The Democratic memo focused on defeating the Republicans.
In a nutshell, that is the crucial difference between the parties:

The Republican Party priority is national security.
The Democratic Party priority is Democratic Party power." - Hugh Hewitt
32 posted on 11/12/2003 9:34:23 AM PST by onyx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
No kidding. We are only talking about a 3-4 week difference and look at the coverage. The one memo that was not scandalous was misreported as serious news while the other memo, which was scandalous, is not reported on unless its dragged kicking and screaming to it.
33 posted on 11/12/2003 10:33:38 AM PST by KC_Conspirator (This space for rent)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: onyx

34 posted on 11/12/2003 10:39:00 AM PST by MeekOneGOP (Will work for tagline)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: MeeknMing
A MeekABump --- that's cute.
35 posted on 11/12/2003 10:41:49 AM PST by onyx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: onyx
hehe ! Thanks. Autoresponder made that for me.

Glad you can see it too. I think my Comcast website/host site was
having problems for a while ...


36 posted on 11/12/2003 12:21:46 PM PST by MeekOneGOP (Will work for tagline)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: MeeknMing
I have not seen the memo discussed any place in the so-called 'mainstream' media forums. But, then that's why they are no longer mainstream forums.

I would bet, however, that Rush comes out swinging with this Monday morning. What a brilliant way to bring two issues to the nose of the 'alphabet' news (LOL..I LOVE THAT ONE). With all media eyes fixed on his return, what do you think he'll lead with. My bet is This Memo, and Judge Nominations.

Not to shortside Hugh. He seems to be the only commentator to fully recognize the significance of this issue. "The Republican memo focused on defeating the country's enemies. The Democratic memo focused on defeating the Republicans." The Left is so dangerously myopic that they cannot recognize the true enemy. As Hugh so accurately puts it, the Left will get us all killed.

Kudos to Hugh... he's really quite series!


37 posted on 11/12/2003 12:27:47 PM PST by Mr.Atos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: MeeknMing
It's a miracle I can *see* it --- I can *see* so few posted graphics and photos! I was, and remain amazed!
38 posted on 11/12/2003 12:52:30 PM PST by onyx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Mr.Atos
Oh, yeah ! Rush will be all over those two issues - MemoGate and 'RAT obstruction of judicial pics - when he gets back next Monday !

I bet a lot of folks will be surprised, too, how vibrant he is. There was something posted here on FR about the corporate entity that owns EIB and there was meeting recently in which Rush came up in discussion. They said he was doing fine in the treatment facility.

Like I've been posting since I found out he was getting help ...


39 posted on 11/12/2003 2:51:39 PM PST by MeekOneGOP (Will work for tagline)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: onyx
Alright ! Since your web browser is being so kind to you today,
then maybe you can see this one ? ...

if not, it's a graph that says "Yee-Hawwww!"


40 posted on 11/12/2003 3:11:51 PM PST by MeekOneGOP (Will work for tagline)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: MeeknMing
YEE-HAW?
41 posted on 11/12/2003 3:12:43 PM PST by onyx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
John, this is a powerful thread. Thank you so much for posting it, and BTW, bttt. ;-D
42 posted on 11/12/2003 3:17:01 PM PST by Judith Anne (Send a message to the Democrat traitors--ROCKEFELLER MUST RESIGN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: onyx
playing catchup again here. yeah ... just being funny. didn't work, lol !

43 posted on 11/13/2003 2:04:07 AM PST by MeekOneGOP (Will work for tagline)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

.


44 posted on 12/27/2004 7:22:57 AM PST by piasa (Attitude Adjustments Offered Here Free of Charge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson