Hoekstra said the White House had discussed several possible candidates with him, and his views on Hayden would not be a surprise to the Bush administration. Yet you felt compelled to go on TV and flap your jaws to Wallace. Nice.
To: prairiebreeze
The House doesn't get a say in the matter.
2 posted on
05/07/2006 9:23:22 AM PDT by
Dog Gone
To: prairiebreeze
The Republican Party shoots itself in the foot again. Such losers and whimps we have in our ranks.
3 posted on
05/07/2006 9:24:09 AM PDT by
My Favorite Headache
("Scientology is dangerous stuff,it's like forming a religion based around Johnny Quest and Haji.")
To: prairiebreeze
"We should not have a military person leading a civilian agency at this time,"
Perhaps a little military style accountability is just what the doctor ordered?
4 posted on
05/07/2006 9:24:12 AM PDT by
Wristpin
("The Yankees announce plan to buy every player in Baseball....")
To: prairiebreeze
Who cares what an obscure representative thinks about it? It's not like he gets a vote.
5 posted on
05/07/2006 9:25:05 AM PDT by
Not A Snowbird
(Official RKBA Landscaper and Arborist, Duchess of Green Leafy Things)
To: prairiebreeze
The military has always had great counterintelligence.
6 posted on
05/07/2006 9:25:09 AM PDT by
Coldwater Creek
("Over there, over there, We won't be back 'til it's over Over there.")
To: prairiebreeze
"We should not have a military person leading a civilian agency at this time,"
Perhaps a little military style accountability is just what the doctor ordered?
7 posted on
05/07/2006 9:25:15 AM PDT by
Wristpin
("The Yankees announce plan to buy every player in Baseball....")
To: prairiebreeze
Ollie North for CIA Director!
9 posted on
05/07/2006 9:35:37 AM PDT by
Signalman
To: prairiebreeze
putting a general charge is going to send the wrong signal to the agency here in Washington but also to our agents in the field around the world," Hoekstra said. What we need is butt-kicking seriousness, competency and a "just git er done" attitude in the CIA. If putting a general in charge will accomplish that, then I'm all for it.
11 posted on
05/07/2006 9:46:48 AM PDT by
ElkGroveDan
(California bashers will be called out)
To: prairiebreeze
Gen. Michael Hayden, former director of the National Security Agency, .... "We should not have a military person leading a civilian agency at this time,"
I don't care if Hoekstra is a "conservative". This statement is idiotic on it's face and particularly so coming from a Republican. Jimmy Carter's CIA man was an Admiral. General Hayden has already lead a civilian agency.
These kind of gratuitous statements by Hoekstra undermine the President and the WOT. He should be ashamed.
To: prairiebreeze
Prepare for another display of rampant pusillanimity by the useless Senate Republicans.
14 posted on
05/07/2006 11:36:18 AM PDT by
Mad_Tom_Rackham
(Every vote for a Democrat is a vote for $10/gallon gas.)
To: prairiebreeze
"We should not have a military person leading a civilian agency at this time," I guess Hockstra hasn't read any Tom Clancy novels. The Admiral did just fine.
15 posted on
05/07/2006 12:48:46 PM PDT by
Mike Darancette
(Proud soldier in the American Army of Occupation..)
To: prairiebreeze
Hoekstra said the White House had discussed several possible candidates with him, and his views on Hayden would not be a surprise to the Bush administration Didn't we determine the biggest problem in intelligence was the various agencies did not share information?
If a military man takes over the CIA then is it not likely the CIA will now at long last cooperate with the Defense department and vice versa? They might both even cooperate with the state department as well.
This house dude is just angry that someone who would illegally leak to him was not selected.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson