Posted on 12/07/2007 10:07:36 PM PST by gpapa
Yes, he did.
Of course, one cannot simply recruit and install a new intelligence corps every 4 or 8 years. Getting people in place takes time. Training takes time. Recruiting takes time. So we have to think long term.
And unfortunately, it doesn't seem like President Bush has made, during his terms, the changes necessary to prevent future abuse.
That's where the Church Committee and Turner did their worst damage, substituting "technical means" for "humint." Now CIA has recruited very shady Arabic and Chinese "interpreters" because we don't already have trained and trusted people who speak the language. It's a gigantic cluster you-know-what.
Eactly, I heard those poll results last night. People constantly “misunder estimate” Bush. Also clearly many of these conservatives are too young and have an idealized version of the possible. For example:
1. A Randite gold bug, Alan Greenspan, was swallowed up by the Fed bureaucracy with ease. He barely if at all mentioned his personal views while Chairman. Rice is hardly an exception and the two state solution is already defacto, maybe if it becomes dejure the Israel can hold the Pali government accountable for raids over international borders. And you just can not fire everyone in a bureaucracy.
2. Bush has accomplished many of the same things as Reagan. He cut tax rates. He built up the military. He also did not have many of the major failings of Reagan. He did not go along with a huge tax increase like Reagan. He did not cut and run in the middle east when the going got tough as Reagan did. He did not sign on to an immigration reform that would get enough Dim votes to pass Congress like Reagan did. He has with just a year left not had a major scandle like Reagan did and as you know it is not for a lack of the Dims trying to invent one out of whole cloth which is what the contra situation was.
3. Bush is not that inarticulate. Sure he is not a professional former actor nor did he spend his ENTIRE career as a politician. But how measured might you be facing a press corp that has give up objectivity and completely gone partisan. How articulate would sound if the entire focus was on any fumbling on your part. The press of facing a hostile audience that you know will spin everything against you has to be huge.
As someone else said in this thread, the Beltway has been like this for decades. The American people are smart enough to understand that. Hence as the polling seems to show, they recognize a partisan snow job when one is delivered. This will make the Dims even more insane. Every thing they think they control the press, the bureaucracy, the Universities, the public is willing to discount when it issues spin.
Lets see what percentage feel the same way after the Lib media is done with this latest scripted myth campaign. The whole utility of public communication is, I fear, well beyond Bush’s thought process and skill level. I don’t expect to hear any effective counter to this coming from the White House. The conservative talking heads will have to do all of the heavy lifting yet again.
Bush isn’t stupid, but he and his administration are inept. Pretending it is otherwise won’t make it true.
Not with President Bush, he is a leader not a perception guy or someone who looks at the polls. If he was that person we would have lost the war on terror long time ago. I think you may be confusing him with Bill Clinton.
I suspect such a solution will be coming, but only after the election in 2008 and if the Klintoons return to power.
They will have no problem punishing people for treason - or any other offense they deem inimicable to their political and personal interests. They will happily use the draconian enforcement mechanisms of the government to do so.
Unfortunately, they will be the wrong people who will be purged and further persecuted. One only need look at the current witch hunt going after the interrogators of the head terrorists and those who destroyed the interrogation tapes to see who will be taking the falls. It will be the good guys.
We can pretend; but, the truth is, a girl can’t fix it.
When women take over, men lose interest.
I didn’t know that. Wow, the inbreeding among the elites is profound.
[We can pretend; but, the truth is, a girl can’t fix it.
When women take over, men lose interest.]
That is the singularly most foolish statement I have ever seen on FR. Presuming you are nearly female, were a man to offer that up, you would grind his nuts into pate!
Receptionist: How do you write women so well?
Melvin Udall: I think of a man, and I take away reason and accountability.
‘As Good As It Gets’
I can't believe I never heard that till now! Look at this:
Albright, the first woman to serve as secretary of state, recalls what Rice said to her when Albright contacted her in 1987.
"Madeleine, I don't know how to tell you this," Rice told Albright, "but I'm a Republican."
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5516648
What I mean is this isn't exactly new...
Yup, and it is damaging America. New tones don't work when only one side is new toning.
Minor point Hal, the Saudis are Sunnis. - Tom
Reagan did it by improving the military--not by lowering standards, allowing in more felons, paying out bigger bonuses, etc.
Oh man, unbelievable!!
I lived through the McCarthy era and could probably write my own book about it. What Evans (and Coulter) say has been part of my personal reality since the 1950s.
If you're trying to say that the bad guys in government have been there a long time you're right. My reading assignment to you is "Witness" by Whittaker Chambers.
Liberals in the CIA have gauranteed millions of Americans and possibly tens of millions of Iranians will be vaporized. Nice.
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.