Posted on 01/31/2007 3:22:15 PM PST by IntelliQuark
I think the fact that only 25-30 out of 435 Members showed up for a closed meeting probably also told Pres. Bush what he needed to know.
These people are not serious people...they are all about politics...and bashing him as much as possible.
He just took that power out of their hands...by giving them their little playground game of "lets play committee".
They are, after all, appointing an 'advisory panel'.
wtf??????????????????????????????
those two jerkweed surrender monkeys get to appoint the iraq advisory group??
what a mother 'effin' JOKE.
Look at it this way...this "advisory panel" can't be any worse than the 9/11 Commission or the ISG.
At least this advisory panel will be made up of people that have to run for re-election...which means Bush and Americans will know exactly where they are coming from.
I think, naively, Americans thought that the 9/11 Commission and the ISG were made up of smart, bi-partisan SERIOUS people that were trying to do their civic duty.
Well...we know differently, now, after the fact. This time everyone will know this will be a bipartisan circle jerk.
--But it would have been infinitely better to NOT have a "bipartisan advisory group", than to legitimize the antiwar Dems by allowing them to create this.--
On the other hand, they will likely overreach and expose themselves as nitwits (with unrealistic policies like "let's make a deal with Iran and Syria").
--The first time the President ignores advice, he will be beat over the head with it...
see "911 Commission"
see "Iraq Study Group"--
Actually the ISG didn't do nearly as much PR damage to the WH as the demands to comply with the 911 Commission (replacing McClellan with Tony snow may have had something to do with it).
But why should he even have to pretend? Why another study group or advisory panel, especially when these are clear opponents of our being in Iraq who have consistently worked against victory, e.g., AGAINST our troops?
This conciliation on the part of CIC, who should be looking out for his troops above all, does not bode well. So what if the Dems won control of Congress and the Senate? Let them gloat and glory in their "power," but why does the President have to agree to their despicable strategems. He doesn't.
Appeasement of our enemies, whether inside or outside of country, will not lead to VICTORY. Every elected representative named in this article has the goal of bringing about resounding DEFEAT for our nation in the War on Terror.
The political aspect of this war has taken a bad turn since the November election. But then again, how can we expect President Bush to stand firm when so few Republican Senators and Representatives stand with him?
Maybe they can pretend to set up a bipartisan committee and Pres Bush can pretend to give a rat's azz about what they come up with.
Why do we not just surrender. This is unbelievable. Saying I am rapidly losing faith in The GOP and Bush is an understatement. Talk about no spine.
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.