New Study Partners [Is Bush Embracing Baker-Hamilton Strategy?]

NY Times ^ | March 2, 2007 | Craig Crawford

[freedomdefender]

Now it seems as though George W. Bush might be paying more attention to former Secretary of State James A. Baker III’s Iraq Study Group than he initially let on. For starters, the president’s apparent about-face last week from his earlier rejection of meetings with Iran or Syria falls right in line with one of Baker’s chief recommendations.

Baker’s blue-ribbon panel, co-chaired with former Democratic Rep. Lee H. Hamilton of Indiana, unveiled 79 recommendations in December for salvaging Iraq. The 10 members of the group — five from each political party — checked their partisanship at the door to draw a comprehensive blueprint for improving chances of ending the war with at least a fig leaf of dignity. While their yeoman effort was much praised, the White House seemingly ignored their specifics. ...

In addition to the surprising move to meet with Iran and Syria, the White House has taken to heart the Baker-Hamilton call for a stronger stand in Afghanistan and new approaches to pressuring the Iraqi government. Still, Bush firmly resists endorsing the group’s plan for phased withdrawal of U.S. troops to bases near Iraq by next year, even though others in his administration broadly hint that it could happen. ...

The president himself brought up the group’s proposals in his most recent formal session with reporters, ticking off several of them from memory and justifying his controversial “surge” of troops to Baghdad as a means to ultimately implementing what Baker and Hamilton suggested. “I thought the Baker-Hamilton made a lot of sense, their recommendations,” Bush said at his Feb. 14 news conference. “We just weren’t able to get there if the capital [Baghdad] was up in flames. That’s why I made the decision I made.”

[neverhillorat]

Mr. Crawford, The President will probably continue to follow his own thoughts and principles. Thank GOD

[CitizenUSA]

"The 10 members of the group — five from each political party — checked their partisanship at the door."

Along with their brains and courage. Sorry, I couldn't resist.

[YaYa123]

Craig Crawford and his unnamed sources:

"Bush insiders say that, in private, the president first rejected the Baker-Hamilton findings with some coarse and unprintable language. But partly at the urging of Bush’s father, whom Baker served as secretary of State, the president gradually adopted a more receptive attitude."
(this was so juicy, Crawford wrote it twice???)


"Many GOP lawmakers hoping to see the White House get on a better footing with the voters are quietly cheering Bush’s apparent moves toward Baker. But as one said, they do not want to make too much of it or the president will “get stubborn” again and back off."


After not naming sources, Crawford gets back to what he does best, bitchy buzz word Bush insults, like:
"presidential pride",
acting like a petulant "child",
" behind-the-scenes intervention to pry the president away from an addiction'',
"the president will “get stubborn” again".