Never Too Soon
To start undermining our foreign policy and abandoning allies:
The New York senator said she came to the conclusion while watching the president’s news conference last week in which he referred to the bipartisan Iraq Study Group report and its recommendations for the administration.
“He talked about it favorably for the first time I’ve ever heard him talk about it,” Clinton told The Associated Press in an interview during a campaign stop in Las Vegas. “That was to me a big signal that starting in the fall and toward the end of the year we’re going to start seeing troops withdrawn from Iraq.
“My argument is, why wait?”
Well, because drawing down troops in an orderly fashion as one is able is a different thing from a precipitous and bloody abandonment forced by cutting the funds. I’d have thought Clinton, of all people, would understand that no matter how difficult things get in the short-term, there might be a long-term benefit in standing by one’s man.
I guess it’s not such a surprise to learn that Hillary hearts Bushthink. She was completely on board with Bush’s Iraq project for a long time, until she saw some political advantage in abandoning it. Seeing as the Democratic hopeful is now basing her thoughts re Iraq on what the president says, it will be interesting to see her get behind that long-term South Korea-style presence concept.
Posted by Jules Crittenden at 9:18 am on Thursday, May 31, 2007
24 Responses to “Never Too Soon”
Leave a Reply
Trackback URLYou must be logged in to post a comment.
May 31st, 2007 at 10:12 am
Thompson/Giuliani in ‘08.
May 31st, 2007 at 11:14 am
Hillary! sounds very impatient. Maybe all that pandering is wearing on her?
May 31st, 2007 at 11:52 am
“My argument is, why wait?”
Damn, if Hillary would have only said that, when documents were requested (or subpoenaed ) of her during an investigation in her regime (well Bill’s really, but two for the price of one, you know) she may have had some moral leverage, today.
But hey, a year or so after the fact I believe, after sanitizing ain’t that bad, huh? Hey, Hillary, hows Vince Foster doing these days?
Power hungry witch.
May 31st, 2007 at 12:51 pm
Hard to say who’s more for early withdrawal — Hillary or Bill.
May 31st, 2007 at 1:12 pm
RebeccaH
In case you missed this….Why Fred Thompson?
By Robert Novak
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/05/why_fred_thompson.html
May 31st, 2007 at 2:54 pm
Fred Thompson is just what the Republican party needs right now - a draft-dodging, Cuba-supporting career lobbyist.
May 31st, 2007 at 3:31 pm
Found a picture of corndog. Tough to see its face, butt…
May 31st, 2007 at 3:32 pm
Much better, now http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e66/1AaronMorse/asshead.jpg
May 31st, 2007 at 3:39 pm
Fred Thompson
Thompson was admitted to the State Bar of Tennessee in 1967 and worked as an assistant U.S. attorney from 1969 to 1972. He was the campaign manager for Republican U.S. Senator Howard Baker’s successful re-election campaign in 1972, which led to a close personal friendship with Baker. He later served as co-chief counsel to the Senate Watergate Committee in its investigation of the Watergate scandal, (1973–1974).
He was responsible for Baker asking one of the questions that is said to have led directly to the downfall of President Richard Nixon—”What did the President know, and when did he know it?” Also, Thompson’s voice has become immortalized in recordings of the Watergate proceedings, with him asking the key question, “Mr. Butterfield, are you aware of the installation of any listening devices in the Oval Office of the President?”[7]
In 1977, Thompson took on a Tennessee Parole Board case that ultimately toppled Tennessee Governor Democrat Ray Blanton from power on charges of selling pardons.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Dalton_Thompson
May 31st, 2007 at 4:01 pm
She’s a pip, isn’t she. People like Hillary seem to think that we all have our memories wiped nightly, or are just brain-dead. Unfortunately, there are sufficient numbers of those who regularly evade reality and so pervert their rational faculty that they believe only what they’ve heard in the last five minutes, that she, and others like her, will garner a large number of votes.
Cid, you’re a sketch.
May 31st, 2007 at 4:18 pm
I guess El Cid proved me wrong. Oh wait, no he didn’t; he entirely avoided the question, instead pasting an article written mostly by Thompson’s staff.
The fact is, for 18 years Thompson was a registered Washington lobbyist, doing the bidding of such high-powered clients as General Electric and Westinghouse, representing the Haitian dictator Aristide, pushing for the passage of the legislation that led to the savings-and-loan crisis of the eighties. Today, Thompson is hiring the architect of the 2000 and 2004 voting fraud schemes, and loves to support the Cuban economy by smoking Cuban cigars.
Exactly the kind of person who best represents what the Republican Party stands for.
May 31st, 2007 at 4:55 pm
Well, lemme see now…I have a Cuban cigar…so gosh, that’s why I like Fred. And damn, I guess we (Fred and I) are boosting Cuba, so people such as yourself can eventually live in a Communist Utopia, corn.
And if I truly wanted to waste my time and effort answering or not answering your inanities, I would…but it’s such a waste of my time effort and fingertips, no what I mean.
OH, could you read and comprehend what you read, you would see that the article, and all other biographies of Fred Thompson, contain the information, that you redundantly harp on…and you will continue to do so….
HEY, corn, if Cuba ain’t your cup of coffee, try Venezuela, Nicaragua, or Bolivia. Course you could always bite the bullet (wishes with a misty eye) and try some Qingdao Beer, in China preferably.
Last time to even acknowledge you corn. Consider yourself, very lucky. 最新花花公子或dudette (later dude or dudette). Sorry for translating that for you, as I know you speak it fluently….hmmmm, or is that effluently?
OH! One last thing, please do try to extricate your head, from your ass, corn
May 31st, 2007 at 5:02 pm
Cid, you’re a sketch.
Why thank you you red haired, green eyed beauty..saltydog. It’s a damn good thing (or it that shame) that we are both married…:).
May 31st, 2007 at 5:05 pm
See what ya’ made me do…you you…without my coma…errr make that comma.
On second thought, maybe it is coma…lol.
May 31st, 2007 at 5:17 pm
“it’s such a waste of my time effort and fingertips, no what I mean.”
Hm-hm-hm-hm, sure do “no what” you mean, there Cid. Save your effort and fingertips for more - important - work at the computer. Right.
May 31st, 2007 at 5:46 pm
One other thing, Cid. Fred Thompson was not the one who dug out the “key question” that Nixon had the Oval Office bugged.
That question came from “minority (Republican) counsel, Donald G. Sanders. He told the staff members that ‘everything was taped … as long as the President was in attendance. There was not so much as a hint that something should not be taped.’ All present recognized the significance of this disclosure and Butterfield was hastily put before the full Committee on July 16 to put the taping system on the record.” Thompson was then fed the question to ask Butterfield.
May 31st, 2007 at 5:51 pm
“She was completely on board with Bush’s Iraq project for a long time, until she saw some political advantage in abandoning it.”
End of story.
May 31st, 2007 at 8:15 pm
Haitian dictator Aristide
Aristide was elected during Clinton’s term. The Duvalier’s were dictators.
May 31st, 2007 at 9:12 pm
Someone here cannot read nor can that someone comprehend what it reads, or that someone does so dishonestly and selectively.
When Nixon was re-elected, Butterfield was appointed on December 19, 1972 as administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration. He was routinely asked to appear before the United States Senate committee headed by Sam Ervin and was interviewed by staff of the committee on July 13, 1973, prior to going before the Senators. John Dean had previously mentioned that he suspected White House conversations were taped, and the committee was therefore routinely asking witnesses about it. Butterfield did not want voluntarily to tell the committee of the system but had decided before the hearing that he would have to if asked a direct question.
As it happened, Butterfield was asked the direct question by the minority (Republican) counsel, Donald G. Sanders. He told the staff members that “everything was taped … as long as the President was in attendance. There was not so much as a hint that something should not be taped.” All present recognized the significance of this disclosure and Butterfield was hastily put before the full Committee on July 16 to put the taping system on the record. Chief Minority Counsel, Fred Thompson, catapulted himself into history by asking “Mr. Butterfield, are you aware of the installation of any listening devices in the Oval Office of the president?”
May 31st, 2007 at 11:18 pm
I just love it when folks go after lobbyists, especially when they accuse someone for working for big (=evil) companies. We all know that when someone works for a big company they lose their rights, and when they have the most to lose due to some legislation, they have the least right to have a say. And I won’t even go into why anyone would hire a lobbyist in the first place; just because Congress have granted themselves the power of the government to hold someone’s business interest as a bludgeon that demands a business waste time and money buying permission to function. If laws were made to be objective, i.e., apply to everyone equally (you know, equal before the law?) instead of handing out favors to this group, while punishing that group, perhaps we wouldn’t have big companies eating at the government trough, while others spend their capital just to be allowed to stay in business. And then, perhaps, Congress wouldn’t find it “necessary” to censor political speech (that has the affect of keeping incumbents in office) in the name of cleaning up the corruption of congresspersons who wield the bludgeon in the first place.
Funny how all that works. Or doesn’t work, depending on your point of view.
May 31st, 2007 at 11:40 pm
saltydog
Damn we all just love it when you type dirty (OR make sense)…LOL. Goodnight Lady Saltydog.
June 1st, 2007 at 8:27 am
El Cid,
Read what you just cut and pasted: Sanders dug out the info, and it was Thompson who got the klieg lights. If you don’t read what I write, you can at least read what you write.
Purple Avenger: Aristide was elected during Clinton’s term and then proceeded to take on dictator-like qualities, ala Chavez.
June 1st, 2007 at 11:05 am
As to your point about how wonderful lobbyists are, Cid, that’s fine. Lobbyists have their place in the DC trough.
But Thompson’s out there trying to say that he’s an “outside the Beltway” aw-shucks Tennessee homeboy, when, in fact, he’s as tassel-loafered big bucks DC insider as they come. And some suckers buy it.
February 20th, 2008 at 8:54 pm
As minority counsel, it often fell to Sanders to directly question witnesses called to give testimony before the committee. And so it was that Sanders asked Butterfield the fateful question: “Is there any kind of recording system in the White House?”
There is even a picture of his notebook about the Butterfield interview.
http://illumination.missouri.edu/spr07/new3.php
”It was actually Don who discovered the existence of the White House taping system, but he was too unassuming to ever mention it,” Mr. Thompson said on Monday in an interview with The Associated Press.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9406E3DE173EF93AA1575AC0A96F958260