W. cuts and runs

Article comments

Subscribe to comment RSS

• 1 - Shark

  Mar 30, 2004 at 7:17 pm

  Yeah, the Bush administration finally responded.
  
  Apparently, Karl Rove looked out the window and saw a gigantic public relations disaster heading for the White House at 500 mph.
  
  It was too late to scramble the Air Force F-16s, Bush was busy reading a story to some little kids, but Rove went ahead and gave the order:
  
  "Send out Condi."
  
  They're action oriented!
  
  They're pre-emptive!
  
  They're aggressive!
  
  They're looking out for... um... we'll get back to you on that one...
  
  
  SO HAL, what questions would you ask Rice?

• 2 - Dan

  Mar 30, 2004 at 7:47 pm

  I don't think this is good for your side Hal.

• 3 - mike

  Mar 30, 2004 at 8:25 pm

  Unfortunately, this makes Bush look good. I think he's in the early states of a pull away, in which his poll numbers rise into the 55-60% range, helped along by modestly improving job numbers and phoney "war on terror" propaganda.
  
  As Krugman says, there are only two outcomes for the country: one that results in political catastrophe for Bush, and one that results in political catastrophe for the United States.
  
  It's going to be the latter.

• 4 - Mark Saleski

  Mar 30, 2004 at 8:55 pm

  i've heard that karen hughes is returning to the white house...undoubtedly to deal with the white house pr trainwreck

• 5 - Hal Pawluk

  Mar 30, 2004 at 9:02 pm

  What side do you think that is, Dan?
  
  I'm on the side of honesty in government and this administration has exhibited little if any of that.
  
  I posted the item because I was pleased that it is possible to force them into a position where they will have to be honest or perjure themselves for the record.
  
  Based on recent history, it will probably be the latter or at least very little of the former (I''ve seen Condi dance).
  
  But it is good to see one of them being called to account, whatever account she gives.

• 6 - Hal Pawluk

  Mar 30, 2004 at 9:10 pm

  Mike:
  
  I think it makes Bush look like a cornered weasel.
  
  Krugman, on the other hand, should be required reading for everyone in this country: The Great Unraveling

• 7 - Hal Pawluk

  Mar 30, 2004 at 9:42 pm

  Shark:
  
  First, I wouldn't try to "prove" that Bush could have prevented 9/11 because I don't believe that. His administration certainly could have done more against terrorism before then, but doing so still would not have guaranteed that 9/11 would not have happened. It's just Monday morning quarterbacking to try to place the blame that way. It happened - let's deal with it.
  
  For Condi, I'd first want to reconcile Clarke's statements with her TV rebuttals. Somebody is telling the truth - let's find out who that is.
  
  Then I'd want to spend more time on the adminstration's response to 9/11. Was it indeed Rumsfeld who first raised the idea of using 9/11 as an excuse to invade Iraq on 9/11 and 9/12? Did she think that was the right response when Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11?
  
  Who was in the 9/15 meeting besides her and Wolfowitz when the idea that invading Iraq would be also be a good idea because it would prevent getting bogged down in Afghanistan? Who actually decided to pull out most of the US forces out of Afghanistan, where the terrorists were, and move them to Iraq where the terrorist weren't (although they are now)?
  
  How does she feel about the way terrorism has been handled since then? Terrorism is now recognized by places like the Rand institute as having splintered and spread rapidly since 9/11 making it even harder to deal with - wouldn't it have been better to try to prevent that rather than getting rid of Saddam?
  
  And like that.
  
  By the way, how do you like the idea of Bush agreeing to testify before the entire Commission, but only with his handler Cheney with him? Man, I'd like to see that one (I'll bet you wouldn't even see Cheney's lips moving as Bush spoke - those guys are good!).