He was against them.....before he was for them!!!!!
The Washington Post's Dan Froomkin is right on,
"President Bush yesterday embraced the Sept. 11 commission's two most significant suggestions, but with some major qualifications. Bush called for the creation of a national intelligence director -- but, unlike what the commission had in mind, that person would not be stationed in the White House for maximum power and easy access to the president and would not control the nation's approximately $40 billion-a-year intelligence budgets or have power over personnel.
Bush said he will also build a national counterterrorism center, but that it will report to the CIA until a national intelligence director is created -- which, because Congress isn't being called back into special session to address the recommendations, could be after the election. All in all, Bush's studied, nuanced approach effectively allows the president to appear supportive of the very popular 9/11 commission, while not being coerced into actions he doesn't support.
Bush's history with intelligence-related proposals includes more than a fair amount of nuance -- and some outright reversals. First, the president resisted the creation of a Homeland Security department for months before enthusiastically championing the idea.
Then, he opposed the creation of the independent 9/11 commission itself. He said Congressional intelligence committees could handle any needed investigations.
Once Bush allowed the commission to form, his aides repeatedly fought its requests for witnesses and documents.
In their stump speeches, Bush and Vice President Cheney repeatedly mock Democratic nominee John F. Kerry for his heavily nuanced statement on the massive security and reconstruction appropriation for Iraq and Afghanistan in 2003, which Kerry supported as long as it required Iraq to eventually repay some of the reconstruction money.
"I actually did vote for the $87 billion, before I voted against it," Kerry said, in what has become arguably the greatest laugh line of the Bush-Cheney campaign.
The risk for Bush is that when it comes to overhauling intelligence agencies, the president's record suggests he was against the proposals before he was for them."
posted by ian @ 10:53 PM
5 comments
5 Comments:
I strongly encourage everyone to visit www.kerryoniraq.com to view a short documentary of John Kerry's changing views on the Iraq. Whether you are a Kerry or Bush supporter, I think you will agree there is some substance to the issue of Kerry's flip-flopping.
The video has been seen by almost 2 million people already and, frankly, I hope everyone gets a chance to see it. It's all John Kerry's words.
Truly unbelieveable.
Just like a Republican to avoid the arguement at hand and instead focus on attacking their opponent.
Typical...
BUSH FLIP FLOPS TOO!!!! ALL THE FREAKIN TIME!!!!
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Right, Right.
I love the liberal argument. When they know John Kerry is getting hit with something he can't defend, that he's an overly nuanced, flip-flopping, waffler, they go back to grade school.
"Well, Gerorge Bush is a flip-flopper, too! He's an even bigger flip-flopper! He flip-flops all day long!! More than John Kerry does!!!"
First let me address a few of George W’s alleged "flip-flops":
My all-time favorite: Bush claimed during the campaign that he was against nation-building. Now, we're rebuilding Iraq and Afghanistan.
My response is very simple: SEPTEMBER 11TH 2001. If you can't grasp how the events of this day caused a seismic shift in the way we look at the world then you don't belong in a political argument.
September 11th also is relevant to a couple other supposed Bush flops.
Take the Department of Homeland Security, true, the Bush White House initially resisted a Cabinet-level position for Tom Ridge. That's right, in October 2001, while America was still trying to get back on its feet after the worst day in its history, George W. Bush's Administration wasn't ready to immediately move forward and endorse a gigantic government reorganization. After some careful thought (which liberals always claim Bush avoids - damned if you do, damned if you don’t...), the President eventually came around to the idea. And when he did, he pursued it with passion. Good for him. Flip-flop? No. I’d say more of an initial resistance, followed by a period of consideration, and finally, an endorsement.
As for the 9/11 Commission, I think the President initially felt it would turn into too much of a blame game (No way!) and that Congress could handle it. Eventually, he allowed a Commission to be formed. I don't think the President was ever enthusiastic about it, but I think that he felt it was something that the American people wanted, and so he acquiesced. In the end, he even took the Commission's advice because he thought it would help the country. I doubt he cared about how it might make him look after his initial opposition.
The key point here is that Bush is accused of flip-flopping on issues that were part of an extraordinary circumstance in American history. In the months after 9/11, there was plenty of thinking to be done as to how America needed to address the fact that 3,000 citizens were murdered and make sure that it never happened again. The Bush Administration was, thankfully, hesitant to rush into anything. They gave consideration to a lot of different ideas and implemented what they thought would be effective in the War on Terror. In the end, they decided, that the pros outweighed the cons in these matters.
As for John Kerry…
In 1991, he voted against the Gulf War. Then, for years after, he spoke as a hawk on the subject of Saddam Hussein and Iraq:
(Quotes found in documentary video at www.kerryoniraq.com)
"[I] believe he is the kind of threat that has been described. I believe that in the post-Cold War period this issue of proliferation, particularly in the hands of Saddam Hussein, is critical. It has implications for a Qaddafi, for a Sudan, for other countries in the world in the future."
GEORGE WILL: "Senator Kerry, you’re way ahead of the commander in chief in this regard."
KERRY: "I am way ahead of the commander in chief, and I’m probably way ahead of my colleagues and certainly of much of the country. But I believe this. I believe that he has used these weapons before. He has invaded another country. He views himself as a modern-day Nebuchadnezzar. He wants to continue to play the uniting critical role in that part of the world. And I think we have to stand up to that." (ABC’s "This Week," 2/22/98)
"I think we clearly have to keep the pressure on terrorism globally. This doesn’t end with Afghanistan by any imagination. And I think the president has made that clear. I think we have made that clear. Terrorism is a global menace. It’s a scourge. And it is absolutely vital that we continue, for instance, Saddam Hussein." (CNN’s "Larry King Live," 12/14/01)
"If Saddam Hussein is unwilling to bend to the international community's already existing order, then he will have invited enforcement ...even if that enforcement is mostly at the hands of the United States, a right we retain even if the Security Council fails to act." - Sen. John Kerry, Op-Ed The New York Times 9/6/02 (Sen. John Kerry, Op-Ed, "We Still Have A Choice On Iraq," The New York Times, 9/6/02)
"I would disagree with John McCain that it’s the actual weapons of mass destruction he may use against us, it’s what he may do in another invasion of Kuwait or in a miscalculation about the Kurds or a miscalculation about Iran or particularly Israel. Those are the things that - that I think present the greatest danger. He may even miscalculate and slide these weapons off to terrorist groups to invite them to be a surrogate to use them against the United States. It’s the miscalculation that poses the greatest threat." (CBS’ "Face The Nation," 9/15/02)
KERRY: "George, I said at the time I would have preferred if we had given diplomacy a greater opportunity, but I think it was the right decision to disarm Saddam Hussein, and when the President made the decision, I supported him, and I support the fact that we did disarm him." (ABC News Democrat Presidential Candidates Debate, Columbia, SC, 5/3/03)
Then, Howard Dean entered the picture, excited anti-war Democrats and we got the famed flip-flop…
MSNBC’S CHRIS MATTHEWS: "Are you one of the anti-war candidates?" (MSNBC’s "Hardball," 1/6/04)
KERRY: "I am - Yeah." (MSNBC’s "Hardball," 1/6/04)
Americans know that President Bush is a leader who will provide strong leadership in these challenging times.
And John Kerry is the guy who actually voted for the funding for our troops before he voted against it.
-BB
"You bet we might have" -- Kerry, on if he'd have gone to war if Saddam Hussein had refused to disarm (Boston Globe, 8/6/04)
Post a Comment
<< Home