"Democrats Applaud Bush Choices"

[StephNW4Clark]

I would like to put Clark's statement on the foreign policy team into perspective. Those men and women on that foreign policy team had to FIRST be confirmed by Congress. So apparently, by displaying such disgust with Clark's statement, logically one must also be disgusted by the Democratic senators and congressmen and congresswomen who, in the words of CNN "applaud Bush choices."

General Clark trusted the Congress to make sure those nominated and confirmed to those posts had been thoroughly and satisfactorily questioned by Congress. If you are going to blame him and scorn him for that statement, then I suggest you do the exact same or even more for those Democrat senators and congresspersons who were responsible for those Cabinet postings in the first place. And just to spice things up, remember Democrats also confirmed EPA Christine Todd Whitman.

Now if your argument defending those senators and congressmen and women were "How could they know that the Cabinet members would act in this way?" I would ask you to extend General Clark (who didn't have the opportunity to question and review those Cabinet members) the same courtesy.

http://www.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/stories/01/17/confirmation.hearings/

on Whitman: "Sen. Robert Torricelli, D-New Jersey, labeled her prospective nomination as a "very wise selection" during his introduction of the Republican governor. He noted that New Jersey developed one of the nation's best coastal management programs under her tenure, as well as a model plan to clean up toxic "brownfield" sites."

on Powell: ""Without question, General Powell's experience at the highest levels of government and the conduct of foreign and defense policy and his experience in managing large organizations makes him well qualified to be secretary of state," said Sen. Joseph Biden of Delaware, the top Democrat on the panel."

[Padraig18]

1. Unfair!

How DARE you introduce logic and reason into a forum with a penchant for flames and ad hominem attack! :P

[StephNW4Clark]

2. I'm idealistic - should I post Democratic senators who spoke glowingly of

...Sec. of Defense Rumsfeld during his confirmation hearings? Or will that cause too many heads to explode?

[Padraig18]

6. Please do

It will be fun. :)

[StephNW4Clark]

8. I'm all for fun!!

Senator Lieberman
""This is going to require some very tough leadership from you in priorities, the setting of priorities and the willingness to try to implement those," said Sen. Joseph Lieberman, D-Connecticut.

Rumsfeld said, "We must work together if we're to be able to address the problems of inadequate funding -- which has been the case -- unreliable funding ... and resistance to change."

WASHINGTON -- The U.S. Senate on Saturday confirmed the top tier of President George W. Bush's Cabinet -- secretaries of state, defense and treasury.

Following tradition, senators met briefly in the Capitol shortly after Bush was sworn in as the nation's 43rd president. On quick voice votes, the Senate approved retired Gen. Colin Powell to head the State Department, former Pentagon chief Donald Rumsfeld for a second turn as defense secretary and retired industrialist Paul O'Neill for the Treasury post.

Other confirmations included Ann Veneman as agriculture secretary, Don Evans as commerce secretary, Spencer Abraham as energy secretary, and Rod Paige as education secretary.

Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nevada, had voiced concern about Abraham advocating dumping nuclear waste in his home state of Nevada, but withdrew his objection and allowed the confirmation to go forward.
http://216.239.57.104/search?q=cache:RLOOjbgvaasJ:www.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/stories/01/20/senate.vote/+Confirmation+Hearings+-+Donald+Rumsfeld&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

[StephNW4Clark]

20. Senator Byrd on Rumsfeld

"SEN. ROBERT BYRD: How can we seriously consider a $50 billion increase in the defense budget when DOD's own auditors, when DOD's own auditors say that the Department cannot account for $2.3 trillion in transactions in one year alone? My question to you, Mr. Secretary, is what do you plan to do about this?

DONALD RUMSFELD: Decline the nomination. (Laughter)"

Apparently, that ended that line of questioning.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/politics/jan-june01/rumsfeld_01-11.html

[Mz Pip]

19. Do it, do it, do it!!!

I love exploding heads! :evilgrin:

MzPip
:dem:

[wyldwolf]

3. HA!

...it's really the far left folks on DU that berate Clark. They'll probably agree that every democratic member of Congress who voted to confirm the Bush appointees should be fired.

But I think your conclusions are brilliant!

[alcuno]

4. I don't hold it against him.

The truth is that I couldn't stand seeing * made the POTUS, but I never thought he would be this bad. My fear was that he'd actually be seemingly competent and we'd be stuck with him for 8 years. Clark made that statement in May of 2001.

[StephNW4Clark]

5. And the confirmation hearings were at the end of January 2001

That's a difference of 4 months.

[eileen_d]

7. OMG, what a blast from the past

Powell said that the incoming Bush administration will take a close but careful look at U.S. military deployments in regions such as the Balkans, with hopes of reducing troop commitments.

"I can assure you that President Bush understands the commitment and obligations that we have made to our NATO allies and to the people in the region," Powell said. "This will be done carefully, it will be done as a part of an overall review of all of our commitments overseas"

On another key front, North Korea, Powell said the incoming Republican administration is aware of the work done by President Clinton in talks aimed at convincing Pyongyang to scrap its program to develop long-rang ballistic missiles.

"We are open to a continued process of engagement with the North, so long as it addresses political, economic and security concerns," he said.

[SWPAdem]

9. Please stop making sense

n/t

[candy331]

10. So does this mean

mean that Bush didnot become a Christian?

[Mz Pip]

11. I've been waiting for someone to

do this. THere must be all kinds of quotes from all kinds of Dems saying an occasional nice word about someone in the Bush Adminsistration or about Bush himself. OFF WITH THEIR HEADS, those treasonous bastards! How dare they speak even one positive statement even if it was before the shit hit the fan, so to speak.

MzPip
:dem:

[StephNW4Clark]

12. Christmas came early this year!

And expect this posting all over the Internet and weblogs. :)

[StephNW4Clark]

13. No flames?

C'mon people - I expected better. Here I make a logical argument and no ravings?

[RichM]

17. OK, I'll flame you. You are arguing: it isn't fair to criticize Clark,

without ALSO criticizing the Congressional Dems who approved Whitman, Powell, & all the rest.

You believe that this argument should cool down the attacks on Clark -- because you're confident that no Dem loyalists would dare criticize their beloved Democrats.

But my take is different: I think the first part of your argument is valid (it isn't fair to attack Clark if one doesn't also blame the Congressional Dems). Where I differ from you is that I'm happy to attack the Congressional Dems, too. They all stink & should be tossed out on their ear for their willingness to go along with so many of Bush's appointments & initiatives.

[StephNW4Clark]

18. Slight adjustment

My point is: should Clark and any one of us as of early 2001 found any reason to doubt the judgment of the appointees to the Bush Cabinet? If we had any doubts, then, they should have been relieved by the fact that the Congressional Dems who conducted the confirmation hearings seemed to express such a great deal of confidence.

My argument is: at that time, it was too early to tell how those appointees would play out. The argument is that we were all duped, and for Lieberman et al to make such a big deal about Clark's statment is therefore not only ridiculous but hypocritical.

[dsc]

14. The problem is Bush

not his appointees. We are making the same mistake now that we made with Reagan. We thought Reagan was some dummy taking orders from Nancy, or Meese, or Haig, or Watt, or God knows who. Well he wasn't an idiot. And they were his ideas. We need to firmly saddle Bush with his unpopular policies.

[caledesi]

16. Good point DSC. n/t

[Donna Zen]

15. Thanks

....and check your messages.

Actually...the usual suspects are busy posting in a thread dedicated to Clark's vote for Reagan.