Republicans campaign on the deficit. Doesn’t mean they actually care about the deficit. What Republicans care about is their certain knowledge that money and power resides precisely where it is supposed to. And if it isn’t God’s Will, its close enough.
Sometimes works for me, but I admit, it’s a bit vague.
More, but I don’t know if that’s entirely fair. Are there any other organizations of this size and scope?
Ummm … we’ve been dropping bombs there for months (actually years at this point). We’ve got forces on the ground, right now, today. Would you agree that’s “more than a stone’s throw” from “didn’t do anything”?
I don’t know if I’d go so far as to say someone predicted the rise of ISIS, specifically, but quite a few people warned, back then, about the danger of pulling out of Iraq before the government and security forces there had a chance to mature and be ready to control their own territory. Mitt Romney is just one example.
And just who do you think signed the agreement for US troop withdrawal from Iraq? The Iraqi government insisted that the US leave. Bush signed the agreement. How in heaven’s name is that Obama’s fault?
As has been pointed out in a number of threads, Iraq didn’t want us there anymore. Our troops would have been subject to Iraqi law.
If the US had stayed, it would have been as an occupying force, not as an ally.
If anything, Iraq was at fault for thinking they were ready to go it alone.
Apoarently, they were right to deny providing the information, since the Trump team is now disavowing the questionnaire, and claiming the person responsible has been “properly counseled”.
But that doesn’t fit the narrative of “all government employees suck” and “neener neener neener somebody’s getting in trouble!”
Now where could that person have gotten the idea for the questionnaire in the first place?
Or sent it out without authorization?
I wonder if his counseling involves hosing his own blood off the underside of the bus?
I think this FactCheck article provides a pretty even-handed review of the timeline and thinking of key players. It concludes with this:
That’s the basics of the Republicans (and Leon Panetta) blaming Obama. I recognize that there are counterpoints and reasons why the Democrats blame Bush.
Like I said, I think it’s a fairly meaningless gesture. Secretary Perry is going to have access to this information in a few weeks anyways.
Except it confirms what they’re planning.
No, it doesn’t, at least not in my eyes. It confirms that the questionnaire became an inconvenient political hot potato, so the Republicans dropped it, because it was an unnecessary distraction.
Heaven, I’m in Heaven … (Cheek To Cheek).
Mea culpa. This was my mistake, I’m not sure how I got so misinformed. But the main criticism does seem to be “we aren’t doing enough”. Right? So again, we have the problem that there’s no good outcome here. Obama got shit for doing what he did in Libya, and he got shit for not doing enough in Syria. So what’s he supposed to do? I know a lot of republicans who were scared of Clinton trying to do more in Syria, lest she start World War III with Russia. Clearly “doing more” isn’t an uncontroversial option. Is there any answer that isn’t wrong here?
Okay, that’s fair. I’m not sure staying would have been better (as we would have been an occupying force), though. Is there a “good outcome” here? And to what degree can we blame the government?
There was a “good outcome” on Saddam Hussein. Don’t invade. Nobody wanted that. Nobody thought it was a good idea. And the result has been an out-and-out catastrophe for the US and the region. I don’t think Syria or Libya is comparable.
We are rather far off the road that was focusing on getting to a discussion of the Cabinet Choices, a matter that is more and more disturbing as each day passes.
This is as close to ‘through the looking glass’ as I can imagine. There are no appointments or nominations to those positions advising Trump or running a government department who are not very questionable as to either their fitness for the position in terms of experience, or their fitness in terms of philosophy (generally wanting to emasculate their new department) or their unquestioned patriotism.
Even one such matter should be setting off alarms for both parties in congress. There are at least a dozen unsuitable choices, starting with Bannon, Flynn, Mattis, … all the way to Perry. Unsuitable not after a congressional hearing that discloses unsavory positions or facts, but, actually, straightforwardly and obviously unsuitable to anyone who cares about America.
This bunch is designed and chosen to destroy the United States of America as we know it. These people, if confirmed, will destabilize every interaction Americans have with each other and with Government. Chaos. I’m serious.
From the first statements Trump made while holding his first press conference announcing his intention to run for President, to the latest announcement of a nomination, Trump has been, in my eyes, just trying for publicity and to shake things up. He didn’t expect to become President and he didn’t want to become President. He knows how unfit he is for such a demanding job and he doesn’t hide it. He wants to be stopped. He wants to have someone step in and say “Thanks for showing us how stupid the electorate can be, now just go away”.
Every thing he does is his plea to get America to see “I’m giving you every excuse to dump me. Please don’t make me go ahead, I know I can’t do this right.” How much more outrageous must it be? Must he announce that on January 21 he is going to have the military wipe out Iran’s nuclear facilities and military strength? North Korea? Leave Nato? The pacts and arrangements he already has said he would destroy should have been enough, but perhaps he has to go even deeper into an insane sort of statement to finally get the courts to declare him unfit for office and declare that a new election must be held?
The courts don’t get to declare the President unfit, the 25th Amendment gives that role to …[dramatic pause]… the Cabinet.* As someone once wrote, that’s some catch, that Catch-22. :eek:
*Congress can always impeach, of course.
As someone posted several weeks ago, which turned out to be prescient: “Watching Trump name new appointments each day is like an Advent calendar counting down to the apocalypse!”
Trump adds Fox News personality Monica Crawley to the NSC as strategic communications director.
According to the linked article, she is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and has a Ph.D. from Columbia University in international affairs. Seems to be pretty sharp.
She also once tweeted a picture of herself in front of the Berlin Wall with the comment “Walls work.” And in accepting the NSC job, she praised Trump’s vision and moral clarity.
Accomplished academic, or bozo? I guess it depends on what day you catch her.
More like the cartoon I saw of a kid opening an Advent calendar and saying “This one’s a turd too!”
I’ve never seen her, but…skinny with long blonde hair like the others, right?
Well, Trump doesn’t care for the fatties.