Bush rapidly losing points with me

[Cyrus]

[ QUOTE ]
George Herbet Walker Bush is a great man.

[/ QUOTE ]
The father was not above slime, himself. And not a great president, by any stretch. This is where our (very) diferent political viewpoints show, I guess.

But here's where father and son differ significantly in terms of character : The old man was a war veteran, who saw action and acted rather bravely, by most accounts.

The son's record on the other hand was rather skippy.



[ QUOTE ]
[George Herbet Walker Bush's] big political downfall came from compromising with slimey Democrats.

[/ QUOTE ]
Don't kid yourself. It was a combination of factors. Clinton's ascending star was just one of 'em.

[cardcounter0]

Compromising with South Americian cocaine dealers, Oily Saudi Royality, and Middle Eastern thugs probably had more to do with it than democrats.

[slamdunkpro]

[ QUOTE ]
I am intrigued by the reaction to the question

[/ QUOTE ]

Did anyone even read the whole article?

Let’s break it down…

First – say what you want but the Washington Post wrote it, so it was designed to make her look bad. The second paragraph demonstrates this:

“The push to appoint Julie Myers to head the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency, part of the Department of Homeland Security, comes in the midst of intense debate over the qualifications of department political appointees involved in the sluggish response to Hurricane Katrina.”

Since the Fed response was not sluggish but faster than any other major hurricane in US history this looks more like an OP/ED piece than hard news.

Second – The big push is that Sen. George V. Voinovich (R-Ohio) beat her up and questioned her qualifications in a Senate hearing. Then the next paragraph says he “might” support her. But the very last paragraph of the story says:

“But Marcie Ridgway, Voinovich's communications director, said yesterday that the Ohio senator had resolved his concerns by talking privately with both Chertoff and Myers. Ridgway said Voinovich was not available to speak directly about the issue.

So the Senator now understands that she is qualified.

Third – Her work experience. The Post said:

“After working as a federal prosecutor in Brooklyn, N.Y., for two years, Myers held a variety of jobs over the past four years at the White House and at the departments of Commerce, Justice and Treasury, though none involved managing a large bureaucracy. Myers worked briefly as chief of staff to Michael Chertoff when he led the Justice Department's criminal division before he became Homeland Security secretary.”

Lets take a little more factual look: From the US Department of Commerce Website:

Julie L. Myers was nominated by President Bush on June 26, 2003, and confirmed by the Senate on October 17, 2003, to serve as the Assistant Secretary for Export Enforcement at the Department of Commerce. Ms. Myers is responsible
for developing and coordinating the Department's efforts to prevent, and where necessary, sanction violations of U.S. dual-use export control laws and the antiboycott provisions of the Export Administration Act. She manages Commerce Special Agents who work at eight field offices in the United States, and oversees Export Enforcement's international attache program. Ms. Myers also provides policy guidance on issues relating to export controls, national security and nonproliferation.

Prior to joining the Department of Commerce, Ms. Myers served as the Chief of Staff of the Criminal Division for Assistant Attorney General Michael Chertoff at the Department of Justice. Before that, she served as the
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Money Laundering and Financial Crimes at the Department of Treasury. She also worked as an Assistant United States Attorney in the Eastern District of New York and as an Associate Independent
Counsel in the Office of Independent Counsel for Kenneth W. Starr.

Before entering government service, Ms. Myers was as an associate in the litigation section of Mayer, Brown & Platt. Immediately after law school, she served as a law clerk to Judge C. Arlen Beam for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit.

Ms. Myers is a native of Shawnee, Kansas. She received her B.A. from Baylor University in Texas and her law degree from Cornell Law School.

Hmm… So she dose have management experience in a large bureaucracy. Is Jason Bair at the Post now?

Now the fun part – who else does the Post quote in attacking her?
Charles Showalter – A union president
Michael Greenberger - a former Clinton administration official (political appointee)

Fact of life time: OK she’s a SAP, a political appointee and connected. At this level in every administration in history everyone is connected. Big deal.

Now, ICE is so broken that I (unlike the Post) don’t want a “status quo”, “don’t rock the boat”, “let em’ in, pat them on the forehead and let em’ draw welfare”, “let’s build them work center” type in there. Perhaps she’ll shake things up.

This is not page one news.

[vulturesrow]

Since you and Nicky, two posters I respect in spite of our generally opposed views, seem to think my response was an unwarranted one, I have taken newfant off ignore and will respond to his question. Allow me to address that first:

[ QUOTE ]
So you're saying Bush is just a puppet, then? That he is unable to make good decisions unless someone else tell him what to do? Why would you vote for such a monkey?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, Im not saying Bush is just a puppet. The Rove bit was an (apparently poor) attempt at humor. Just because I think that he made a bad decision here hardly means that I think he is incapable of good ones.

Now on to your post AC.

[ QUOTE ]
A reasonable question, posed in decent language,

[/ QUOTE ]

Not reasonable at all. He made an absurd interpretation of my post, followed it up with a question that is a rough equivalent of me asking a man if he has quit beating his wife, along with the whole "monkey" appellation that is quite juvenile and worn.


[ QUOTE ]
in response to an OP that was clearly made to make a political rather than an intellectual point.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, I am not quite sure what you are charging me with here. I will elaborate on the "point" of my post since it was obviously poorly written as evidenced by the responses.

I am a Repbulican who voted for Bush and have defended him on most fronts. Then he makes the mistake of appointing this woman for this position. My problem with this appointment is on two levels. Appointing people based on their connections/loyalty etc. is wrong, but Bush is hardly the first to do it. Still given that he has put some very talented people in various positions that were still connected and Bush friends, he couldve avoided this scenario. On another level, it was a politically tone deaf move given the controversy surrounding "Brownie". And I have criticized Bush's loyalty at all costs mentality before. Hopefully I worded this a bit more clearly than my original confused ramblings.

[slamdunkpro]

[ QUOTE ]
Just because I think that he made a bad decision here....

[/ QUOTE ]

I am genuinely curious why you think this is a bad decision. From just the Post article it does sound bad (see my earlier post), but she is a former assistant secretary being nominated for a department head job after some staff "grooming" jobs. In Washington, that’s pretty much the standard career path. Perhaps in this instance it’s time for a little outside the box thinking?

The comparisons with Brown are unwarranted – Brown had no real emergency experience, she does have law and law enforcement experience.

BTW I’m not totally defending this nomination – it is a bit of an odd choice. But I am willing to give her a chance.

[twowords]

[ QUOTE ]

“The push to appoint Julie Myers to head the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency, part of the Department of Homeland Security, comes in the midst of intense debate over the qualifications of department political appointees involved in the sluggish response to Hurricane Katrina.”

Since the Fed response was not sluggish but faster than any other major hurricane in US history this looks more like an OP/ED piece than hard news.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is something you are going to need to get past to maintain any legitimacy. This view of the response is somewhere to the right politically of both GWB, who noted the slow response and apologized, and fox news, whose commentators have pointed toward a "sluggish" or "poor" FEMA/HS response. Thats pretty far out of the mainstream.

Your points after this may have been well thought out so why ruin your legitimacy in your second paragraph?

[slamdunkpro]

[ QUOTE ]
This view of the response is somewhere to the right politically of both GWB, who noted the slow response and apologized, and fox news, whose commentators have pointed toward a "sluggish" or "poor" FEMA/HS response. Thats pretty far out of the mainstream.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sigh.....

What's FEMA's commitment as far as response time in a disaster? Answer 72-96 hours after the disaster, is over. When was FEMA on the ground in the disaster area (not just New Orleans, which was hit bad but include Mississippi, which took a point blank hit) Answer - 49 hours.

While this may be sluggish to the press, the laws of physics, organization, and movement from place to place indicate that this wasn’t bad. Also according to New Orleans’s own disaster plan the first responders are local and FEMA is not expected for ….you guessed it 72-96 hours.

[Felix_Nietsche]

Don't get me wrong.......I'm glad Bush is president because I think both Al Gore and John Kerry are complete fools. BUT Bush's spending and pandering is getting old. To me Bush is just "Democrat Lite". He was just a lesser of two evils. If he can replace O'Conner with a good conservative judge then he will have done much to have redeemed himself.

I'd like to see a principled fiscal conservative become the next president.

[Exsubmariner]

Sorry such a delayed response, cardcounter. But this statement by you really bothered me. I think the idea that I can't get past is your completely ignoring the morally relative aspects of doing business with drug lords, dictators, etc to achieve your greater goals. Small sacrifices to make in the face of the larger ends.

Don't you appreciate the irony of the moral equivalency arguements in your statement? Is it OK that Bill Clinton negotiated with Middle Eastern thugs, Puerto Rican gangsters, and oily Saudi Royalty? What about Jimmy Carter? He did the same.

You might want to think about that some things are necessary and politics in general is a dirty business.

X