The Waning of the GOP - William F. Buckley

[one...two...tree 2,762]

The Waning of the GOP

The political problem of the Bush administration is grave, possibly beyond the point of rescue. The opinion polls are savagely decisive on the Iraq question. About 60 percent of Americans wish the war ended — wish at least a timetable for orderly withdrawal. What is going on in Congress is in the nature of accompaniment. The vote in Congress is simply another salient in the war against war in Iraq. Republican forces, with a couple of exceptions, held fast against the Democrats’ attempt to force Bush out of Iraq even if it required fiddling with the Constitution. President Bush will of course veto the bill, but its impact is critically important in the consolidation of public opinion. It can now accurately be said that the legislature, which writes the people’s laws, opposes the war.

Meanwhile, George Tenet, former head of the CIA, has just published a book which seems to demonstrate that there was one part ignorance, one part bullheadedness, in the high-level discussions before war became policy. Mr. Tenet at least appears to demonstrate that there was nothing in the nature of a genuine debate on the question. What he succeeded in doing was aborting a speech by Vice President Cheney which alleged a Saddam/al Qaeda relationship which had not in fact been established.

It isn’t that Tenet now doubts the lethality of the terrorists. What he disputed was an organizational connection which argued for war against Iraq as if Iraq were a vassal state of al Qaeda. A measure of George Tenet’s respect for the reach and malevolence of the enemy is his statement that he is puzzled that Al Qaeda has not, since 2001, sent out “suicide bombers to cause chaos in a half dozen American shopping malls on any given day.” By way of prophecy, he writes that there is one thing he feels in his gut, which is that “Al Qaeda is here and waiting.”

But beyond affirming executive supremacy in matters of war, what is George Bush going to do? It is simply untrue that we are making decisive progress in Iraq. The indicators rise and fall from day to day, week to week, month to month. In South Vietnam there was an organized enemy. There is clearly organization in the strikes by the terrorists against our forces and against the civil government in Iraq, but whereas in Vietnam we had Hanoi as the operative headquarters of the enemy, we have no equivalent of that in Iraq, and that is a matter of paralyzing importance. All those bombings, explosions, assassinations: we are driven to believe that they are, so to speak, spontaneous.

When the Romans were challenged by Christianity, Rome fell. The generation of Christians moved by their faith overwhelmed the regimented reserves of the Roman state. It was four years ago that Mr. Cheney first observed that there was a real fear that each fallen terrorist leads to the materialization of another terrorist. What can a “surge,” of the kind we are now relying upon, do to cope with endemic disease? The parallel even comes to mind of the eventual collapse of Prohibition, because there wasn’t any way the government could neutralize the appetite for alcohol, or the resourcefulness of the freeman in acquiring it.

General Petraeus is a wonderfully commanding figure. But if the enemy is in the nature of a disease, he cannot win against it. Students of politics ask then the derivative question: How can the Republican party, headed by a president determined on a war he can’t see an end to, attract the support of a majority of the voters? General Petraeus, in his Pentagon briefing on April 26, reported persuasively that there has been progress, but cautioned, “I want to be very clear that there is vastly more work to be done across the board and in many areas, and again I note that we are really just getting started with the new effort.”

The general makes it a point to steer away from the political implications of the struggle, but this cannot be done in the wider arena. There are grounds for wondering whether the Republican party will survive this dilemma.

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MWZjM...jlkOTE5OWVkOTc=

Edited May 1, 2007 by Steven_and_Jinky

[GaryC 7]

The Waning of the GOP

The political problem of the Bush administration is grave, possibly beyond the point of rescue. The opinion polls are savagely decisive on the Iraq question. About 60 percent of Americans wish the war ended — wish at least a timetable for orderly withdrawal. What is going on in Congress is in the nature of accompaniment. The vote in Congress is simply another salient in the war against war in Iraq. Republican forces, with a couple of exceptions, held fast against the Democrats’ attempt to force Bush out of Iraq even if it required fiddling with the Constitution. President Bush will of course veto the bill, but its impact is critically important in the consolidation of public opinion. It can now accurately be said that the legislature, which writes the people’s laws, opposes the war.

Meanwhile, George Tenet, former head of the CIA, has just published a book which seems to demonstrate that there was one part ignorance, one part bullheadedness, in the high-level discussions before war became policy. Mr. Tenet at least appears to demonstrate that there was nothing in the nature of a genuine debate on the question. What he succeeded in doing was aborting a speech by Vice President Cheney which alleged a Saddam/al Qaeda relationship which had not in fact been established.

It isn’t that Tenet now doubts the lethality of the terrorists. What he disputed was an organizational connection which argued for war against Iraq as if Iraq were a vassal state of al Qaeda. A measure of George Tenet’s respect for the reach and malevolence of the enemy is his statement that he is puzzled that Al Qaeda has not, since 2001, sent out “suicide bombers to cause chaos in a half dozen American shopping malls on any given day.” By way of prophecy, he writes that there is one thing he feels in his gut, which is that “Al Qaeda is here and waiting.”

But beyond affirming executive supremacy in matters of war, what is George Bush going to do? It is simply untrue that we are making decisive progress in Iraq. The indicators rise and fall from day to day, week to week, month to month. In South Vietnam there was an organized enemy. There is clearly organization in the strikes by the terrorists against our forces and against the civil government in Iraq, but whereas in Vietnam we had Hanoi as the operative headquarters of the enemy, we have no equivalent of that in Iraq, and that is a matter of paralyzing importance. All those bombings, explosions, assassinations: we are driven to believe that they are, so to speak, spontaneous.

When the Romans were challenged by Christianity, Rome fell. The generation of Christians moved by their faith overwhelmed the regimented reserves of the Roman state. It was four years ago that Mr. Cheney first observed that there was a real fear that each fallen terrorist leads to the materialization of another terrorist. What can a “surge,” of the kind we are now relying upon, do to cope with endemic disease? The parallel even comes to mind of the eventual collapse of Prohibition, because there wasn’t any way the government could neutralize the appetite for alcohol, or the resourcefulness of the freeman in acquiring it.

General Petraeus is a wonderfully commanding figure. But if the enemy is in the nature of a disease, he cannot win against it. Students of politics ask then the derivative question: How can the Republican party, headed by a president determined on a war he can’t see an end to, attract the support of a majority of the voters? General Petraeus, in his Pentagon briefing on April 26, reported persuasively that there has been progress, but cautioned, “I want to be very clear that there is vastly more work to be done across the board and in many areas, and again I note that we are really just getting started with the new effort.”

The general makes it a point to steer away from the political implications of the struggle, but this cannot be done in the wider arena. There are grounds for wondering whether the Republican party will survive this dilemma.

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MWZjM...jlkOTE5OWVkOTc=

"President Bush's biggest mistake was keeping CIA Clinton holdover George Tenet, who threw him under the bus to sell books. To have the guy that was in charge of the agency that was wrong about war intelligence, turn around and write a book critical of Bush's handling of the war is akin to Tony Romo writing about how to hold the ball. Imagine if Rumsfeld did the same thing. Bush doesn't make decisions on the basis of public opinion or his own self interests. He makes them on the basis of what is right, no matter how unpopular it may make him." quote from Mark Belling

The dems have done none of the things they have promised to do since elected. They haven't passed a single one of the bills they promised to do in the first 100 days let alone the first 100 hours. All they have been doing is posturing and bad mouthing Bush. They have no substance and no vision. The American people see that also. They may not like Bush or his handling of the war but the dems haven't made any points either. I see a clean sweep in the next election, throw everyone out dems and reps alike that are not giving the people what they promised. The GOP isn't waning, but it will need to be reborn. The dems on the other hand, are wandering aimlessly around hoping that no one notices that they are not doing anything but crying about how bad Bush is. I got news for them, Bush isn't running next year. They can only hope that bashing Bush will somehow translate into them winning. They have a real chance if they would only take it. Give the American people a real plan and a real vision and they can clean up. So far they have failed miserably.

[MichelleandCraig 1]

*This is a bulletin. There is a serious political discussion underway. If you are here only to have fun, back away now. This is a bulletin. Serious political discussion in progress. If you are not serious about discussing this issue......*beeeeep* *beeeeeep* *beeeeeeep*

*wonders what was in that IV at the hospital.....* totally kiddin' guys, sorry...carry on! (btw, so happy for both of you recently reuniteds!!)

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

Wow.... he flings a William F. Buckley, Jr. column, and you counter with a Mark Belling quote ?

Any clash veteran could tell you -- "dat nuh mek it."

[Anais Nin 0]

The Waning of the GOP

It isn’t that Tenet now doubts the lethality of the terrorists. What he disputed was an organizational connection which argued for war against Iraq as if Iraq were a vassal state of al Qaeda. A measure of George Tenet’s respect for the reach and malevolence of the enemy is his statement that he is puzzled that Al Qaeda has not, since 2001, sent out “suicide bombers to cause chaos in a half dozen American shopping malls on any given day.” By way of prophecy, he writes that there is one thing he feels in his gut, which is that “Al Qaeda is here and waiting.”

What anyone cannot doubt is the ability of America to spread terror across the globe. Reaping what is has sown on September 11th, and even more when the American soldiers return to their homeland, suffering from post-traumatic stress, and perhaps even wreaking havoc at a shopping mall near you.

[homesick_american 1]

The Waning of the GOP

It isn’t that Tenet now doubts the lethality of the terrorists. What he disputed was an organizational connection which argued for war against Iraq as if Iraq were a vassal state of al Qaeda. A measure of George Tenet’s respect for the reach and malevolence of the enemy is his statement that he is puzzled that Al Qaeda has not, since 2001, sent out “suicide bombers to cause chaos in a half dozen American shopping malls on any given day.” By way of prophecy, he writes that there is one thing he feels in his gut, which is that “Al Qaeda is here and waiting.”

What anyone cannot doubt is the ability of America to spread terror across the globe. Reaping what is has sown on September 11th, and even more when the American soldiers return to their homeland, suffering from post-traumatic stress, and perhaps even wreaking havoc at a shopping mall near you.

So...you're saying we deserved what happened to us on 9/11?

[Robor007 0]

The Waning of the GOP

It isn’t that Tenet now doubts the lethality of the terrorists. What he disputed was an organizational connection which argued for war against Iraq as if Iraq were a vassal state of al Qaeda. A measure of George Tenet’s respect for the reach and malevolence of the enemy is his statement that he is puzzled that Al Qaeda has not, since 2001, sent out “suicide bombers to cause chaos in a half dozen American shopping malls on any given day.” By way of prophecy, he writes that there is one thing he feels in his gut, which is that “Al Qaeda is here and waiting.”

What anyone cannot doubt is the ability of America to spread terror across the globe. Reaping what is has sown on September 11th, and even more when the American soldiers return to their homeland, suffering from post-traumatic stress, and perhaps even wreaking havoc at a shopping mall near you.

So...you're saying we deserved what happened to us on 9/11?

Sure seems like it. Read some of their recent posts.

[Ban Hammer 13,340]

The Waning of the GOP

It isn’t that Tenet now doubts the lethality of the terrorists. What he disputed was an organizational connection which argued for war against Iraq as if Iraq were a vassal state of al Qaeda. A measure of George Tenet’s respect for the reach and malevolence of the enemy is his statement that he is puzzled that Al Qaeda has not, since 2001, sent out “suicide bombers to cause chaos in a half dozen American shopping malls on any given day.” By way of prophecy, he writes that there is one thing he feels in his gut, which is that “Al Qaeda is here and waiting.”

What anyone cannot doubt is the ability of America to spread terror across the globe. Reaping what is has sown on September 11th, and even more when the American soldiers return to their homeland, suffering from post-traumatic stress, and perhaps even wreaking havoc at a shopping mall near you.

by charging too much on their credit cards?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Maybe we should all vote for Robin Williams

[Saddle Bronc 124]

Maybe we should all vote for Robin Williams

How about Dustin Hoffman (since he was the pioneer)?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Maybe we should all vote for Robin Williams

How about Dustin Hoffman (since he was the pioneer)?

My vote is with Patrick McGoohan (vote for Number Six) but he's too old to run. Not US born either... So he's out.

[Saddle Bronc 124]

Maybe we should all vote for Robin Williams

How about Dustin Hoffman (since he was the pioneer)?

My vote is with Patrick McGoohan (vote for Number Six) but he's too old to run. Not US born either... So he's out.

Wrong! He was born in Astoria, NY.

(admittedly, they haven't had a 80+ president yet, though they have voted in one of 70+--Reagan in second term)

[rclouse 0]

/hotlinked

[almaty 19]

/hotlinked

great combination of liberal and conservative thinkers...