jorgelito |
06-05-2008 01:39 PM |
Oh sure, I definitely agree with you - the media (not without blame, just not sole blame), the administration are not mutually exclusive in responsibility.
Here is a sample of what I am referring too.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080605/...ntelligence_dc
Quote:
Bush misused Iraq intelligence: Senate report
By Randall Mikkelsen Thu Jun 5, 1:23 PM ET
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President George W. Bush and his top policymakers misstated Saddam Hussein's links to terrorism and ignored doubts among intelligence agencies about Iraq's arms programs as they made a case for war, the Senate intelligence committee reported on Thursday.
ADVERTISEMENT
The report shows an administration that "led the nation to war on false premises," said the committee's Democratic Chairman, Sen. John Rockefeller of West Virginia. Several Republicans on the committee protested its findings as a "partisan exercise."
The committee studied major speeches by Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and other officials in advance of the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in March 2003, and compared key assertions with intelligence available at the time.
Statements that Iraq had a partnership with al Qaeda were wrong and unsupported by intelligence, the report said.
It said that Bush's and Cheney's assertions that Saddam was prepared to arm terrorist groups with weapons of mass destruction for attacks on the United States contradicted available intelligence.
Such assertions had a strong resonance with a U.S. public, still reeling after al Qaeda's September 11, 2001, attacks on the United States. Polls showed that many Americans believed Iraq played a role in the attacks, even long after Bush acknowledged in September 2003 that there was no evidence Saddam was involved.
The report also said administration prewar statements on Iraq's weapons programs were backed up in most cases by available U.S. intelligence, but officials failed to reflect internal debate over those findings, which proved wrong.
PUBLIC CAMPAIGN
The long-delayed Senate study supported previous reports and findings that the administration's main cases for war -- that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and was spreading them to terrorists -- were inaccurate and deeply flawed.
"The president and his advisors undertook a relentless public campaign in the aftermath of the (September 11) attacks to use the war against al Qaeda as a justification for overthrowing Saddam Hussein," Rockefeller said in written commentary on the report.
"Representing to the American people that the two had an operational partnership and posed a single, indistinguishable threat was fundamentally misleading and led the nation to war on false premises."
A statement to Congress by then-Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld that the Iraqi government hid weapons of mass destruction in facilities underground was not backed up by intelligence information, the report said. Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon said Rumsfeld's comments should be investigated further, but he stopped short of urging a criminal probe.
The committee voted 10-5 to approve the report, with two Republican lawmakers supporting it. Sen. Christopher Bond of Missouri and three other Republican panel members denounced the study in an attached dissent.
"The committee finds itself once again consumed with political gamesmanship," the Republicans said. The effort to produce the report "has indeed resulted in a partisan exercise." They said, however, that the report demonstrated that Bush administration statements were backed by intelligence and "it was the intelligence that was faulty."
White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said: "We had the intelligence that we had, fully vetted, but it was wrong. We certainly regret that and we've taken measures to fix it."
PUBLIC SUPPORT
U.S. public opinion on the war, supportive at first, has soured, contributing to a dive in Bush's popularity.
The conflict is likely to be a key issue in the November presidential election between Republican John McCain, who supports the war, and Democrat Barack Obama, who opposed the war from the start and says he would aim to pull U.S. troops out within 16 months of taking office in January 2009.
Rockefeller has announced his support for Obama.
The administration's record in making its case for Iraq has also been cited by critics of Bush's get-tough policy on Iran. They accuse Bush of overstating the potential threat of Iran's nuclear program in order to justify the possible use of force.
A second report by the committee faulted the administration's handling of December 2001 Rome meetings between defense officials and Iranian informants, which dealt with the Iran issue. It said department officials failed to share intelligence from the meeting, which Rockefeller said demonstrated a "fundamental disdain" for other intelligence agencies.
|
Folks, it's starting to look like Hillary may not be in consideration nor is she looking to be the Veep.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080605/ap_on_el_pr/clinton
Quote:
By BETH FOUHY, Associated Press Writer 44 minutes ago
WASHINGTON - Hillary Rodham Clinton on Thursday disavowed efforts by some supporters who have urged Barack Obama to choose her as his running mate. The push-back came a day after the former first lady said she would end her quest for the Democratic nomination and endorse the Illinois senator.
ADVERTISEMENT
"She is not seeking the vice presidency, and no one speaks for her but her," communications director Howard Wolfson said. "The choice here is Senator Obama's and his alone."
Clinton was planning an event in Washington Saturday to thank supporters and urge them to back Obama's candidacy. But as she was bowing out of the race, supporters in Congress and elsewhere were ramping up a campaign to pressure him to put her on the ticket in the No. 2 spot.
Bob Johnson, the billionaire founder of Black Entertainment Television and a Clinton supporter, sent a letter to the Congressional Black Caucus Wednesday urging the group to encourage Obama to choose Clinton as his vice presidential pick. He said he was doing so with her blessing.
Obama is seeking to become the first black president.
Clinton has told other friends and supporters she would be willing to be Obama's running mate. But her immediate task is bringing her own presidential bid to a close.
In an e-mail to supporters, the New York senator said she "will be speaking on Saturday about how together we can rally the party behind Senator Obama. The stakes are too high and the task before us too important to do otherwise."
Clinton expressed the same sentiment in a conference call with 40 members of her national finance committee, whom she urged to begin raising money for Obama and for the Democratic National Committee.
"She was in good spirits and totally supportive, without qualification, of Senator Obama and his campaign," finance co-chairman Alan Patricof said of the call.
It was a shift in tone by the former first lady, who announced 17 months ago that she was "in it to win it." Many of her supporters want her as the vice presidential candidate, in their minds a "dream ticket" that would bring Obama her enthusiastic legions and broaden his appeal to white and working-class voters.
But Obama indicated he intends to take his time making a decision.
"We're not going to be rushed into it. I don't think Senator Clinton expects a quick decision and I don't even know that she's necessarily interested in that," Obama told NBC in an interview.
Clinton's move to formally declare that she is backing the Illinois senator came after Democratic congressional colleagues made clear they had no stomach for a protracted intraparty battle. Now that Obama has secured the 2,118 delegates necessary to clinch the nomination, Clinton had little choice but to end her quest, and sooner rather than later.
Some of Clinton's closest supporters — the nearly two dozen House Democrats from her home state of New York — switched their endorsements to Obama Thursday.
The public announcement from the 23 New York followed two days of private phone calls weighing her options.
"She was just as spunky as ever," Rep. Charlie Rangel said of Clinton's mood on the calls, as her friends and supporters urged her to come to a decision "sooner rather than later."
Many of the lawmakers said it was important for them, as New Yorkers who are close to Clinton and helped launch her presidential bid, to work together to repair some of the rifts in the party.
"We're Democrats. Dammit to hell we fight. When it's over, we come together and go out there to win," said Rangel, the dean of the New York delegation.
The New Yorkers, said Rep. Gregory Meeks, have a duty "to lead this transition" to full party support of Obama.
Another of Clinton's most prominent supporters, Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland, also announced his "wholehearted and enthusiastic support" for Obama Thursday.
The move to end her campaign came Tuesday, when Clinton told House Democrats during a private conference call that she would get behind Obama's candidacy and congratulate him for gathering the necessary delegates to be the party's nominee.
The only degree of uncertainty was how. Clinton is exploring options to retain her delegates and promote her issues, including a signature call for universal health care.
The announcement closed an epic five-month nominating battle pitting the first serious female candidate against the most viable black contender ever.
Obama on Tuesday night secured the delegates needed to clinch the Democratic nomination. But Clinton stopped short of acknowledging that milestone, defiantly insisting she was better positioned to defeat McCain in November.
"What does Hillary want? What does she want?" Clinton asked, hours after telling supporters she'd be open to joining Obama as his vice presidential running mate.
But by Wednesday, other Democrats made it abundantly clear they wanted something too: a swift end to the often bitter nominating contest.
Her decision to acquiesce caught many in her campaign by surprise and left them scrambling to finalize the logistics and specifics behind her campaign departure.
|
You know, I think there are plenty of other areas in which Hillary can serve and do very well actually. A cabinet position certainly but I kind of like her in the Senate. Maybe even as Senate Majority Leader. I think that would suit her well. Attorney General is another possible position. I don't think Supreme Court Justice would be good for her at all.
The Dems really need to secure their positions in Congress if Obama is to have success in the White House. To me, the Congressional placements will be the most interesting thing to watch this November. I would like to see more independents, 3rd party members get elected too.
|