Jump to content

Do the shuffle!


Recommended Posts

I have been keeping an eye on this and I am suprised the amount of people resigning and at the time it is happening.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/04/19/mcclellan/index.html

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A shakeup in President Bush's administration widened Wednesday as White House press secretary Scott McClellan announced his resignation and a senior administration official said longtime Bush confidant Karl Rove will no longer oversee policy development.

GONE ARE ...

Scott McClellan

Karl Rove (changing roles within the Administration)

Andrew Card

there should be a liste of others, still looking for it.

The Bush Administration is going through some major changes, and I expect more to come. These are not the first but I think these are the most important changes to happen yet. And Karl Rove will focus on pilitics again to help the Republicans maintain their foothold in the Senate and Congress.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And on the same day; Kickbacks for Iraq contracts unveiled. I had to post a link from Al-Jazeera since apparently this story isn't important enough to post on cnn, nbc, fox etc..

**edit**

I had had to dig but I found an article on cbs as well.

Alot of people discredit Al Jazeera, but I go there now and then. Usually with one article you can check out other news sources and the articles will be there, but the links are usualy not 72pt CNN BReAKING NEWS font. but tucked away in a corner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alot of people discredit Al Jazeera, but I go there now and then. Usually with one article you can check out other news sources and the articles will be there, but the links are usualy not 72pt CNN BReAKING NEWS font. but tucked away in a corner.

I agree, I find Al Jazeera to be very balanced. I wish people who badmouth them would actually visit the website.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apparently, one of the people the White House has approached as a possible replacement for McClellan is FOX News Radio host Tony Snow. For Snow, it would be a lateral move.

That would be absolute comedy gold. But Bush will be the 'decider' on that one I assume.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been keeping an eye on this and I am suprised the amount of people resigning and at the time it is happening.

GONE ARE ...

Scott McClellan

Karl Rove (changing roles within the Administration)

Andrew Card

there should be a liste of others, still looking for it.

The Bush Administration is going through some major changes, and I expect more to come. These are not the first but I think these are the most important changes to happen yet. And Karl Rove will focus on pilitics again to help the Republicans maintain their foothold in the Senate and Congress.

- GH - In reality, the Bush White House, cabinet/secretary and deputy secretary levels have seen surprisingly little turn over in his more than five years in office, far less turnover than in the equivalent period of the Clinton administration. Here, you seem to be labouring to paint a negative picture of a bunch of panicky people jumping ship and all you can actually come up with is:

1/ After serving in the most high pressure and grinding job in any US administration, WH Chief of Staff, longer than anyone since Ike's CoS Sherman Adams in the 1950s, Andrew Card finally resigns to be replaced by an individual well regarded by senior members of both parties.

2/ The new CoS naturally decides to make some staff changes to make his job easier and accordingly he opts for a new Press Secretary and he does some minor tinkering including taking some responsbilities away from Rove and giving them to somebody else.

So according to you, among the more than 100 people of senior WH, secretary and deputy secretary level, the departure of two of these executive level personnel and the changing of the job content of two others is "a surprising amount" and at a strange time. Yes, it is surprising but only because of the comparatively small number of staff changes which is a reflection of Bush's characteristic loyalty but, in my view, may not be enough changes to inject the new thinking and approaches and energy that is an essential process of organizational renewal that all organizations should periodically undertake. No, the timing is not surprising because it is early in Bush's second term and the logical time for making such executive level staff changes is in the relatively early stages of the second term which is where the Bush administration is.

Perhaps you've been in the Canadian federal public sector where nobody is ever fired and nobody has their job content changed and if one executive out of a thousand is actually right sized or out placed or canned or make uncomfortable enough to want leave or leaves because he is fed up with the wrokload and pressures then the Ottawa psychiatrists do a landslide business for awhile as all the snivel serpants develop grrat feelings of anxiety and insecurity that they might actually be faced with having to go out and toil in the competitive market sector.

Or maybe you've watched too many episodes of The West Wing, that left-lib Hollywood version of how things work in Washington. If so, let me remind you that while the Democrats will always win on The West Wing they generally and deservedly lose in real presidential elections involving real voters with just a single Democratic president elected twice in the past 61 years while the Republicans have elected four presidents twice in the same period.

In summary, no story here. Best to move on to try manufacturing another more convincing anti-Bush tale.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Realistically, Bush's administration is currently failed. It lacks support of lawmakers, it lacks support of the population.

Time to bring in new faces or face being a lame duck.

I am a very conservative person, but I just haven't bought this love-in with GWB.

The Iraq war I agreed with, it is our obligation to liberate those oppressed and don't have the rights we do. I didn't agree with how Bush approached the war, I don't agree with his lack of a plan while there. I don't agree with the ignorance of other issues, like Sudan. Domestic spying concerns me, though I'm open to it if it is being use as stated, and I haven't seen convincing evidence to the contrary.

I agree with tax cuts, always. I don't agree with the increased spending of the White House. I don't agree with financing wars with debt.

These are just a few examples. It's not just the left that is unimpressed with Bush. I approach my dislike in a much more pragmatic way then the left, who seem to discredit things merely because Bush did them. He's done some great things, but he is an incompetent leader.

There are some great ideas the Republicans have. But the right people aren't in the positions to make the good choices for the US right now. Maybe a little suffle will see more sense and pragmatism in the White House? We are stuck with the Bush admin. for a few more years so we might as well make the most of it.

I'm optimistic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Goss is gone

CIA Director Porter Goss resigned unexpectedly today, leaving behind a spy agency still battling to recover from the scars of intelligence failures before America's worst terrorist attack and faulty information that formed the U.S. rationale for invading Iraq.

Is it part of the "essential process of organizational renewal" for the head of the freaking CIA to resign without notice and without a successor after less than two years on the job?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awesome BD, I was going to post this myself in the last hour. Tried to finish the post in notepad, came back refreshed abd BOOM, you posted.

What is in store for Goss now? What company will he get on with? This I am curious to know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are already a few rumors running about that Goss resigned because he may be implicated in the Duke Cunningham/HookerGate problem. Another rumor has it that Goss, a former congressman from Florida, intends to run for the GOP nomination for US Senate. The current GOP frontrunner, Katherine Harris (aka, Cruella deVille from the 2000 Florida Recount Debacle), has been running a disastrous campaign and is viewed by even those in the GOP as a write-off. The GOP has been unsuccessful at finding a replacement for Harris. Goss would need to declare his candidacy by next week to make it onto the GOP primary ballot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic....
Wow, that's original. Never heard that one before. :rolleyes:
But Bush will be the 'decider' on that one I assume
I was away for a while, can someone refresh me as to why the "decider" statement was note worthy?
Is it part of the "essential process of organizational renewal" for the head of the freaking CIA to resign without notice and without a successor after less than two years on the job?
How do you know it was without notice? Did Karl Rove invite you into the Oval Office again to participate in another meeting? Damn you, I'd kill for one of those invites. Oh, and apparently, he was asked to resign, it wasn't voluntary.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Black Dog)

Re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic....

..

Wow, that's original. Never heard that one before

How about the chairs on the Hindenburg?

I was away for a while, can someone refresh me as to why the "decider" statement was note worthy?

A new recent bushism. check out http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/04/18/rumsfeld/

How do you know it was without notice? Did Karl Rove invite you into the Oval Office again to participate in another meeting? Damn you, I'd kill for one of those invites. Oh, and apparently, he was asked to resign, it wasn't voluntary.

Re resigned on his own will I guess, (but was probably preassured from other people)

Micheal Manley will hewad up the CIA (former subordinate of Negroponte and former NSA director)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A new recent bushism
Thanks for the link. However, I'm still a little confused. How is it a Bushism? It's an actual word/term.

The word just sounds odd. 'I am the decider.' to me sounds really dumb. 'I am the one who makes the decisions.' sounds alot better to me. I had never heard anyone use 'decider' untill Bush said it. I learn something new everyday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not really the word "decider", it's how it came across. It would have been stronger for Bush to have said, "I decide and my decision is that Rumsfeld stays." By whining, "I'm the decider," Bush might as well have been using the childhood chestnut, "you're not the boss of me."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,742
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    CrazyCanuck89
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • paradox34 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • DACHSHUND went up a rank
      Rookie
    • CrazyCanuck89 earned a badge
      First Post
    • aru earned a badge
      First Post
    • CrazyCanuck89 earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...