1
   

Being Frank And Honest With The President

 
 
Reply Thu 10 May, 2007 08:07 am
what a waste of time Laughing

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A group of Republican lawmakers warned President George W. Bush this week at a private White House meeting that conditions in Iraq must improve quickly or he will lose more support from his own party, The New York Times reported on Wednesday.

Eleven moderate House Republicans were unusually candid with Bush in a meeting that lasted more than an hour, telling him public support for the war was crumbling in their swing districts, the Times said, sighting participants in the Tuesday session.

NBC Nightly News quoted an unnamed participant in the meeting as saying that they had an "unvarnished conversation" with Bush about the war.

The delegation, headed by Mark Kirk of Illinois and Charles Dent of Pennsylvania, told Bush: "We need candor. We need honesty," and that the White House had lost its credibility on the war, NBC reported.

The White House declined comment on the discussions.

"I'm not going to comment on what the president may or may not have said in a meeting with members. He meets regularly with members of Congress and asks for their unvarnished opinions and frank advice," said spokesman Tony Fratto.

[color=red]My guess is he held his breath until he turned blue and then promptly ignorerd everything they said. :wink: [/color]
The session in the residential section of the White House demonstrated the grave unease many Republicans feel about the war, even as they continue to stand with Bush against Democratic efforts to force a troop withdrawal through a funding measure, The New York Times said.

"It was a tough meeting in terms of people being as frank as they possibly could about their districts and their feelings about where the American people are on the war," said Rep. Ray LaHood of Illinois, who took part in the meeting. "It was a no-holds-barred meeting."

Lawmakers said that Bush and others at the meeting, including Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, political adviser Karl Rove and National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley, appeared to appreciate the political reality facing Republicans who will be on the ballot next year, the newspaper said.

Dent, who helped arrange the meeting, told the Times the lawmakers wanted to convey the frustration and impatience with the war they are hearing from voters.

"We had a very frank conversation about the situation in Iraq," he said.

Even so, the Republicans who attended the meeting indicated that they would stand with Bush for now by opposing the latest Democratic proposal for financing the war.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 461 • Replies: 8
No top replies

 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 May, 2007 10:57 am
None Of Republican Moderates voted for Iraq Bill
None Of Republican Moderates Who "Warned" Bush Voted For Iraq Bill
By Greg Sargent

Here's a list of the "moderate" Republican members of Congress who made a big show of parading into President Bush's office a few days ago to inform him that the American public wants out of Iraq:

Charles W. Dent, Pennsylvania
Tom Davis, Virginia
Ray LaHood, Illinois
John Boehner
Mark Kirk, Illinois
Jim Gerlach, Pennsylvania
James T. Walsh, New York
Jo Ann Emerson, Missouri
Jim Ramstad, Minnesota
Mike Castle, Delaware
Todd Platts, Pennsylvania

Guess how many of them voted yesterday for the House short-term bill that would tie funding to progress of the war? Exactly zero.

This isn't all that surprising, and doesn't say a great deal, but it does remind us that we shouldn't take the protestations of these GOP moderates all that seriously until they actually do something in practice, anything at all, to rein in this President and his war.

Update: It's worth adding that there may be a very good reason those GOPers leaked word of the "private" meeting with Bush: It sent a message back to their districts saying, in effect, that they're working hard to get this President to see reality -- really they are!
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 May, 2007 11:06 am
Is that a direct copy and paste of a journalistic source ? ! ? ! ?

Quote:
Eleven moderate House Republicans were unusually candid with Bush in a meeting that lasted more than an hour, telling him public support for the war was crumbling in their swing districts, the Times said, sighting participants in the Tuesday session. (emphasis added)


So the New York Times "sighted" the participants. Did they fly up to New York after the meeting, and the New York Times "sighted" them walking in Times Square? Was that all of the NYT staff? (Hey, Fred, come look, i just sighted some participants of today's White House meeting ! ! !) Maybe just some of the Times staff "sighted" them.

Perhaps Reuters meant that the New York Times cited participants in the meeting.

Journalism has fallen on hard times.
0 Replies
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 May, 2007 11:10 am
Setanta
Setanta wrote:
Is that a direct copy and paste of a journalistic source ? ! ? ! ?

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 May, 2007 11:11 am
Setanta wrote:
Is that a direct copy and paste of a journalistic source ? ! ? ! ?

Quote:
Eleven moderate House Republicans were unusually candid with Bush in a meeting that lasted more than an hour, telling him public support for the war was crumbling in their swing districts, the Times said, sighting participants in the Tuesday session. (emphasis added)


So the New York Times "sighted" the participants. Did they fly up to New York after the meeting, and the New York Times "sighted" them walking in Times Square? Was that all of the NYT staff? (Hey, Fred, come look, i just sighted some participants of today's White House meeting ! ! !) Maybe just some of the Times staff "sighted" them.

Perhaps Reuters meant that the New York Times cited participants in the meeting.

Journalism has fallen on hard times.


True enough - their profits are down by half, maybe they couldn't afford a good copy editor Smile

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 May, 2007 11:13 am
Your response to my question is a non sequitur, Aunt Bee. I don't know what you think it means, but it doesn't answer my question.

Bear, do you have a Reuters source for that?
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 May, 2007 11:18 am
Setanta wrote:
Your response to my question is a non sequitur, Aunt Bee. I don't know what you think it means, but it doesn't answer my question.

Bear, do you have a Reuters source for that?


Daily Mail - without mentioning reuters.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 May, 2007 11:20 am
Well, i'd have to refer to what Cyclo wrote, and suggest that journalism has fallen on such hard times that no one can afford any longer to employ copy editors.
0 Replies
 
squinney
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 May, 2007 11:30 am
Obviously, they were seen but not heard.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Being Frank And Honest With The President
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 05/17/2025 at 06:22:40