Two Retired Generals Denounce Former Vice President Cheney

It’s not every day that retired generals denounce a Vice President. But two distinguished military leaders felt compelled to speak out against Mr. Cheney’s support of torture, in an op-ed in today’s Miami Herald.

There's more...

Top Military Officers Endorse Clinton

March 2, 2008
During a conference call with the Clinton campaign Sunday, moderated by Clinton's National Security Director Lee Feinstein (with Howard Wolfson), flag officer after flag officer offered their unqualified endorsements of Hillary Clinton for Commander-in-Chief. It was one testimony after another from these fine career military men and women who know first hand what it takes to be the boss.

The flag officers on the call yesterday, all endorsing Hillary Clinton for Commander-in-Chief, included:

   General Wesley Clark
    Admiral William Owens
    General Johnnie E. Wilson
    Lt. Gen. Joe Ballard
    Lt. Gen. Claudia J. Kennedy
    Vice Admiral Joseph A. Sestak
    Lt. Gen. Frederick E. Vollrath
    Major General George A. Buskirk, Jr.
    Major General Paul D. Eaton
    Rear Admiral Stuart Platt
    Rear Admiral David Stone
    Major General Antonio M. Taguba
    Brigadier General Michael Dunn
    Brigadier General Evelyn "Pat" Foote
    Brigadier General John M. Watkins, Jr.
    Brigadier General Jack Yeager
    Former Secretary of the Army and Veterans Affairs Togo West
    Former Secretary of the Navy, John Dalton sh/military-flag-officers-si_b_89495.htm l

There's more...

Listening to the generals?

   Bush keeps telling us that he is listening to the generals and the Democrats are trying to micromanage the war.  This would be a winning point for the President if he did not very selectively appoint the generals he supposedly listens to.  The fact is that the flag leadership of this war has been changed by Mr. Bush to reflect his policies not established military doctrine.  
  It required only one Chief of Staff, General George C. Marshall, to win WWII.  Might Bush's revolving door of Chiefs of Staff have something to do with the progress of this war and its going on longer than WWII?  
  Bush selects the generals who echo what he wants to hear, which is the prerogative of a Commander in Chief, but contradicts the charge he levels at the Democrats.  It is really Mr. Bush who has micromanaged this war from day one.  Bush would like for us to think he is listening to the generals but they are just telling him what he wants them to say.  Can we blame the Democrats for wanting to micromanage the war when the President only listen to the generals who tell him what he want to hear...especially when the war is going so badly?  

There's more...

Bush getting no takers for war chief job

 Bush wants someone to run his wars?  What's wrong with running them himself?  After all he is "the decider." We have a Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to debate policy and do photo-ops and a Secretary of Defense to order the troops into combat.  What are we looking for here -- another general to ignore or another general to blame for the consequences of ignoring the generals?   Sounds to me like we have a president who wants to go down in history as a "decider" but doesn't want to be accountable to history for his decisions.  Wanna be another Truman, Mr. Bush?  Then the buck has to stop at your desk.  Stop looking for a scapegoat and do your job!

There's more...



Don Imus is now challenging the Trent Lott record for number of apologies. He has apologized daily on his show and in conversations with Al Sharpton and many others.
With the media paying undue and hyped attention to this story, his opportunities to apologize will be endless.

Imus needed to acknowledge his guilt for his thoughtless, reprehensible remark, but other than that, his sincere apology should be to the Rutgers basketball players whom he gratuitously insulted. We don't know what he may have done with respect to them or to Rutgers, but scholarship or other funds might not be a bad idea.

To put the matter in perspective, remember that a large part of his shtick is the cutting remark, often a bit offensive. He trades insults with his guests and attacks
injustice with relentless criticism. Although close to the line, his comments are not really serious, such as when he called Governor Bill Richardson a "fat sissy" and the New York Knicks "chest-thumping pimps". Also, Imus constantly refers to Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld as "war criminals", although here he may be serious.

None of this excuses his Rutgers remark and, as Imus has said, he has been "humiliated". A two week suspension may be appropriate but cancellation of his program would not. His show is usually entertaining, it supports good charitable work, and it provides thoughtful, strong comment on events by Imus and his
intelligent, influential guests.

And when generals and other high officials get away with reprimands or less for such actions as permitting Abu Ghraib or lying about Pat Tillman or Iraq's connection to 9/11 or nuclear materials, cancellation of Imus in the Morning would be overkill.
    from Homer

There's more...


Advertise Blogads