Expert quality leadership from the administration that "CAN'T REMEMBER ANYTHING"

Here are quotes from respectively the Speaker of the House, Dennis Hastert, and the office of the Secretary of State, Condi Rice.

If they are so smart and capable.......Why can't they remember anything....

both reports and quotes come from today's news.

Just a couple of days ago she was ripping Clinton claiming that the Bush administration was at least as active between Jan -Sept '01 as had been Clinton in the prior administration.

She remembers some stuff and not other stuff.

GIVE ME A BREAK!!!! WHERE IS THE BEEF?????


They never never remember the bad stuff. Wonder why that occurs?

 

It's amazing how some forget. And how some continue to push something that backfires in their face.

 

Well GTech....that reference is a mirror image of an earlier Republican political directive that said something like Go UGLY all the time...spend about $45 million on negative attack ads.

But my original post copies two quotes from news stories. Not polical ads paid for by parties creepingly chasing money to post their attacks

so how can these smart people forget such important stuff?

 

Are you presuming they have forgotten something?

There are no political ads here. A fine red herring to be sure. It seems democrats may have known about this too, but sat on it till election time for the purposes of playing politics.

Bob Woodward openly admitted that was his goal with his book.

Sounds like politics to me. It is amazing how some forget.

I mentioned in that post it would backfire. I see my prediction is coming true. Thank you!

 

GTech:

Those two citations/links have zero to do with the fact that two highly placed republicans FORGOT/ or couldn't remember about critical points and events that question their leadership qualities.

But first to your links:

With regard to the first one, it is an historical fact that both democrat and republicans have been caught in a number of sex scandals over many years.

I read something interesting recently, (can't find it) that listed many sex scandals over many years by members of both parties. The article pointed out that the Republicans have in total suffered more than the Democrats. The article and a person it quoted suggested that the reason for Republicans suffering more was the hypocracy issue in that Republicans claim to be the party of family values.

Regardless, those that act like Foley should not be in office no matter the party.

With regard to the 2nd link: So the democrats are in high attack mode on all examples of republican mistakes/errors/ etc.

Cripes, the dems are simply learning from the masters, the republicans who are better at attack politics and been doing it longer with a greater impact than the dems.

Both parties are engaging in attack politics. In fact it is big time. I'd be surprised if substantial policy is discussed by anyone between now and the elections.

Forgetting all this I was pointing out that two members of the Republican party; one a critical policy decision maker in the administration and one the speaker of the house,

Conveniently couldn't remember things that staff members acknowledged. the things they couldn't remember point to serious questions about their leadership qualities.

Just a week ago Condi Rice was engaged in a debate with Clinton about who did or did not do more to stem and control Al-Queda. Immediately thereafter it was revealed that the highest people in the CIA gave her a stern and serious warning......and she can't even remember it.

That ought to be looked at. Especially if she is going to get into a debate about how active she and her administration have been in defending Americans.

If Hastert knew that Foley was sending suggestive emails to pages much earlier and did nothing it questions his judgement and leadership qualities.

If he did nothing it would seem he values republicans more than the health and well being of young (16 year old) boys.

 

One person's viewpoint on the issue: Richard Viguerie, a well known conservative activist:

 

So, like the plame scandal where you were sure the administration was guilty, but just couldn't prove it, you are sure they either forgot, or couldn't remember, but not sure which? That sounds pretty sure to me. Or, it never happened in the first place, which is why they don't remember.

I can appreciate your desire for guilt here, despite not knowing the details as acknowledged above. Do you feel that's objective? I perceive you as a more objective person than that.

I believe we can agree on this. This has been a point I've tried to remind others. In this case, we have someone who allegedly has sent emails *only* to an underage staffer. In the case of democrats, they have someone who *actually* had sex with an underage staffer, then to prove how responsible they are, Clinton commuted his sentence (in other words, let him go), and now the same guy is trying to run for office again as a democrat. What message was it that democrats wanted to send home? Not to mention, another democrat was guilty in the late 80s, ignored it, continued running for office and is still in the party today.

I think it's fair to point out the hypocrisy, don't you?

Can we conclude from this that democrats do not have family values? It's an interesting twist to suggest that it hurts republicans more because democrats have less or no values. There was a time when democrats did have values. Those days are long gone.

So you take offense with republicans, but not democrats. When have they not engaged in attack politics? That is politics.

Given the topic of the post, an attack on republicans where you are not sure if they can't remember, forgot (or the one left out) that it never happened at all, it seems trickle down "attack politics" have arrived here too.

But entertaining the idea that they never happend in the first place, is out of the question? So anyone can lob a claim out and it doesn't matter if it's not factual in the first place, if they can't remember something that never happened, then they are guilty?

Just magically revealed? Someone said it, so it must be true.

I believe the general notion has been that they were as active at that early point as the Clinton administration. To assume they did less is to assume the Clinton administration did as well.

Interestingly enough, Hillary was on record a few weeks ago saying:

Yet we learn that Hillary was in fact, incorrect and that Bill was given this information. Do you believe Hillary should apologize?

Kind of reminds me of the plame incident. Guilty, guilty guilty. If anyone raises a question, no matter how ridiculous, they are guilty. Since no one seems to have anything more than hypothetical questions at this point, it seems like it would have more bite if there were some truth behind it, rather than attacking as the democrat playbook noted. You would ask no less of a democrat, no? Surely we wouldn't want to "plame" Hastert the way the Bush administration was "plamed?"

 

At a point in time when serious issues are being brought to the public eye, it is both ironic and troublesome when leaders either claim they can't remember about a critical issue, or they claim they didn't know about it, or they claim, they forgot it, or they make some other such claim.....ESPECIALLY when other sources DIRECTLY contest their claim....that they hope EXCUSES them from culpability.

Yesterday the irony was that 2 leaders in the Republican administration made these claims. One in the administration, one the Speaker of the House.

Two different issues. They both get to the nut of the quality of current Republican leadership of the country.

In the case of Condi Rice, the the quote referenced that IN FACT there was a meeting on July 10, 2001. The head of the CIA and his deputy are cited in Woodward's book that at that meeting they made it crystal clear that an Al-Queda threat was serious and imminent. They say that Rice didn't really respond.

Just the other day she responded to Clinton's infamous claims on Fox TV that he did a lot to fight Al-Queda. She then claimed the Bush administration did as much or more than Clinton.

Unrelated to the Clinton issue on Fox, the Woodward book comes out and points specifically to an item that negated what she said in response to Clinton and Condi Rice says she can't remember.

Her office then had to issue a statement acknowledging that there was a meeting.

So the question comes up. Are her claims justified or not. Is her memory selective. Do her statements ring true.

On the same day, Hastert claims that he didn't know about Foley's emails with young pages. Three sources within the Republican party claim he did know about these emails significantly earlier and did nothing about it.

So on the same day we are faced with a critical leader whose very claims are debated by people in his own party.

Who can we believe.

As to the sex stuff itself with Foley. I referenced an article which was a pretty even handed description of sex "crimes" by both democrats and republicans over time. The simple fact is that members of both parties have been involved in such issues.

Of interest... the article merely cited that Republicans have seemingly suffered worse then democrats. The article suggested that this might have been because of a perception of hypocracy.

Nothing more meant about the article. I wish I could find it. There are quite a few examples of people from both parties who have been "caught".

Suffice it to say there are rotten apples in both parties.

That little piece of news has nothing to do with multiple excuse claims of not remembering critical news when your own staff has to site that in fact you were given the news at an earlier date.

Are we seeing some examples of attack politics by democrats? Yeah, I'd say we are.

Is it justifiable to bring up the issues?

In view of 3 recent murders in schools, in view of rising questions about internet porn, and in view of general issues of decency, when an adult male is engaging in internet sexual fantasies with 16 year olds....I'd say that is a serious moral issue that faces American's every day....and one that people are seriously concerned about.

In light of that it is appropriate to question when Hastert knew about the emails and how much he knew.

If he knew about them early and he knew about them in detail...then one has to question the quality of his leadership.

We will find out more about this over time.

With regard to Condi Rice remembering about this meeting with Tenet and his colleague....that also is important.

This week the President is campaigning raising money and he is directly attacking Democrats calling them the Party of Cut and Run...and so on.

The NIE report states that one of 4 reasons for the rise in terrorism (not the drop) is the war in Iraq. That suggests the very war itself is making us less safe not safer.

There are increasing numbers of sources and questions coming from people inside the government, but are not members of the quartet of Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Rove...or Bush's main foreign policy advisor, Condi Rice.

They question virtually everything that the administration has been saying about the war in Iraq.

Why did we go in the first place? Did the administration disregard intelligence? Did it disregard all the statements that qualified various claims? Did it cherry pick intelligence from Iraqi sources that were in dispute with Saddam Hussein and much to gain by our attacking them?

Did it manufacture the evidence against Hussein to create a war? Did they invent or overstate the case that Hussein had ongoing real connections with Al-Queda?

Did Bush, as he repeatedly said, provide the troops that the military requested? Did the administration take the threat of Al-Queda seriously, prior to 9/11.

These are just a few of the questions which the American public deserve to have answered honestly

So when the former head of the CIA and his associate claim they gave the strongest warning to Condi Rice about Al-Queda....and she claims she can't even remember it.....that is a valid question with regard to the specific issues about how well the current administration can be regarded as to its efforts to protect the American public. Its a big issue.

Now are the Democrats playing hardball with these issues also. Yeah.

Do the two people who can't remember or forget about these big issues be questioned.
Absolutely. We are dealing with real lives here. These are serious issues and the irony is that two people couldn't remember squat on the same day.

As far as Hillary....Plamegate and the rest....it is late but I'll get to it later

 

Seems like the first half of your response is a rehash. I still contend the third option that if something didin't happen, one cannot have memory of it. Just because someone asserts something happened, doesn't mean it did. Nor does it mean the person accused is avoiding the issue by pretending to forget it.

As for the Foley incident, this is unfolding into a huge scandal that is backfiring on democrats. In another post, I noted this would happen. Last night's drudge headlines show the page in question was 18 at the time of the supposed emails. Sources of the lead are unfolding and I think this is going to come crashing down on democrats in a way they never imagined. News is still unfolding.

As for your questions posed, I believe many of these have been answered time and time again. Continuously raising them because they aren't the answers one wants to hear doesn't make them any more valid. There's only so many times a question can be answered.

I've posted this link dozens of times and every time it still holds true. One cannot suggest Bush lied about Iraq time and time again and ignore what others before he was ever in office said and did. Not if facts matter. If facts matter, this is a moot issue.

 

LOL, thats a good one

 

I know, it's all over Drudge and unfolding even more. Are you watching it too? Dems have buried themselves with this one

 

Hastert admits guilt and still refuses to take responsibility (by resigning):

 

Did I miss the part where he "admitted guilt?"

Watching him speak on Fox right now. Did not see him mention he was guilty at all. Said they take responsibility because the buck stops here. That's not admitting guilt.

Work on your credibility please. A poor job of interpreting the facts in your source.

 

I blame the Arizona public school system.

 

If he'd done nothing wrong he'd have nothing to feel "deeply sorry" about.

 

Funny, I just blame your mom

 

You clearly have never held a position of responsibility and have no concept of how responsibility works.

For example, I am an employer. If one of my employees goes on a client site and acts inappropriately, I am "deeply sorry" about it -- even though I have not personally done anything wrong.

Moreover, the final responsibility is mine. This is much more true in my case than in the Foley affair. Foley did not work for Hastert, he "worked" for the people of Florida.

 

So you admit to twisting the facts when clearly he "insisted he had done nothing wrong?"

Proving once again, facts do not matter. Parents should teach their children about credibility, don't you think?

 

Old men should take their medication, don't you think?

 

Old men wouldn't have to take medication if young angry white males with low IQs had proper home training