Neighborhood Bully
24th August 2005, 16:55
National Security
Q Mr. President, Dr. Rice again -- quoting your future Secretary of State, wrote in "Foreign Affairs Magazine" in 2000, outlining what a potential Bush administration foreign policy would be, talked about things like security interests, free trade pacts, confronting rogue nations, dealing with great powers like China and Russia -- but promotion of democracy and liberty around the world was not a signature element of that prescription. I'm wondering what's changed since 2000 that has made this such an important element of your foreign policy.
THE PRESIDENT: I'm the President; I set the course of this administration. I believe freedom is necessary in order to promote peace, Peter. I haven't seen the article you're referring to. I can assure you that Condi Rice agrees with me that it's necessary to promote democracy. I haven't seen the article, I didn't read the article. Obviously, it wasn't part of her job interview. (Laughter.) Condi is a firm believer in democracy.
Yes, sir.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/rele...20050126-3.html
So. . . George Bush's national security tutor, er, I mean, "adviser" wrote an article in the prestigious "Foreign Affairs" journal in 2000 outlining what the Bush Administration national security policy would look like if Bush were elected . . . but Bush says he never read the article. ( http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20000...l-interest.html ) Can that be possible? Does the President really hate reading so much that he never bothered to read the article? Or is he lying? Did he actually read the article, but just didn't want to comment on it?
1965 Voting Rights Act
"WASHINGTON -- While courageous American troops and Iraqi civilians risk life and limb for the right to vote in war-torn Iraq, President Bush has made the 43-member Congressional Black Caucus, currently all Democrats, more than a little nervous about how much he values voting rights back here at home.
According to various eyewitnesses at a private meeting in the White House Cabinet Room last week, the president was characteristically cordial, yet remarkably non-committal in responding to a wide range of questions, mostly about racial disparities concerning such issues as employment, education, health care and legal rights.
But the most "mind-boggling moment," in the words of Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (D-Mo.), came after Rep. Jesse L. Jackson Jr. (D-Ill.) asked the president, "Do we have your support in extending and strengthening the 1965 Voting Rights Act when it comes up for renewal in 2007?"
The president responded, according to witnesses, in a way that made caucus jaws drop: He did not know enough about that particular law to respond to it, he said, and that he would deal with the legislation when it comes up."
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...ll=chi-news-col
What? The President doesn't know enough about the 1965 Voting Rights Act to have an opinion? The 1965 Voting Rights Act? One of two key pieces of legislation to come out of the Civil Rights movement in the 60's, and the President doesn't have a working knowledge of it? Again, is he lying? Did he just not want to talk about whether he supports renewing it? Or is he truly ignorant about it?
Q Mr. President, Dr. Rice again -- quoting your future Secretary of State, wrote in "Foreign Affairs Magazine" in 2000, outlining what a potential Bush administration foreign policy would be, talked about things like security interests, free trade pacts, confronting rogue nations, dealing with great powers like China and Russia -- but promotion of democracy and liberty around the world was not a signature element of that prescription. I'm wondering what's changed since 2000 that has made this such an important element of your foreign policy.
THE PRESIDENT: I'm the President; I set the course of this administration. I believe freedom is necessary in order to promote peace, Peter. I haven't seen the article you're referring to. I can assure you that Condi Rice agrees with me that it's necessary to promote democracy. I haven't seen the article, I didn't read the article. Obviously, it wasn't part of her job interview. (Laughter.) Condi is a firm believer in democracy.
Yes, sir.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/rele...20050126-3.html
So. . . George Bush's national security tutor, er, I mean, "adviser" wrote an article in the prestigious "Foreign Affairs" journal in 2000 outlining what the Bush Administration national security policy would look like if Bush were elected . . . but Bush says he never read the article. ( http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20000...l-interest.html ) Can that be possible? Does the President really hate reading so much that he never bothered to read the article? Or is he lying? Did he actually read the article, but just didn't want to comment on it?
1965 Voting Rights Act
"WASHINGTON -- While courageous American troops and Iraqi civilians risk life and limb for the right to vote in war-torn Iraq, President Bush has made the 43-member Congressional Black Caucus, currently all Democrats, more than a little nervous about how much he values voting rights back here at home.
According to various eyewitnesses at a private meeting in the White House Cabinet Room last week, the president was characteristically cordial, yet remarkably non-committal in responding to a wide range of questions, mostly about racial disparities concerning such issues as employment, education, health care and legal rights.
But the most "mind-boggling moment," in the words of Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (D-Mo.), came after Rep. Jesse L. Jackson Jr. (D-Ill.) asked the president, "Do we have your support in extending and strengthening the 1965 Voting Rights Act when it comes up for renewal in 2007?"
The president responded, according to witnesses, in a way that made caucus jaws drop: He did not know enough about that particular law to respond to it, he said, and that he would deal with the legislation when it comes up."
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...ll=chi-news-col
What? The President doesn't know enough about the 1965 Voting Rights Act to have an opinion? The 1965 Voting Rights Act? One of two key pieces of legislation to come out of the Civil Rights movement in the 60's, and the President doesn't have a working knowledge of it? Again, is he lying? Did he just not want to talk about whether he supports renewing it? Or is he truly ignorant about it?