kallend 2,182 #1 December 27, 2006 From Insight (the self-proclaimed "Hottest Conservative News Site"): Former Secretary of State James Baker was involved in a cover-up of illegal trading by his law firm with the regime of Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein, according to a former contractor who did work for Mr. Baker’s firm. He said Mr. Baker used non-Americans to help acquire funds from Iraq in violation of the United Nations embargo and U.S. law. James Baker, a Texan, held senior positions in the Ford, Reagan, and the G.H.W. Bush administrations and was appointed by G.W. Bush to be Special Presidential Envoy.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #2 December 27, 2006 QuoteFrom Insight (the self-proclaimed "Hottest Conservative News Site"): Former Secretary of State James Baker was involved in a cover-up of illegal trading by his law firm with the regime of Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein, according to a former contractor who did work for Mr. Baker’s firm. He said Mr. Baker used non-Americans to help acquire funds from Iraq in violation of the United Nations embargo and U.S. law. James Baker, a Texan, held senior positions in the Ford, Reagan, and the G.H.W. Bush administrations and was appointed by G.W. Bush to be Special Presidential Envoy. Yes, and wasn't it brilliant of Bush to appoint someone who's credibility was suspect so the ISG, who's recommendations Bush disapproved of, but Dems lapped up, would be seen as invalid, allowing Bush to shrug them off, plan for the Surge, and hand the Dems. another defeat? Brilliant, I tell ya. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,182 #3 December 27, 2006 QuoteQuoteFrom Insight (the self-proclaimed "Hottest Conservative News Site"): Former Secretary of State James Baker was involved in a cover-up of illegal trading by his law firm with the regime of Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein, according to a former contractor who did work for Mr. Baker’s firm. He said Mr. Baker used non-Americans to help acquire funds from Iraq in violation of the United Nations embargo and U.S. law. James Baker, a Texan, held senior positions in the Ford, Reagan, and the G.H.W. Bush administrations and was appointed by G.W. Bush to be Special Presidential Envoy. Yes, and wasn't it brilliant of Bush to appoint someone who's credibility was suspect so the ISG, who's recommendations Bush disapproved of, but Dems lapped up, would be seen as invalid, allowing Bush to shrug them off, plan for the Surge, and hand the Dems. another defeat? Brilliant, I tell ya. Yup - lifelong stealth Dem, that Baker guy!... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #4 December 27, 2006 QuoteQuoteQuoteFrom Insight (the self-proclaimed "Hottest Conservative News Site"): Former Secretary of State James Baker was involved in a cover-up of illegal trading by his law firm with the regime of Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein, according to a former contractor who did work for Mr. Baker’s firm. He said Mr. Baker used non-Americans to help acquire funds from Iraq in violation of the United Nations embargo and U.S. law. James Baker, a Texan, held senior positions in the Ford, Reagan, and the G.H.W. Bush administrations and was appointed by G.W. Bush to be Special Presidential Envoy. Yes, and wasn't it brilliant of Bush to appoint someone who's credibility was suspect so the ISG, who's recommendations Bush disapproved of, but Dems lapped up, would be seen as invalid, allowing Bush to shrug them off, plan for the Surge, and hand the Dems. another defeat? Brilliant, I tell ya. Yup - lifelong stealth Dem, that Baker guy! You need to look a little deeper to see the ingenuity of the plan. Bush could have been trying to destroy the ISG's credibility. What better way than to appoint Baker, who's credentials nobody would question at the time, to write a report to suck the Dems in, and then snap the rug out from under them after they fell for it. With the iSG's recommendation lacking credibility, Bush is now free to "Listen to his Generals", which the Left has demanded he do, and institute the "Surge" which does the exact opposite of the ISG recommendations. Beautiful Political Ploy, eh? - Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,182 #5 December 27, 2006 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteFrom Insight (the self-proclaimed "Hottest Conservative News Site"): Former Secretary of State James Baker was involved in a cover-up of illegal trading by his law firm with the regime of Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein, according to a former contractor who did work for Mr. Baker’s firm. He said Mr. Baker used non-Americans to help acquire funds from Iraq in violation of the United Nations embargo and U.S. law. James Baker, a Texan, held senior positions in the Ford, Reagan, and the G.H.W. Bush administrations and was appointed by G.W. Bush to be Special Presidential Envoy. Yes, and wasn't it brilliant of Bush to appoint someone who's credibility was suspect so the ISG, who's recommendations Bush disapproved of, but Dems lapped up, would be seen as invalid, allowing Bush to shrug them off, plan for the Surge, and hand the Dems. another defeat? Brilliant, I tell ya. Yup - lifelong stealth Dem, that Baker guy! You need to look a little deeper to see the ingenuity of the plan. Bush could have been trying to destroy the ISG's credibility. What better way than to appoint Baker, who's credentials nobody would question at the time, to write a report to suck the Dems in, and then snap the rug out from under them after they fell for it. With the iSG's recommendation lacking credibility, Bush is now free to "Listen to his Generals", which the Left has demanded he do, and institute the "Surge" which does the exact opposite of the ISG recommendations. Beautiful Political Ploy, eh? - Maybe he would have done better using his brainpower () to plot a strategery (sic) to win a few more seats in the House and Senate.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #6 December 27, 2006 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteFrom Insight (the self-proclaimed "Hottest Conservative News Site"): Former Secretary of State James Baker was involved in a cover-up of illegal trading by his law firm with the regime of Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein, according to a former contractor who did work for Mr. Baker’s firm. He said Mr. Baker used non-Americans to help acquire funds from Iraq in violation of the United Nations embargo and U.S. law. James Baker, a Texan, held senior positions in the Ford, Reagan, and the G.H.W. Bush administrations and was appointed by G.W. Bush to be Special Presidential Envoy. Yes, and wasn't it brilliant of Bush to appoint someone who's credibility was suspect so the ISG, who's recommendations Bush disapproved of, but Dems lapped up, would be seen as invalid, allowing Bush to shrug them off, plan for the Surge, and hand the Dems. another defeat? Brilliant, I tell ya. Yup - lifelong stealth Dem, that Baker guy! You need to look a little deeper to see the ingenuity of the plan. Bush could have been trying to destroy the ISG's credibility. What better way than to appoint Baker, who's credentials nobody would question at the time, to write a report to suck the Dems in, and then snap the rug out from under them after they fell for it. With the iSG's recommendation lacking credibility, Bush is now free to "Listen to his Generals", which the Left has demanded he do, and institute the "Surge" which does the exact opposite of the ISG recommendations. Beautiful Political Ploy, eh? - Maybe he would have done better using his brainpower () to plot a strategery (sic) to win a few more seats in the House and Senate. Because now he can blame everything that goes wrong on the Dems. - Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #7 December 28, 2006 Quote Because now he can blame everything that goes wrong on the Dems. - But..but...but.... They have a PLAN, I tell you!!!!!Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCclimber 0 #8 December 28, 2006 Let's not overlook the smoking gun, who said: QuoteAs a citizen of Israel I cannot just sit by and watch the hypocrisy being spewed by Baker. If Baker was still a private citizen I could keep his business dealings private, but now he is involved in diplomacy that sells out Israel. People need to understand he is acting out of economic considerations." Anyone doubt this guy prefers a strong US presence in the Middle East??? Is opposed to our leaving Iraq? I wonder if he would have still come forward if Baker's recommendations had been to increase our troop levels over there. Not really. Give this a few days... the liberal blogs and forums will be screaming for Karl Rove's head, yet again. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,132 #9 December 28, 2006 >Beautiful Political Ploy, eh? I can think of almost 3000 US families who might be disgusted to hear you describing it that way. But who cares, as long as Bush can make the democrats look bad, eh? Heck, that alone is worth another 1000 dead soldiers! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #10 December 28, 2006 Quote>Beautiful Political Ploy, eh? I can think of almost 3000 US families who might be disgusted to hear you describing it that way. But who cares, as long as Bush can make the democrats look bad, eh? Heck, that alone is worth another 1000 dead soldiers! Nice cut and paste so you can fake being offended. Here's the whole quote. QuoteYou need to look a little deeper to see the ingenuity of the plan. Bush could have been trying to destroy the ISG's credibility. What better way than to appoint Baker, who's credentials nobody would question at the time, to write a report to suck the Dems in, and then snap the rug out from under them after they fell for it. With the iSG's recommendation lacking credibility, Bush is now free to "Listen to his Generals", which the Left has demanded he do, and institute the "Surge" which does the exact opposite of the ISG recommendations. Beautiful Political Ploy, eh? To begin with, we are talking about the upcoming "Surge" which hasn't happened yet, so your weak attempt to bash me is meaningless. Secondly, it is clear to almost anyone that we were not being serious about the "Surge" and were just taking a break from some of the seriousness. Fourth if you have a personal problem, I accept PM's. I commend your fake attempt at being offended, though. Another audition for SNL? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
