NYT: Democrats Don't Plan to Block Confirmation of C.I.A. Nominee

[kskiska]

WASHINGTON, Aug. 11 - A dozen Senate Democrats suggested Wednesday that they would not oppose President Bush's nomination of Representative Porter J. Goss as director of central intelligence, but they vowed to use his confirmation hearings to amplify their concerns over fatal intelligence failures under this administration.

Senator Pat Roberts, the Kansas Republican who is chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, said he expected to open the confirmation hearings the first week of September. He also predicted that Mr. Goss, a Florida Republican, would be confirmed.

In interviews, none of the Senate Democrats disputed that prediction. In fact, no Democratic senator declared an intention to oppose the nomination outright. Many said they were unhappy with what they perceived as Mr. Goss's excessive partisanship, but they said they would withhold judgment until the hearings.

(snip)

Privately, some Democrats said the nomination put them in a difficult political position. The C.I.A. has already gone two months without a replacement for George J. Tenet as director. The Democrats said that if they opposed the Goss nomination, they expected that the White House would cast them as obstructionists who were delaying prosecution of the war on terror.

more…
http://nytimes.com/2004/08/12/politics/12goss.html?hp

[onehandle]

1. No problem. President Kerry will replace him. nt

[aquart]

4. How?

[BeyondGeography]

7. Well, ummmm, he'd be the BOSS

As in, "you stay, you go, you're hired, you're fired," etc.

[Cha]

9. Do you know how President Kerry can go about that?

At first when I heard about goss..I got real sick and then someone else said Kerry can replace him.

Now I feel better but how can he do that?

What I mean is ..just because it's a new team..can they do for that?

[unfrigginreal]

15. It's easier said than done

How's it going to look if Kerry fires the guy that Democratic congressfolk didn't oppose? We're about to make the same stupid mistake that we made in 2002 by giving this crook in the White House a free pass.

If Goss is right for the job, then that's one thing. But if the only reason we won't oppose him is fear of being called obstructionists then we deserve the shit that the repugs shove down our throats. The pukes will call them obstructionists no matter what they do. It seems that we never learn.

[Citizen Daryl]

23. If he replaces him early in the administration ...

... there'll be an uproar for a little while, then people will forget about it.

I really don't think it would be all that big of a deal to do.

[livinginphotographs]

12. My thoughts exactly.

n/t

[aquart]

2. Jesus H. Christ.

Is this the most gutless group of guppies on the planet.

I don't know why I called them guppies. Idiot tiny fish, easily swallowed by anything with more determination.

[Democat]

3. Then people wonder why some Americans see Democrats as weak

Because our party is weak.

We need a major house cleaning after Kerry is elected.

There are few current Dems who should be left standing.

[Cha]

5. Too bad the dems are scared of what the repukes

would "cast them" as. But ..I've heard porter goss is irrelevant because he will be fired in Jan, 2005! That sounds good to me.

Just because bush hires him doesn't mean Kerry has to keep him, does it?

[Greyskye]

6. They might after Michael Moore gets through with him!

Have you seen this?


http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=615&e=4&u=/nm/bush_cia_moore_dc

"I don't have the language skills. I, you know, my language skills were romance languages and stuff. We're looking for Arabists today. I don't have the cultural background probably," Goss is quoted in an interview transcript.


"And I certainly don't have the technical skills, uh, as my children remind me every day: 'Dad you got to get better on your computer.' Uh, so, the things that you need to have, I don't have."

:evilgrin:

[fizzana]

8. Unfortunately this is a case of damned if you do, damned if you

don't.

If they don't oppose him, the CIA gets someone who shouldn't be running the organization. If they do oppose him, they hand the GOP a perfect pre-election issue which will allow them to accuse the Democrats of standing in the way of fixing our intelligence systems.

Tactically, it's the right thing to do even though it stinks to high heaven. We have to keep our eyes on the prize and that means not giving Bush or the Republicans any issues they can use in the election.

[Cha]

10. It seethes me that rove has his ugly hand all

over this...think it will backfire though..just not sure how, yet.

[Rose Siding]

11. Have they learned nothing?

Didn't they learn that the people want them to stand up!?

They will contribute *again* to the myth of Geo as a "strong leader". He wouldn't have the "strength" if they didn't keep giving it to him. Very stupid.

[Democat]

16. Democrats look weak because they are weak!

And they are weak in the eyes of the American people because they look weak. The American people do not want weakness right now.

Bush isn't strong, but he doesn't run scared every time a Democrat looks at him wrong.

Too many of our cowardly elected Democratic officials cower in fear when they see a Republican coming their way.

[AndyTiedye]

19. Democrats are Weak Because We Are a Minority Party With No Power

> Democrats look weak because they are weak!

and the Democrats are weak because there are too few of us in
Washington to do anything except filibuster or cave in, and the
Dems in the Senate can't filibuster everything.

There is also the crippling effect of nearly all of the nation's
media outlets being under the control of the Republicans. This
has never been true to such an extent before.

Our party would not survive a loss this Fall. The Republicans could
easily end up with a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, in which
case the Democrats might as well hang it up and go home for all the
influence they would have in DC.

It is absolutely essential that we win this election, and win it
by a landslide so the regime can't steal it again.
We have one last chance to take back our country.

> Too many of our cowardly elected Democratic officials cower in fear
> when they see a Republican coming their way.

With the press ever eager to do their bidding, and not enough votes
in Congress to do anything, can you blame them?

[LiberalBushFan]

13. When Kerry has to start fixing Bush's fuckups,

will Republicans not resist him in fear of being labelled "obstructionists"? No. That is why they win.

[2Design]

14. concerned on how much more damage can be done

secretly with this guy....shredding....MIHOP again....

[shraby]

17. There is info on Goss

on the latest Plame thread. Send some of it to the newspapers and let your congresscritters know you know.

[2Design]

18. do you have link to plame thread

[4morewars]

21. here ya go:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=2191498

[4morewars]

22. Here's another:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=2193218

[stickdog]

20. We need to replace the donkey with a jellyfish!

[TacticalPeek]

24. What are Democrats for?

?
?
?

[gulfcoastliberal]

25. Fing Ridiculous

Where is the spine? This is damn election year; and the dems are acting just like they did after 9/11 - handing Bushler whatever his heart desires on a silver platter. We no longer have a 2 party system. We have one party with a timid moderate wing that has no voice, no guts, and no code of honor. Sickening. Just sickening.

[Domitan]

26. Gutless fools

If the Dems were planning to let Goss in based on strategy in which the GOP gets tripped up, more power to them...but I see this decision as based on their political fears. Where are the people of principle???