• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Ex-Aide Details a Loss of Faith in the President

26 X World Champs

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 6, 2005
Messages
7,536
Reaction score
429
Location
Upper West Side of Manhattan (10024)
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
One of the highest ranking members of Bush's inner circle has come out and strongly criticized President Bush for being out of touch with the American public, for ignoring the will of the people and for not trying to be a "uniter." Matthew Dowd uses the attempt by Bush to renominate John Bolton as UN Ambassador last Fall as proof that Bush has no desire at all to work with Democrats because he knew that Bolton was unacceptable to the Democrats and rather than nominating someone that a consensus could approve he stayed with his inner circle and ignores the will of the American people. Here's part of today's story from the New York Times.

Ex-Aide Details a Loss of Faith in the President

By JIM RUTENBERG
Published: April 1, 2007

AUSTIN, Tex., March 29 — In 1999, Matthew Dowd became a symbol of George W. Bush’s early success at positioning himself as a Republican with Democratic appeal.

01adviser1.190.jpg

Karl Rove and Matthew Dowd talked as President Bush spoke at a campaign rally in 2004 in Canton, Ohio.

A top strategist for the Texas Democrats who was disappointed by the Bill Clinton years, Mr. Dowd was impressed by the pledge of Mr. Bush, then governor of Texas, to bring a spirit of cooperation to Washington. He switched parties, joined Mr. Bush’s political brain trust and dedicated the next six years to getting him to the Oval Office and keeping him there. In 2004, he was appointed the president’s chief campaign strategist.(snip)

Looking back, Mr. Dowd now says his faith in Mr. Bush was misplaced. (snip)

He criticized the president as failing to call the nation to a shared sense of sacrifice at a time of war, failing to reach across the political divide to build consensus and ignoring the will of the people on Iraq. He said he believed the president had not moved aggressively enough to hold anyone accountable for the abuses at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, and that Mr. Bush still approached governing with a “my way or the highway” mentality reinforced by a shrinking circle of trusted aides.

“I really like him, which is probably why I’m so disappointed in things,” he said. He added, “I think he’s become more, in my view, secluded and bubbled in.”

In speaking out, Mr. Dowd became the first member of Mr. Bush’s inner circle to break so publicly with him.
Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/01/w...gin&adxnnlx=1175428864-SJosxXZ0d0wD4HUAvvSu6Q
 
I saw this article on NYTimes's home page and printed it out. I will read it later. But I am very proud of Matthew Dowd for coming out and speaking his mind. Good for him.

September 11th was a devastating day for the United States. That was a time we all came together. However, George Bush took that goodwill we had for each other and the goodwill that other countries had towards us, and he tore us apart. Our country is more divided now than I have ever seen it. Other countries think we are arrogant a$$es as a result of the way this president carries himself.

My brother was a die-hard Bush fan and has been completely repulsed by his behavior over the last month. I hope that slowly those who are rational and on the right will turn their backs on this arrogant president.
 
I saw this article on NYTimes's home page and printed it out. I will read it later. But I am very proud of Matthew Dowd for coming out and speaking his mind. Good for him.

September 11th was a devastating day for the United States. That was a time we all came together. However, George Bush took that goodwill we had for each other and the goodwill that other countries had towards us, and he tore us apart. Our country is more divided now than I have ever seen it. Other countries think we are arrogant a$$es as a result of the way this president carries himself.

My brother was a die-hard Bush fan and has been completely repulsed by his behavior over the last month. I hope that slowly those who are rational and on the right will turn their backs on this arrogant president.
What should be most interesting is to see how GOP candidates shun Bush as they run for office in 2008. I betcha that very few will ask Bush to campaign for them unless it's a blow out race. Any closely contested election will necessitate that Bush stay away in order to not harm the GOP candidate.

Have you noticed that the only people still loyal to Bush are the 30% who are totally blind to any of his faults? Check out the Bushies in this Forum and they represent the hard core fanatics who are in total denial about Bush and whose only rebuttal is to label anyone who disagrees with Bush as a "traitor" a "lefty" and "not patriotic". Interesting considering in their world that means that 70% of America are "traitorous lefties who should move to Iran."

YIKES! :shock:
 
He's a political hack, a campiagn manager/advisor who first did this to Clinton at the end of his term and now is doing the same to Bush.

How much you wanna bet he picks another leading candidate to try to get a job with to hold him over for the next 6 years?
 
What should be most interesting is to see how GOP candidates shun Bush as they run for office in 2008. I betcha that very few will ask Bush to campaign for them unless it's a blow out race. Any closely contested election will necessitate that Bush stay away in order to not harm the GOP candidate.
They did that during the 2006 campaign.

Conservative Arizona Congressman J.D. Heyworth pondered when asked by radio host Don Imus last November if he wanted the president to campaign with him. "In a word, no," Heyworth answered.

Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum declined to appear with Bush when the president came to town recently.

New Jersey Senate candidate Tom Kean arrived at a Newark fundraiser 15 minutes after Dick Cheney's motorcade had left.

"Who's running for the Senate?" frustrated Maryland GOP Senate candidate Michael Steele told a local audience. "Michael Steele, not George Bush."

Maryland Lt. Gov. Michael Steele, a Republican who is running for the Senate seat being vacated by Democrat Paul Sarbanes, told reporters that he would "probably not" want Bush to campaign for him. Steele called party affiliation a "scarlet letter" and "an impediment...a hurdle I have to overcome."

Rep. Curt Weldon chose not to appear at a Bush event in Pennsylvania. He told the Wall Street Journal on Tuesday that with Bush's poll numbers so low, "there's nothing the president can do to help me."

Congresswoman Thelma Drake, of Norfolk, Virginia, announced she had to remain in Washington for an "important vote'' on a military appropriations bill and miss President Bush's visit to her district.

South Dakota Senator John Thune said that the Iraq war has taken a toll on Bush's popularity. Thune recently said that "If I were running in the state this year, you obviously don't embrace the president and his agenda."

Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), identified by The Hill as "a close Bush ally," said there is room for candidates to abide by the "moral commitment" the United States has made to the Iraq war and still create distance between themselves and the President on the issue.
 
He's a political hack, a campiagn manager/advisor who first did this to Clinton at the end of his term and now is doing the same to Bush.

How much you wanna bet he picks another leading candidate to try to get a job with to hold him over for the next 6 years?
Nothing like another unsubstantiated and unproven attack post! NICE!

Funny thing is if you would bother to read the story you would have read these points:

Dan Bartlett, the White House counselor, said Mr. Dowd’s criticism is reflective of the national debate over the war.

“It’s an issue that divides people,” Mr. Bartlett said. “Even people that supported the president aren’t immune from having their own feelings and emotions.”

He said he disagreed with Mr. Dowd’s description of the president as isolated and with his position on withdrawal. He said Mr. Dowd, a friend, has “sometimes expressed these sentiments” in private conversation, though “not in such detail.”

(snip)

In television interviews in 2004, Mr. Dowd said that Mr. Kerry’s campaign was proposing “a weak defense,” and that the voters “trust this president more than they trust Senator Kerry on Iraq.”

But he was starting to have his own doubts by then, he said.

He said he thought Mr. Bush handled the immediate aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks well but “missed a real opportunity to call the country to a shared sense of sacrifice.”
(snip)
“I think we should design campaigns that appeal not to 51 percent of the people,” he said, “but bring the country together as a whole.”

(snip)

His views against the war began to harden last spring when, in a personal exercise, he wrote a draft opinion article and found himself agreeing with Mr. Kerry’s call for withdrawal from Iraq. He acknowledged that the expected deployment of his son Daniel was an important factor.

He said the president’s announcement last fall that he was re-nominating the former United Nations ambassador John R. Bolton, whose confirmation Democrats had already refused, was further proof to him that Mr. Bush was not seeking consensus with Democrats.
How much you wanna bet he picks another leading candidate to try to get a job with to hold him over for the next 6 years?
Mr. Dowd does not seem prepared to put his views to work in 2008.
Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/01/washington/01adviser.html?pagewanted=2&hp

I love how when someone speaks from the heart against the President and he happens to be a Bushie he automatically gets labeled a "hack" by the radical right wingers in this Forum!

So tell me Stinger what you think of Dick Morris?
 
Nothing like another unsubstantiated and unproven attack post! NICE!

Funny thing is if you would bother to read the story you would have read these points:




Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/01/washington/01adviser.html?pagewanted=2&hp

I love how when someone speaks from the heart against the President and he happens to be a Bushie he automatically gets labeled a "hack" by the radical right wingers in this Forum!

So tell me Stinger what you think of Dick Morris?

Slam dunk!
 
Back
Top Bottom