Barbarians At The Gates

Carl Levin sounding out the principled opposition to Robert Gates’ nomination.

“I haven’t decided what I’m going to do with Mr. Gates,” Levin said. “I voted against him 15 years ago when he was not forthcoming in his role with Iran-Contra. And also, there were some very significant statements, including by former Secretary of State Schulz, that Mr. Gates shaped intelligence in order to support policy. We don’t need to have anybody ever again who is going to tell the president what he wants to hear instead of what the facts are, and I’m afraid that at least there are some real questions that have been raised that Mr. Gates needs to answer.”

The truth is Bob Gates lied about his knowledge of Iran-Contra and was too busypoliticizing intelligence on the capabilities of the Soviet Union to notice the rise of Islamic Fundamentalism. People like Gates got us into the mess we find ourselves today.

11 thoughts on “Barbarians At The Gates

  1. It will be interesting to watch the confirmation play out, although I’d be surprised if Gates’s nomination gets deep-sixed. His nomination seems based on the expectations that his connection to Baker’s and Hamilton’s forthcoming Great Big Book of Everything boosts his bona fides, that the MSM will largely pooh-pooh the Iran-Contra thing as ancient history, that no one will really want to mess with Baker, and that no one could possibly be worse than Rummy.
    And they’ll be right about that last point. If Gates is going to cook the intelligence, at least it will be to suit 41’s foriegn policy rather than 43’s.

  2. scary thing about iran-contra is that some people will think being a part of that is a bonus. ollie north came out of iran-contra as a goddamn folk-hero.
    these manly men weren’t going to let something as silly as the law keep them from fightin’ the commies, no siree.
    it was a pr masterstroke – they convinced most people to actually forget that they were arming a nation that had already taken our citizens hostage and pledged to destroy us.
    -dan mcenroe

  3. Truth is, anyone affiliated with GWB or GHWB can be considered “part of the problem”.
    Bush (41) used to run the CIA, and would occasionally sign his documents “the head spook”. Gates had that job not long after. ’nuff said.

  4. Holden, I think you actually meant to say:
    actively contributing to the rise of Islamic Fundamentalism”

  5. Slightly OT, if you go to CNN.com right now (9:49 a.m. MT), on their main page is, I believe, one of the signs of the apocalypse.

  6. Dang, it’s not up anymore. Maybe they’ll cycle through it again. It’s Dubya and the Big Dawg grinning together. That’s gotta stick in Dubya’s craw, don’tcha think?

  7. People like Gates got us into the mess we find ourselves today. Then he sounds like the perfect Bush nominee.

  8. Levin has this exactly right – we *know* this guy cooked intelligence previously. That is the last thing we need right now – yet another guy who will tell the Dauphin what he wants to hear, instead of the reality. I really don’t care that he’s daddie’s chosen chef (although I understand that second First Lady Condi had mucho influence on this decision), a history of cooking intelligence should immediately disqualify you. Not to mention, he helped create OBL and the Taliban. Gates ain’t our savior, and his selection ain’t any kind of bipartisan gesture, either.
    “He’s better than Rummy” doesn’t make him good.
    OT – wonder if the Dauphin has seen that Newsweek cover yet? Do you suppose they gave him the bourbon first?

  9. The one thing that makes me positive to Gates is that Shrub has a long history of running companies into the ground and Daddy bailing him out. I really think Gates may be the right person to bail the country out of the mess that Shrub has let it into.
    When is Shrub gonna learn that its easy to break things than fix them? He keeps saying that the dems need a plan. I have no doubt that in 2 years the dems will be held accountable for fixing (in 2 years) what it has taken Bush 6 years to totally break.
    But like others here, I can’t get away from the consistent pattern of personalities continually recycled by Nixon, Reagan, Bush, and Shrub who lied to congress, etc., etc. I tend to accept that the CIA managed to make so much money off of illegal deals that it got a wad of cash to fund anything and everything **it** wanted without regard to the US Govt, morality, etc.
    I can’t believe that the conservatives don’t stand up and decry these people as felons – a title whch would instantly disqualify anyone else from public service.

  10. You know, I’d agree with you, except for one thing. I don’t think “bailing the country out of this mess” is their prime directive. I think that Poppy and his pals are concerned about not having the Bush name attached to the biggest cockup in US history. Those two things are NOT necessarily the same. It is entirely possible they could find a way to bail out Jr. without improving things for either US or Iraq.
    You are right, however, about the democrats need to be very careful, because I guarantee you the first thing on the agenda is to find a way to blame any further cocking-up on the democratic majority in Congress, while giving Jr. a free pass – and the media whores will gleefully aid in that narrative.
    He is such a dismal failure. And we are so fucked.

  11. You’re right – I should have said that as a member of Bush 41, Gates is well qualified for this post due to extensive experience in bailing out little Shrub.
    Now if someone could only explain why the basic requirement for success with the conservatives is a proven record of felonies / sedition / treason. G Gordon Liddy, Ollie North, etc – the epitomy of the American hero.

Comments are closed.