Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Baker quietly working to rescue Repubs from impending Bush-caused disaster

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-09-06 11:14 PM
Original message
Baker quietly working to rescue Repubs from impending Bush-caused disaster
Edited on Sat Sep-09-06 11:19 PM by BurtWorm
That's James Baker III, the guy who fucked us up in 2000 and brought us the "presidency" of the Bush boy himself. As head of the "bipartisan" Iraq Working Group, he's ostensibly charged with making the nonsensical Iraq fiasco make sense and finding a way out of it. But according to this article, the real reason he's there is to pull Jr. out of yet another scrape and make the electoral process safe for Republicans again.


http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2006/0609.dreyfuss.html

A Higher Power
James Baker puts Bush's Iraq policy into rehab.

By Robert Dreyfuss

Amid the highly charged political infighting in Washington over what to do in Iraq, you might be excused for not noticing that a bipartisan commission quietly started work last spring with a mandate to help the Bush administration rethink its policy toward the war. Of course, anything labeled "bipartisan commission" seems almost guaranteed to be ignored by a highly partisan White House that is notoriously hostile to outside advice and famously devoted to "staying the course." But what makes this particular commission hard to dismiss is that it is led by perhaps the one man who might be able to break through the tight phalanx of senior officials who advise the president and filter his information. That person is the former secretary of state, Republican insider, and consigliere of the Bush family, James A. Baker III.

Since March, Baker, backed by a team of experienced national-security hands, has been busily at work trying to devise a fresh set of policies to help the president chart a new course in--or, perhaps, to get the hell out of--Iraq. But as with all things involving James Baker, there's a deeper political agenda at work as well. "Baker is primarily motivated by his desire to avoid a war at home--that things will fall apart not on the battlefield but at home. So he wants a ceasefire in American politics," a member of one of the commission's working groups told me. Specifically, he said, if the Democrats win back one or both houses of Congress in November, they would unleash a series of investigative hearings on Iraq, the war on terrorism, and civil liberties that could fatally weaken the administration and remove the last props of political support for the war, setting the stage for a potential Republican electoral disaster in 2008. "I guess there are people in the party, on the Hill and in the White House, who see a political train wreck coming, and they've called in Baker to try to reroute the train."

The fact that Baker is involved has sent the Washington rumor mill buzzing with the theory that the commission is really a Trojan Horse for the views of Baker's friend and former boss, George H.W. Bush. It has been widely speculated that the former president never agreed with his son's decision to invade Iraq, and the son appears to have repaid that perceived dissent by largely refusing to reach out to his father for advice on national security, despite the elder Bush's knowledge and experience. In any case, for reasons that may be Oedipal or that may have to do with neoconservatives' disdain for realists associated with Bush 41, or both, Bush 43 has so far kept the 41 circle at arm's length--including Baker; his confrere Brent Scowcroft; and even, during his ill-fated tenure as secretary of state, Colin Powell. But with the situation in Iraq sliding towards irretrievable chaos, a moment of receptivity may have arrived.

It's hard to know what the commission is really up to because its inner workings are nearly as secretive as those of the White House. Baker has imposed an ironclad gag order on all of its participants. The 60 people involved in the effort have been instructed, in the strongest of terms, not to comment to reporters on the task force's work. Every one of the participants I spoke to flatly refused to comment for the record, and several did not want to talk even off the record. Some were palpably nervous. "We're not allowed to talk about it," said one person involved. "We get about every month a warning: 'Do not discuss in any context the substance of what is happening in this group.' You know how bad it is? Initially they wanted us to end all of our contacts with the media, make no statements, write no op-eds--in other words, become monks. Then they realized, how can you take the entire community of Iraq experts in the United States and have them all stop talking?"

Baker's commission--officially called the Iraq Study Group--was created in March by Congress at the instigation of Rep. Frank Wolf, a Virginia Republican. After his third trip to Iraq last year, Wolf started contacting members of Congress on both sides of the aisle, urging the creation of a high-powered, private task force to take a fresh look at the mess in Iraq. "If you had a very serious illness...and you weren't completely comfortable that everything was going the way you hoped, you'd certainly want to get a second opinion," Wolf told me. At least 30 members of Congress supported the idea, including Rep. Christopher Shays (R-Conn.) and Sen. Joseph Biden (D-Del.). According to participants in the task force, a key silent partner with Wolf in putting it together was his Virginia Republican colleague, Sen. John Warner, the chairman of the powerful Senate Armed Services committee.
...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Jcrowley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-09-06 11:19 PM
Response to Original message
1. Bush, Baker
Electronic Voting Machine Maker
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
City Lights Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-09-06 11:23 PM
Response to Original message
2. Somebody is always right behind him with a shovel cleaning up
his mess. Some things never change. Sigh...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CarlVK Donating Member (632 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-09-06 11:39 PM
Response to Reply #2
8. That's what you get with Socially Promoted trust funders.
The wages of voting in a child of aristocracy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The_Casual_Observer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-09-06 11:26 PM
Response to Original message
3. This thing is way out of baker's league. Baker's talent is in
Edited on Sat Sep-09-06 11:27 PM by The_Casual_Observer
intimidation of people using his prestige, connections and money. I don't think that sort of thing intimidates the "insurgency".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-09-06 11:30 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. You're exactly right.
They don't call him the consigliere for nothing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-09-06 11:39 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. Appropos of your point and mine, an interesting quote from the article
<<But according to all accounts, the Iraq Study Group is Baker's show, with the assembled cast of characters there to give Baker the bipartisan, protective coloration he needs. "Jim Baker is the gatekeeper," one task-force participant told me, insisting on anonymity. "He's by far the most dynamic, and everyone else is intimidated by him." And Baker is keeping his cards very close to his chest. "He's very secretive, he keeps his distance, and he compartmentalizes everything, which is not a bad way to organize a political conspiracy," says another member of one of the working groups.>>
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The_Casual_Observer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-09-06 11:49 PM
Response to Reply #7
12. Sure, all the suit ,beltway and pundit guys are intimidated. Even his
barber is probably intimidated, but what's that worth in Baghdad? They keep making these misguided blockhead "management decisions".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
razors edge Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-09-06 11:34 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. didn't
baker also tell Gillespie to tell Saddam that ghwb (america) had no position on arab on arab violence prior to Saddam's invasion of kuwait?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The_Casual_Observer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-09-06 11:43 PM
Response to Reply #6
10. That was April Glaspie.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
razors edge Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-10-06 12:03 AM
Response to Reply #10
14. thanks,
I knew baker fueled this shit from day 1.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madokie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-10-06 08:02 AM
Response to Reply #3
19. through the insurgency was not a beginning nor will it be an end.
much more to the question of how to get it right than the insurgency as such.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nashville_brook Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-10-06 08:20 AM
Response to Reply #3
21. i wonder, tho -- the subtext is that *when* dems win a branch of gov
there WILL BE investigations.

how long can that be insured without *drastic* measures?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
glitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-10-06 10:28 AM
Response to Reply #3
25. It's beyond the talent of any bush league player.
Death squads are their league, not nation building.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
razors edge Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-09-06 11:27 PM
Response to Original message
4. i think these guys
are just jealous of Kissinger's kill numbers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EVDebs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-09-06 11:41 PM
Response to Original message
9. It's still a FIASCO. No matter what Baker cooks up nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bigtree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-09-06 11:45 PM
Response to Original message
11. the classic inside straight
the one who brought us the first Saudi patronage bombing of Iraq to protect Kuwait's oil harbor. Baker who brought the sanctions which enriched Saddam and impoverished everyone else. Oil baron buddy, crook.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jedr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-09-06 11:58 PM
Response to Original message
13. Spin will only take you so far;
There ain't enough lipstick in the world to cover this pig!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NJCher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-10-06 01:17 AM
Response to Original message
15. what do you guys think of this?
Here are the Dems in the group:

...the bipartisan task force is co-chaired by former congressman Lee H. Hamilton, the Indiana Democrat

...the Democrats are William Perry, President Clinton's secretary of defense; Charles Robb, the former Virginia senator; Leon Panetta, Clinton's chief of staff; and Vernon Jordan, the lawyer and Friend of Bill.


And here is a possible outcome, as cited by the article:

The president may have had another political motive for giving his blessing to the endeavor. If--and it's a very big if--Baker can forge a consensus plan on what to do about Iraq among the bigwigs on his commission, many of them leading foreign-policy figures in the Democratic Party, then the 2008 Democratic presidential nominee--whoever he (or she) is--will have a hard time dismissing the plan. And if the GOP nominee also embraces the plan, then the Iraq war would largely be off the table as a defining issue of the 2008 race--a potentially huge advantage for Republicans.

So the question is, given the Dems involved in this, do you think they will buy into the plan, thus (somewhat) removing this as an issue in the '08 presidential election?




Cher
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elehhhhna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-10-06 07:49 AM
Response to Reply #15
17. Wm. Refigerator Perry was BC's SecDef?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
exlrrp Donating Member (598 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-10-06 07:56 AM
Response to Reply #15
18. Lipstick On a Pig
This "commission" is going to have to make sense out of a total disaster, a complete fiasco.
We never shoud have invaded Iraq in the first place and itf the first sentence of this "commission's" report doesn't say that in capital letters, its a waste of time and effort.
Everyone in this country is finally waking up to the disaster the War on Iraq is. Putting listick on this pig isn't going to make it look any better, it'll look like a pig with lipstick on it.
They can put all the Democratic names they want on it, the Republicans will "stay the course" right into national disaster. Bush and Cheney will ignore this commission like theyve ignored all the rest of the commissions.
Bush and Cheney have completely destroyed consensus politics in this country. Any Democrat that lends his name to their shenanigans should be dealt with by our party ala Lieberman.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nashville_brook Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-10-06 08:24 AM
Response to Reply #15
22. what's the best way to neuter "snitches" ?? INVOLVE them in the "crime"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cosmicdot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-10-06 06:18 PM
Response to Reply #15
27. will they buy into the plan?
imo, yes ... that's why they were selected ... my question: why?

The point that one of the goals is damage control for 2008 is probably true.

Bad economic times and failed foreign policy might be a ripe time for a non-corporatist player to emerge. Can't have that.

Amy Goodman commented once that the political spectrum has moved so far to the right that today's New Democrats are to the right of Richard Nixon. This is where they want to keep things.

Bu$h-Cheney 'bi-partisan' is almost as real as 'Clear Skies' or 'Help America Vote Act'.

Baker probably has something on all of these corporatist good ol'boys. They have something to gain, but do we?

a few observations:

Lee Hamilton? Co-chair and party to the 911 commission, and serves on the Advisory Council of the Nixon Center (which has quite a few characters, Conrad Black, Kissinger, Sen. Roberts, Lieberman, Maurice and Evan Greenberg, etc.)
http://tinyurl.com/pubbw

Vernon Jordan? On many big good ol'boy corporate Boards of Directors, and on the International Advisory Board of Barrick Gold, the company Poppy worked for post-office and helped to score a US gold mine (see Palast, Poppy Strikes Gold). A Bilderberg conference attendee.

Chuck Robb? He's probably still carrying LBJ's baggage. He was part of the "Setting the Record Straight" effort by the White House 2004: Bu$h created a bipartisan commission to investigate quality of intelligence used to justify Iraq war and to address problems posed by weapons proliferation; gives panel until March 2005 to submit its conclusions; selects former Sen Charles S Robb and Judge Laurence H Silberman as chairmen of commission. They must like his work.

Stephen Hadley noted that the presidential commission, led by retired judge Laurence H. Silberman and former senator Charles S. Robb, said it found no evidence that administration officials manipulated intelligence.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/10/AR2005111002402.html



They're probably all part of the Council on Foreign Policy and/or csis.org ground team efforts trying to stay the course with a 'new direction'/some modification/tweaking. They're enjoying the profiting, not the fallout and failure.

TPTB are working hard. See post 18
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=2500173#2500391
TPTB don't want another Carter to slip through the cracks he did in the wake of Watergate in 1976 or a populist who might be able to springboard off the domestic/foreign policy mess Jr. has made.

Follow the money. Who benefits?
Can't go wrong with those directions in dealing with the corporate good ol'boys and their goals.

Re-setting/re-establishing the course: foreign policy based on corporate profits

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elehhhhna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-10-06 07:48 AM
Response to Original message
16. JIM BAKER, if you're reading this:
Edited on Sun Sep-10-06 07:50 AM by elehhhhna
FUCK YOU!

You Leered at me in the lobby of the Baker Botts Bldg. last summer. I'm a 6 foot blonde -- maybe you though Anne Coulter had gained a few and got a decent haircut and a new dress--who knows? BTW, you are one tiny little shit. What? Maybe 5'5"? I have never felt such a chill in my life as to have a murderous traitor bastard like yourself "smile" at me, and I've met John (Honey I killed the Kid) Ramsey so trust me: I ain't no sheltered Texas beauty queen.

FUCK YOU, JIM! Keep your bleary eyes to yourself, you puffy midgety pig!

If i see you again you'll get what you should have gotten then: A roundhouse kick from my 40 inch leg.

Elena
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KoKo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-10-06 08:06 AM
Response to Reply #16
20. He's that short? Amazing. I can believe the leer.. He's got that
Texas thingy going where all women are fair game for their macho prowess.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elehhhhna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-10-06 10:11 AM
Response to Reply #20
24. I think the combination of age and evil shrank him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jazzjunkysue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-10-06 08:50 AM
Response to Original message
23. who see a political train wreck coming, and they've called in Baker
"I guess there are people in the party, on the Hill and in the White House, who see a political train wreck coming, and they've called in Baker to try to reroute the train."

Yup. They're finally getting it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Canuckistanian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-10-06 11:46 AM
Response to Original message
26. Dems would open investigations on civil liberties?
OMG, what a disaster.

Looks like someone is stepping in to rescue Pretzel Boy from certain defeat .... again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 23rd 2024, 04:44 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC