White House considers making war czar a “staff job.”
White House considers making war czar a “staff job.”
The White House Bulletin (sub. req.) reports:
Confirmation hearings for Lute could easily turn into a high-volume, sustained attack on the Administration and the increasingly unpopular war in Iraq. Republicans who might otherwise provide some political cover at those hearings are growing increasingly impatient with the war as well, and the appointment of a ‘czar’ at this point in the war and the Administration’s tenure is widely viewed as too little, too late. Indeed, the confirmation hearings could provide the first public forum for Republicans to express their disillusionment with the war and the President. As a result, there has been some quiet talk about considering making the position a White House staff job that would not require Senate confirmation, though it would likely require Lute to give up his military career.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
The old Al Haig play? They’re really dipping into Nixon’s playbook!
May 22nd, 2007 at 10:58 amUmmm, Lute has already given up his military career, or better put, his military career is over.
May 22nd, 2007 at 11:00 amso Lute was required to get the word “SUCKER” tattooed agross his ass right
May 22nd, 2007 at 11:00 amthough it would likely require Lute to give up his military career.
Lute’s military career was over the moment he accepted this idiotic post.
May 22nd, 2007 at 11:01 amIsn’t there already a person doing the job description of War Czar called the Commander in Chief? Oh, right, he’s not really doing that job very well.
May 22nd, 2007 at 11:05 amWe need a “war czar” like we need a Dept. of Energy or Education.
May 22nd, 2007 at 11:06 amA staff position sounds like a permanent position…fitting, since the goal of this administration, and its means for retaining power, is a perpetual state of war.
May 22nd, 2007 at 11:07 amGreat, another staff infection.
May 22nd, 2007 at 11:10 amComment by TripMaster Monkey
Lt.Gen. Lute is a capable and intelligent 3-star Army general, a stature you’re unlikely to ever attain. His military career doesn’t end simply because you disagree with his acceptance of the position. Get over yourself.
Lt.Gen. Lute has no operational authority in this position, people. He’s simply a advisor of this war. If it were up to me, though, I would have him remain as Director of Operations, The Joint Staff. He was just confirmed to this post in September 2006.
May 22nd, 2007 at 11:10 amHe can have my job.
May 22nd, 2007 at 11:13 amBush already has a senior military advisor to this war – the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
May 22nd, 2007 at 11:16 amWhatever makes Bush butt happy seems to be fine with everybody in DC, but we the people want him to be impeached > PERIOD.
May 22nd, 2007 at 11:18 amCompTROLLER V-1 sez:
…and the generals in the field are 4-star generals. Did you wonder why Chimpy went with a 3-star general for his “war czar”? Perhaps because he couldn’t find a 4-star general dumb enough to take the position of Official Iraq War Scapegoat?
Or you, either, I might add. Unlike you, however, my personal worth is not dictated by my military rank.
No, it ended because of his acceptance of the position. My agreement or disagreement is immaterial…just as yours is.
Right back at ya, CT.
May 22nd, 2007 at 11:19 amGreat, another staff infection.
Comment by hellinabucket
HAHAHAHAHA!!!! You gotta warn us when you pop out with something like that. Ohh, HAHA, that hurts.
HAHA, trying to stop laughing now…ha.
May 22nd, 2007 at 11:29 amComment by TripMaster Monkey
“My agreement or disagreement is immaterial”
I don’t believe that. Your preceding posts are certainly inconsistent with statement.
A four-star general isn’t needed for the post. It’s an advisory position, and Gen. Pace is already the U.S. Military’s senior advisor, anyways. I would call this a step below him, charged with with Iraq AND Afghanistan policy only.
It’s another advisory position – how is this supposed to be so controversial?
May 22nd, 2007 at 11:31 ami can’t wait until this administration appoints a “Finding New Ways to Avoid Senate Confirmation Czar”
May 22nd, 2007 at 11:40 amwhat astounds this old man is the simple fact that anyone is surprised by any action designed to thwary oversight. This is a given. The evidence is clear.
May 22nd, 2007 at 11:48 amAS IS THE SOLUTION– IMPEACHMENT.
When do they appoint the “This isn’t Bizarre Czar”?
May 22nd, 2007 at 12:02 pmAh, yes, the Republican fallback position: If you’re losing, change the rules.
May 22nd, 2007 at 12:02 pmThe bar’s been permanently lowered. Three-star generals, 4th tier law schools. Eh, what’s the diff?
bu$hCo incompetence. It’s the new excellence.
May 22nd, 2007 at 12:04 pmNOT only does the King have no clothes his symphony is playing Kazoos!!
May 22nd, 2007 at 12:05 pmEvery time we get a report about how the Right is going to do something like turn on the Bush Admin, they learn that we are salivating over it, and then they don’t do it. TP and other sources really should keep these things quiet until there is really something to celebrate.
May 22nd, 2007 at 12:35 pmGood move by the WH. This way, they can block the Czar’s testimony with executive privilege claims..
May 22nd, 2007 at 12:41 pm