Comments on: Fred Barnes Names Names

By: Grant W. Hastings

Grant W. Hastings — Tue, 21 Mar 2006 16:26:04 +0000

This article is pure fantasy. These actions would contradict everything we’ve learned about Dubya in the past 5 years. The man rewards those who have fought along side of him. There is no way that he would fire any of his staff or ask Cheney to resign. He is too loyal for that.

These people who have to remove themselves for the good of the administration. But how likely is that?

I am going to disagree with one of the commenters here that McCain would not accept the Veep slot if indeed Cheney did retire.

I think he’d take it in a heartbeat and bank on his national popularity to turn things around.

If he didn’t take it, he’s gambling that the new Veep wouldn’t become the defacto frontrunner for the 2008 nom. If Rice replaced Cheney, or Rudy, or Allen, McCain’s White House dreams are done forever. There’s no way he takes that chance.

If there is even a whiff of legitimacy of the Cheney retirement rumors, I suspect that McCain would be on the phone in a heartbeat to stake his claim to the slot to block any other challengers.

By: Mark

Mark — Tue, 21 Mar 2006 15:47:34 +0000

Dennis, I would support Lieberman on any position – up to and including the top (and Lieberman might be the only Democrat I would ever vote for as President – of course, he’ll never make it out of the primaries)…

By: Mark

Mark — Tue, 21 Mar 2006 15:45:13 +0000

AE, agreed on Khalilzad – we need him right where he is…

By: Dennis

Dennis — Tue, 21 Mar 2006 15:08:27 +0000

I would be against moving Lieberman to the cabinet if only because I really don’t want to listen to Kossacks claiming it was their pressure that scared him away to the arms of the Beast. But that’s more of a personal issue.

I agree that there seems to be a bit of musical chairs in Barnes’ proposal. Seems to me if you want to do something like this, why not go dramatic? How about picking Lieberman for VP? The Kossack wing will claim he was a Republican all along, and I imagine many republicans would be loathe to put a Democrat so close to running the country, and it’s probably unlikely Lieberman would agree.

But it’s certainly something that would shake politics up a bit.

By: too many steves

too many steves — Tue, 21 Mar 2006 14:34:32 +0000

There is a phrase for the thinking behind this sort of action when it happens in the business world: “birdcage mentality”. The concept is that you have a birdcage with many birds on many perches. You shake the cage and all the birds are disturbed for a moment and then settle back onto a, often, different perch. Same birds, same ideas, same results. Looks like a lot happened but nothing has really changed.

The political advantage, such as it would be, for Bush is that he would force the Democrats to either allow the elevation of a potential 2008 Presidential Candidate – and the increased padding of her resume – or fight the appointment of a conservative black woman to the office of Vice President (a first in both cases).

I like it for the simple entertainment value but it makes no practical sense.

By: AcademicElephant

AcademicElephant — Tue, 21 Mar 2006 12:24:50 +0000

This column is just plain weird. Slow news week leads to navel gazing. Yes, Rove to the RNC is an excellent move and I expect it will happen–but in January ‘08, not before. As for bringing home Khalilzad, that’s nuts–he’s going to be desperately needed in Iraq for as long as possible–you can’t just yank him the moment a governement is in place and not rist upsetting that whole applecart. And what did Hadley do wrong anyway? CR&R are going no where. Just ask them.

The really valuable suggestion was Senor for McClellan. That is a wretched job and needs turnover.

By: Aaron

Aaron — Tue, 21 Mar 2006 04:51:02 +0000

After reading the column last night/early this morning, the “shake-up” Barnes proposes is hardly what I was expecting after the reading the first sentence. I was expecting him to propose Republicans as appointments, yes, but people who aren’t currently in the administration. I don’t think that if we saw the same faces and names on the television, just with different titles in front of them, it would hardly give 2006 a “3rd term feel.”

A real sake-up would be appointing Richard Myers, Tommy Franks or Eric Shinseki as SoD (maybe even trying to convince Colin Powell to pull a George Marshall), John Danforth or John Negropante as SOS. I would doubt anyone would want the position as Bush’s VP for 2 years, mainly because anyone other than Cheney would be more likely as a 2008-contender, and at this point, the more associated a candidate is with the Bush White House, the more one is hurt in a national election (possibly even in the primary). McCain wouldn’t take it, and I doubt George Allen would either. Rice might, and I’d love to see her as president, but, as has been said before, she doesn’t look like she intends to run.

The one idea I do regard as excellent is Karl Rove as the RNC Chairman.

By: Mark

Mark — Tue, 21 Mar 2006 03:46:34 +0000

Yeah, Ryan, that’s my feeling on Lieberman – if he had been offered the position right after the 2004 election, maybe – but now, not enough payoff for the cost…

By: Ryan Bonneville

Ryan Bonneville — Tue, 21 Mar 2006 03:42:22 +0000

Since before the 2004 election, I’ve been saying that Cheney will not last through 2008. I’ve also picked Rice as the obvious successor but I could be wrong about that. Either way, I’m with Barnes on this one. Maybe not Lieberman – would he even want the job? Just because he’s with Bush on Iraq doesn’t mean he needs to cut all ties with his party and take a job he only gets for a couple years. It would be political suicide.