The Warner Situation

Hey folks,

Yup, it’s STILL Friday. I have to address this. Some of you, and you know who you are, have let me know that I was wrong. The MMD {Mass Media Drones} have been having a field day with this one.

I said that Warner was not just another Senator pumping his fist in the air and demanding President Bush bring the troops home now. I pointed out why. He stated he was never for a full pull out. He voted against timetables. He was simply advising the press that the President was planning on bring some of the troops home.

Well, well, well, the MMD have been saying the exact opposite. He IS another Republican Senator that is distancing himself from Bush and he DOES want the troops home now. We cannot win, ETC.

Even the White House was saying what I said and urged him to clarify his comments. So the AP asked him to do just that. According to the AP -Warner's Iraq proposal roils White House By ANNE FLAHERTY, Associated Press Writer

Sen. John Warner's suggestion that some troops leave Iraq by the end of the year has roiled the White House, with administration officials saying they've asked the influential Republican to clarify that he has not broken politically with President Bush.

But Warner said Friday he stands by his remarks and that he took no issue with how his views have been characterized.

"I'm not going to issue any clarification," Warner, R-Va., said in an interview with The Associated Press. "I don't think any clarification is needed."

This is just bizarre folks. You have one set of comments, two completely different interpretations, and he says "I don't think any clarification is needed."

Following his trip to Iraq this month, which included a two-hour meeting with Petraeus, Warner said time has run out on the Baghdad government and Bush should make good on his word that the U.S. commitment was not open-ended by announcing a pullout of troops this fall.

Not exactly what he said, but let’s go with that.

The symbolic gesture, he said, could amount to as few as 5,000 of the 160,000 troops in Iraq brought home by Christmas. The goal would be to pressure the Iraqi leaders to make the political compromises necessary to tamp down sectarian violence.

Warner's remarks were significant. While he said he would still oppose Democratic legislation ordering troop withdrawals, it was the first time he had embraced pulling troops out by a certain date. It also put him at odds with the president by rejecting Bush's long-held assertion that only security conditions on the ground should dictate deployments and that any announced redeployments would be an unhelpful broadcast of war plans to the enemy.

Before stepping before the television cameras, Warner met with Lt. Gen. Douglas Lute, the president's chief adviser on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

After Warner made his ideas public — and attracted headlines suggesting he had effectively broken with the president on the war — White House officials said they reached out to Warner's staff and asked him to clarify his position.

Told you so.

According to an administration official, Warner's staff agreed that the story was being portrayed incorrectly as Warner splitting with the president.

"They said they'd take steps to deal with it," said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss details of the private conversations.

Of course {Sigh}

However, in the AP interview, Warner said he personally had not been asked to revise his comments and he took no issue with how his views were reported. When asked whether he had indeed split with Bush on Iraq, he declined to say and noted his remarks speak for themselves.

"You have to surmise that on your own," he said.

What in the Blue Hell does THAT mean?

Warner's comments also prompted pushback Friday from GOP colleagues known for their steadfast allegiance to Bush on the war.

Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., issued a statement saying that efforts to pre-empt Petraeus' September review was "premature and irresponsible." Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, said "it's a little curious to me that people are proposing a change in strategy when in fact the current strategy appears now to be working."

Likewise, the U.S. military commander in one of the more troubled areas of Iraq said Friday that embracing Warner's call to begin withdrawing troops before the end of the year would be "a giant step backward." Army Maj. Gen. Rick Lynch, commander of troops south of Baghdad, said that in such a scenario, militants pushed from his sector in recent operations would quickly return.

The swift pushback undercuts any suggestion that Warner — known for his caution and party loyalty, as well as his expertise on national security issues — might have been paving the way for Bush to announce his own plan to withdraw troops.

Warner, who has not announced whether he will run for re-election next year, said he spoke on his own behalf. He also said he was unconcerned about any political fallout and didn't want to wait until mid-September to speak out because by then Bush may have made up his mind.

WAIT!!! Read that again. Not a quote, but worth noting. He also said he was unconcerned about any political fallout and didn't want to wait until mid-September to speak out because by then Bush may have made up his mind. So perhaps he WAS calling on Bush to pull out troops. Then he said this.

"I've always said politics be damned," he said. "This thing is too important. . . . I simply view my effort as a way of putting out one option that could — I repeat could — help the situation."

Well, there you go. I guess. Now we are fully and completely clear on what Warner was saying. I think.
Peter