Petraeus

If I had a buck for every time over the last year or so a Republican had expressed the fond wish that Gen. David Petraeus would eventually enter the race for President, then right now I’d be on a golf course, not at my desk. 

In certain quarters, the draft-Petraeus strategy had already been worked out to a fare-thee-well.  Iowa would produce no clear winner.  Then New Hampshire would go to Romney, but by only a feeble margin.  Commentators, prominent Republican officials—heck, even Rob Long:  all would begin publicly entreating Gen. Petreaus to put on civvies and enter the race.  For a week or two he would resist.  Then, admitting that, after a life of service to the nation, he could not turn his back on his country now, he would indeed enter the race.  Every Republican and three-quarters of Independents would rally to him, and in January 2013 David Petraeus would take the oath of office as the forty-five chief executive.

The whole scenario had a certain appeal.  No, it had a lot of appeal.  But now that Gen. Petraeus has accepted the President’s nomination to become CIA Director?

Before it began, it's over.

  • Comment Filters
Contributor Comments
Member Comments
Comment Popularity

Comments :

Trace Urdan
Joined
May '10
Trace Urdan

I need for someone smarter than I to explain how this is a good thing. Why Panetta for defense and not Petraeus? And why Petraeus for CIA which seems to operate in a thousand ways that the DoD does not?  Why disrupt two organizations instead of only one. I just don't get it.

Frozen Chosen
Joined
Aug '10
Frozen Chosen

Peter, do you have evidence that Petraeus would be conservative in regards to domestic issues?  How do you know he is not another Colin Powell, who elicited the same sort of hope several cycles ago and turned out to be an uber RINO?

Just askin'....

Stuart Creque
Joined
Dec '10
Stuart Creque

I don't see why Petraeus couldn't resign from the CIA as easily as he could from the military, if he decides to run for office.

Charles Mark
Joined
Aug '10
Charles Mark

Surely the real story here is how the General has moved from Far (and not so far) Left hate-figure to being appointed to yet another key position by the Left's favourite President ever?

Kenneth
Joined
Jul '10
Kenneth

Peter, as is pretty well known here, I am far, far from an admirer of Petraeus. 

Of course I honor his service.  But this is the guy, after all, who subscribes to a politically-correct war doctrine which imposes rules of engagement that cost American lives, while doling out cash tribute to people who hate us and measuring the progress of the war by how many Afghans have cell phones.

Everything Bing West tells us about why our efforts in Afghanistan are failing can be laid at Petraeus' doorstep.

David Williamson
Joined
Mar '11
David Williamson

This is about the smartest thing that Mr Obama has done (not that there is much competition).

I can't really see General Petraeus running for President, anyway - he is far too mild-mannered and gentlemanly.

Gus Marvinson
Joined
Mar '11
Gus Marvinson

Generals aren't always forthcoming about their political leanings, for good reason, which makes this less a disappointment and more a curiosity. I don't understand the hop from Afghanistan to the CIA. Did Petraeus achieve some measurable, sustainable success in Poppyland? I'd love to know what Rummy thinks!

Edited on Apr 27, 2011 at 10:10pm
Bill Whalen

Peter, I think a Petraeus candidacy would have been a great test of how Republicans go about choosing a leader -- and what qualifies as mainstream-acceptable in the primary process.

Impeccable military credentials and, as you suggest, so easy to enter the race as the drafted "high road" candidate.

But here's where things would get "rocky" (with an upper-case "R", as in Rockefeller), and I'm quoting from a September 2008 New Yorker profile of the general:

Petraeus is registered to vote as a Republican in New Hampshire—he once described himself to a friend as a northeastern Republican, in the tradition of Nelson Rockefeller—but he said that around 2002, after he became a two-star general, he stopped voting.
What if Petraeus, as a Republican, turned out to be a uniformed version of Oly Snowe and Susan Collins in terms of social issues? Would conservatives dare come forward and call him a four-star RINO?

Edited on Apr 27, 2011 at 3:58pm
Ken Sweeney
Joined
Oct '10
Ken Sweeney

Gen. David Petraeus was the Republican version of Obama.  RINO’s and non-tea party Republicans can feel free to project all of their own personal policy preferences and good vibrations onto a cipher of a candidate.  

I live in the real world.  I wanna see candidates with a track record and policy coherence when making a speech.  Let the fantasy-makers remain in the Democrat party.

Layla
Joined
Nov '10
Layla

Bill Whalen:

Petraeus is registered to vote as a Republican in New Hampshire—he once described himself to a friend as a northeastern Republican, in the tradition of Nelson Rockefeller—but he said that around 2002, after he became a two-star general, he stopped voting.

Wha--?! Is this typical among officers? Frankly, I'm shocked that Petraeus would admit to not voting, unless this is a "military thing" that I just don't understand. And I *don't* understand it.

Petraeus lost me with his obsequious "Holy Quran" stuff. Utterly lost me.

Peter Robinson

Frozen Chosen: Peter, do you have evidence that Petraeus would be conservative in regards to domestic issues?  How do you know he is not another Colin Powell, who elicited the same sort of hope several cycles ago and turned out to be an uber RINO?

Just askin'.... · Apr 27 at 3:19pm

I have zero such evidence.  Nor have I so much as spoken to anyone who claimed to have even a glimmer of such evidence.  The Petraeus Dream was always wistful--and wishful.

flownover
Joined
Aug '10
flownover

Another puzzle from the master ! How can we deign to see the brilliance in the design that he etches on the ages. Grasshopper ... Why does the porridge bird lay it's eggs in the air ? CIA does what exactly , lately , accurately ? And Panetta's qualifications for SecDef are what exactly, lately, and -yes- accurately ? Do we get to have Carney (unintended barker reference) to tell us ?
Step right up

Edited on Apr 27, 2011 at 7:14pm
Erik Larsen
Joined
Jan '11
Erik Larsen

"Uncommon Knowledge, with special guest David Petraeus".  I can dream, can't I, Mr Robinson?  :-)

Troy Senik

My thoughts precisely, Trace. Petraeus has been deified to the point where it's hard to think of anything the man can't do -- and he's earned most of those accolades. But I don't see a shred of evidence to indicate that he's a particularly wise choice to take the helm at Langley.

Trace Urdan: I need for someone smarter than I to explain how this is a good thing. Why Panetta for defense and not Petraeus? And why Petraeus for CIA which seems to operate in a thousand ways that the DoD does not?  Why disrupt two organizations instead of only one. I just don't get it. · Apr 27 at 3:16pm

Joined
Feb '11
Rackut

Does this appointment signify that Mr. Obama is apprehensive about Gen. Petraeus' political ambitions? 

Edited on Apr 27, 2011 at 9:20pm

Joined
Feb '11
Rackut

For anyone out there with a connection to the intelligence community: will Petraeus' appointment raise morale at the agency, particularly on the ops side?

Bill Whalen
Erik Larsen: "Uncommon Knowledge, with special guest David Petraeus".  I can dream, can't I, Mr Robinson?  :-) · Apr 27 at 7:14pm

My suggestion for 2012: before Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire or South Carolina cast a ballot, we hold the "Robinson Primary" -- see who can and can't clear the "Uncommon Knowledge" bar . . .

Douglas
Joined
Mar '11
Douglas

It's never been my dream. And I've grown increasingly suspicious that the guy isn't a conservative anyway. He deserves a lot of credit for his part in turning Iraq around, but I think we're seeing increasing evidence that he was but one part of that situation. I watched your UK interview with Rummy, and I seemed to get the impression that he believed the same thing... that the general did a good job, but also arrived at just the right time, in congruence with several other timely factors.

Erik Larsen
Joined
Jan '11
Erik Larsen

 Above comments re Petraeus - I think this is a great development.  Hopefully he can rest a bit, but maybe it's not in his nature. 

Perhaps he can help reform the lack of information sharing - this is a GREAT article

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/03/magazine/03intelligence.html?_r=1

Kenneth
Joined
Jul '10
Kenneth
Douglas: It's never been my dream. And I've grown increasingly suspicious that the guy isn't a conservative anyway. He deserves a lot of credit for his part in turning Iraq around, but I think we're seeing increasing evidence that he was but one part of that situation. I watched your UK interview with Rummy, and I seemed to get the impression that he believed the same thing... that the general did a good job, but also arrived at just the right time, in congruence with several other timely factors. · Apr 27 at 9:56pm

Yep.  He's the rooster who believes the sun came up because he crowed.


Would you like to comment on this Conversation?

Become a Member for $3.67 a month.

Join the Conversation
Already a member? Sign In
Loading
Welcome Visitor

Already a Member?
Please Sign In

Become a Member to enjoy the full benefits of Ricochet:

Join Ricochet today!

Already a Member? Sign In