Drudge Retort: Red Meat for Yellow Dogs
Monday, January 05, 2009

President-elect Barack Obama has chosen Leon Panetta, who was White House chief of staff for President Bill Clinton, to lead the CIA, Democratic officials said on Monday.

Liberal Blog Advertising Network

Menu

Subscriptions

Author Info

corky

MORE STORIES

Special Features

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in the discussion of this weblog entry should note the site's moderation policy.


Say what!?


Might as well call the Obama Presidency the Clinton Presidency with an Obama face. Unfuckingbelievable.

Larry


What's unbelievable are the people who thought an Obama admin would be oh so different than a Hillary admin.

If I wanted a Clinton Presidency Corky I would have hired Hillary. I expected fresh faces in an Obama Presidency. ALL I see are Bandags.

Larry


Where did you expect these "fresh faces" to get their relevent experience, other than in the last Dem admin?


Oh, I forgot. Obama made experience unnecessary. My bad.

Though maybe that's why he is so dependent on former Clintonistas, eh?

Oh, I forgot. Obama made experience unnecessary. My bad.


Though maybe that's why he is so dependent on former Clintonistas, eh?

Posted by Corky at 2009-01-05 03:57 PM | Reply

And what kind of experience did Hillary have Be honest Corky. Obama had more elected experience than Hillary but yet You won't admit to that.

Larry

Oh, I forgot. Obama made experience unnecessary. My bad.
Posted by Corky

I guess the tree isn't bearing any apples ready to fall.

Where did you expect these "fresh faces" to get their relevent experience, other than in the last Dem admin?


#5 | Posted by Corky at 2009-01-05 03:55 PM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

You can not tell Me that with over 300 MILLION people in this Country He couldn't find qualified people to serve who were not tied to Bill or Hillary Clinton. Now can You corky and be intellectually Honest about it.

Larry

Oh and Obama campaigned on the premise of Change. It's not change when You go back to old retreads Corky. No matter how hard You try You can not say that is change now can You??

Larry


There isn't a nickles worth of difference between the Cabinet Obama has picked and what Clinton would have done..... except maybe Hil would have brought in more fresh faces, lmao!


On topic, I guess Obama figured the CIA needed a real personnel manager instead of another spook.

I took My 18 wheeler in for new tires Corky and I only see Retreads. I hired the boys at GoodYear for fresh Rubber. Don't You think You would be pissed too if You only received used rubber for Your rig??

Larry

What sort of "change" would we be looking for at the CIA???? Oh, I know, the "change" will be that President Obama actually reads the intel memos. That's change you can believe in.

the people who thought an Obama admin would be oh so different than a Hillary admin.

Actually Hillary would be worse, but only marginally so with regards to domestic misandrist policy.

The benefit is in foreign relations and I think that may improve substantially.


I guess Obama just disagrees with you, Lar. Or maybe he just didn't swallow so much of his own kool aid....

Corky, you think he's more qualified than the Hyde Park Chief of Police??


Why Mikey, you have mail....

www.drudge.com

There isn't a nickles worth of difference between the Cabinet Obama has picked and what Clinton would have done..... except maybe Hil would have brought in more fresh faces, lmao!


On topic, I guess Obama figured the CIA needed a real personnel manager instead of another spook.


Posted by Corky at 2009-01-05 04:04 PM | Reply


Now You are talking out of Your ass Corky because Hillary would not be a Fresh face Herself. She would be recycled goods from Jump street.

Larry

-You would be pissed too

If I swallowed more kool aid than the candidate himself?

Naw, I think I would chalk it up to experience and maybe learn not to believe all the hype.


Wis,

I didn't really get that so I used The Googles

www.hydeparkny.us

I still don't get it....

If I swallowed more kool aid than the candidate himself?


Naw, I think I would chalk it up to experience and maybe learn not to believe all the hype.


Posted by Corky at 2009-01-05 04:09 PM | Reply


I guess You don't expect certain things from Your hires now do You Corky?? I guess You are fine with however they do their jobs for You as long as they please themselves huh??

Larry

"Where did you expect these "fresh faces" to get their relevent experience, other than in the last Dem admin?"

Is it impossible to get political experience anywhere but in a presidential administration? What about promoting someone from within the CIA, or at least finding someone who has experience with intelligence matters?

-The benefit is in foreign relations and I think that may improve substantially

Ya mean with Hillary as Sec of State, do ya?

roflmfao

I still don't get it....

#20 | Posted by Corky

Hyde Park in Ill. You know, where Obama lived on the Rezco estate.


Gee, Larry.... ya hire a guy for Leadership and then you bitch and moan when he leads. Some people are never satisfied.


Rezco might have done well at the CIA....

Hyde Park is a rich liberal enclave on the south side of Chicago. It is surrounded by ghettos upon which Obama's "community organization" had very little effect.

Gee, Larry.... ya hire a guy for Leadership and then you bitch and moan when he leads. Some people are never satisfied.


Posted by Corky at 2009-01-05 04:17 PM | Reply


I expected Fresh Faces You know a fresh start. Not so many Clintonites. If I wanted A Clinton administration I WOULD HAVE HIRED HILLARY do You not grasp that Corky.

Larry


Oh, I think I get it, Lar.

Oh, I think I get it, Lar.


Posted by Corky at 2009-01-05 04:20 PM | Reply

Obviously You don't or You aren't being intellectually honesty about it.

Larry


No, I'm just making fun of you again. Maybe I should apologize.

Maybe later.

Is it impossible to get political experience anywhere but in a presidential administration? What about promoting someone from within the CIA, or at least finding someone who has experience with intelligence matters?

#22 | Posted by JOE at 2009-01-05 04:14 PM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

You can not tell Me there aren't qualified people for these positions that do not have Clinton tied to their names.

Larry

It seems to me that Billy-Boy hired a few no-names himself....
Maybe this is all part of the deal B.O. struck with Bill to get him to give up his speaking engagements.

I'm with you Larry. Dorky wants to pretend there's no such thing as someone with intelligence experience that didn't work for Clinton. Most of us aren't that naive.


Penatta IS a surprise.

I was thinking maybe Vlad Putin.... well, he does have experience.... and he's not real busy... and he isn't a Clintonista... just sayin'.

-Dorky wants to pretend there's no such thing as someone with intelligence experience

Would you care to point out where I said anything of the sort, Joelo?

Or will you just be pointing to your ass again where you usually find things?

On topic, I guess Obama figured the CIA needed a real personnel manager instead of another spook.


#11 | Posted by Corky at 2009-01-05 04:04 PM | Reply


I like Leon. I think he's smart as hell and an all around good egg (well as much as you can garner from watching him speak). I don't agree with him being the head of the CIA.

As for you Obamites that lapped up the transparent Hope and Change crap...You're a bunch of fucking fools, just like everyone including Democrats told you prior to the Primary.

Out of say 200 MILLION ADULTS. Only Clintonites are qualified to hold cabinet level and executive positions?? What rubbish Corky. If the only ones qualified are from the former Clinton Administration then this Country is in sadder shape than I thought.

Larry


I always liked Leon, too, I just didn't picture him in a cloak with a dagger.


And I can't believe you passed up the "spook" softball... ;^)

"Dorky wants to pretend there's no such thing as someone with intelligence experience"

"Would you care to point out where I said anything of the sort, Joelo?"

Sure. Right here:

Where did you expect these "fresh faces" to get their relevent experience, other than in the last Dem admin?
Posted by Corky

And my full quote was:

Dorky wants to pretend there's no such thing as someone with intelligence experience that didn't work for Clinton.


Larry,

Reread the thread carefully and find where I said, "Only Clintonites are qualified to hold cabinet level and executive positions".

Take your time, dear.

Considering the fact that Dumbya turned the CIA into a propaganda arm of the rethug party replete with the shameless and traitorous outing of an NOC spook whose husband dared speak truth to power a major housekeeping is well in order here.

Pannetta is a good pick fer that.

/That goes double fer the DoJ, btw.

Be Well.

Where did you expect these "fresh faces" to get their relevent experience, other than in the last Dem admin?

~Corky

True dat.

Anyone suprised by the plethora of ex-Clintonistas in major power positions in the Obama cabinet have simply not being paying attention at all.

Rtards are unhappy with it?

Well, don't that just break Spud's heart?/snark>

Be Well.

And I can't believe you passed up the "spook" softball... ;^)

#39 | Posted by Corky at 2009-01-05 04:46 PM | Reply


I tried to actually make a legit comment. I'll never make that mistake again...


Pookie for Director of the CIA!!!
i103.photobucket.com


Joe-lo,

It's obvious to all but the most inane pettifogger that the most recent Dem admin might be where a normal person in Obama's situation would start looking for experienced help. No where did I, "pretend there's no such thing as someone with intelligence experience that didn't work for Clinton".

That was your usual overstatement, you know, the kind of posting that people usually laugh at you for.

Where did you expect these "fresh faces" to get their relevent experience, other than in the last Dem admin?

#5 | Posted by Corky at 2009-01-05 03:55 PM | Reply | Flag: Flag:

Rtards are unhappy with it?


Posted by dethspud

Unhappy with it? I doubt the Republicans ever bought into this "Change" bullshit in the first place. He certainly could have done worse considering his breath od experience.

Spud I am hardly a RTard and I am even unhappy with it.

Larry

Was that Pookie or Michele Obama?

Hope and Change! Change we can believe in! (I think these gullible fucks are falling for it...Better keep it up...) Yes we can! Foshizzle!
-Hussien Obama

All we need now is a position of power for that hottie, Madeleine Albright. Of course, Michelle might have a problem with it, being a trophy wife and all.

"No where did I, "pretend there's no such thing as someone with intelligence experience that didn't work for Clinton"."

Again, yes you did. It's right here:


Where did you expect these "fresh faces" to get their relevent experience, other than in the last Dem admin?
Posted by Corky at 2009-01-05 03:55 PM

You see, Dorky, when you ask someone critical of Obama's appointment where else he was supposed to find someone with experience, the suggestion is that he only could have found it in the place he already looked. Perhaps a routine English class would help.

Actually CorkScrew I think people in other countries will see America more favorably because Obama's election demonstrates that we as a people are willing to put aside the bigotry and prejudice that has long plagued this nation.

On the other hand his claim that discretion trumps experience is belied by selecting Biden for VP and nominating Clinton for SoS. Two worse choices I can hardly imagine.

As for your "mail" the delay in my receiving it is that I don't live in Appalachia where Clinton polled better than Obama. But I understand why you favor the region, like minds and all that.

Further, opposing feminists who gave up on equal and decide that preference was a better deal is not misogyny. For 30 years men have been portrayed as Al Bundy or Ted Bundy. Neither accurately depicts most men in America. But that campaign has produced a culture of misandry that is real and destructive to our society. I denigrate them because they deserve it. If you to know what a real women thinks of the feminist movement Google Erin Prizzy who started the first shelters for women and children in England. It's an inside look at feminism, and it's not pretty. Here's a snippet: Erin Prizzy Critiques Feminism


Joe-lo

If you'll check the first few posts, in between playing with your Dora the Explorer lunch kit, you'll see that I was responding in general to Lar's in general comments about Obama's cabinet picks, in general.

You are the one that said I, "pretend there's no such thing as someone with intelligence experience that didn't work for Clinton".

Again, your overstatement reflects a weak mind and an even weaker rhetorical ability.

You flunked out of pettifogg... uh, I mean law school, did you?

Don't like this choice. The spooks will make him dizzy from the circles they will run around him. The analysts will consider him a mirage. At best, he will be treated like George Bush sr.

- I denigrate them because they deserve it.

You denigrate women. (That's a period.)

Glad to see you admit it... you know, first baby steps and all. Keep it up and maybe you'll work out your misplaced hostility.

Maybe it won't even take the 5000 years it has taken women to come this far. And maybe you won't have to put up snide little assholes who demean your accomplishments, eh?

"I was responding in general to Lar's in general comments about Obama's cabinet picks, in general."

Well, Dorky, those "general" statements were at the top of a thread about Obama's CIA pick, and appeared to be a direct reference to that pick.

However, if your idiotic statement question as to where people were to get their experience other than the Clinton administration was in no way related to the choice of Leon Panetta, then of course, my bad.

put up with

-my bad

Agreed.

Deliberate ignorance from Dorky. Par for the course.


Well, I knew it would be ignorant to agree with you.

give the guy a chance

start the complaints after the 20th.


when a football team needs change

they get a new coach.

they don't change all the players... some players they keep.

obama if he went out and got all new people... who would he get? you and me?

there aren't THAT many to choose from who know what they are doing.

Spud I am hardly a RTard and I am even unhappy with it.

~Larry

Yeah, Spud gets that Larry.

Here's the deal.

Carter tried to change the face of Washington by bringing in too many outsiders and ended up getting insulated and shut out by the incestuous mob that runs the place. He was effectively a lame duck from the get-go, mostly.

Obama has obviously done a little reading and will not make the same mistake.

DC is an open sewer pipe at present where corruption is the rule rather than the exception. Spud has always sed that Obama's ability to make any sort of effective changes in that city are limited and predicated on how well he plays the game according to the unwritten rules.

Unwritten rule one is "Work with known quantities"

Rule number two (as the Clintons found out when they tried to eradicate "don't ask don't tell" right out of the gate) is "Chose yer battles wisely".

ie. Don't take on a herculean task that, if it backfires, will hamper yer ability to make any sort of future progress in other areas.

There is a grace period of sorts, a honeymoon if you will given to every new POTUS ordinarily but given the grim realities that Obama faces ie. two losing wars and an economy on the brink of depression he will not have the time given to previous admins.

Spud imagines Obama know that.

The CIA need an outside agent to come in and clean up the massive mess that Cheney's meatpuppet Dumbya left.

A total unknown would be laughed out of the room.

Leon won't, despite posts to the contrary already on this thread.

Be Well.

"The CIA need an outside agent to come in and clean up the massive mess ..."

I know I've forgotten way more than I still know (okay, not saying much). Still, has that ever really occurred?

Trying to figure out what, if any, intelligence experience Leon Panetta has. Even a stretch like we saw with Obama ("his inexperience is a positive") would be appreciated.

"Spud imagines Obama know that."

Why do you talk like this?

Seriously?

Your football analogy isn't appropriate here because the Team is already in place they just change the Coach. Now with a new Administration it's a clean Slate where no Team is already assembled. When You hire a new President You expect new faces in the Team. Not retreads from a previous Administration. Especially when You campaign on a Change theme.

Larry

obama if he went out and got all new people... who would he get? you and me?
Posted by klifferd

Tell that to members of Obama's own generation. It appears he's turned his back on the up and coming politicians for the old guard.

"Why do you talk like this?"

Methinks everyone adapts a persona for their appearance on internet discussion sites. Most are very bland. Spud shows imagination. Tip of the hat to him for that.

Spud shows imagination.
Posted by fyi

Then I must have a neighbor with imagination, that rides a special bus. And here I thought he was retarded.

maybe you won't have to put up snide little assholes

You're too much a masochist to leave Drudge.

My hostility, as you call it, is reactionary. I supported the Equal Rights Amendment partly because of my daughter. I think the effort should be resurrected. Women should not be given preference, and opposing that is not misogyny.

You're a sick man Corky. Though articulate and occasionally witty you really have you head up your partisan ass.

What WisGod said

"And here I thought he was retarded." - WisGod

So your 0-fer streak is continuing? Don't fret, it's gotta change sometime.

"What about promoting someone from within the CIA, or at least finding someone who has experience with intelligence matters?

#22 | Posted by JOE at 2009-01-05 04:14 PM | Reply | Flag:"

Of course, then Republican Joe would whine: where is the change?

Larry...

I guess you didn't hear Obama say the HE is the change, not just the people whom he places into positions of authority around him. Can you imagine anyone sentient choosing right now to place a gaggle of people with NO or extremely limited governmental experience in place? Spud is dead-on with his Carter analogy.

The difference and "change" with Obama has always begun and ended with himself as the ultimate arbiter of the open debates of policy and processes that the Bush 43 Administration never had. Obama never stated that he'd staff his Administration with inexperienced people just for the sake of calling it change.

Competence and desired outcomes are the goals, not just window-dressing and posturing attune to campaign slogans. Obama's much to pragmatic for such tripe in my opinion. Give it a chance to work, and I believe you'll be surprised by how well things will turn out.

Tell that to members of Obama's own generation. It appears he's turned his back on the up and coming politicians for the old guard.

This is the beginning of his Administration, not the end. All good things in time....

I guess I expected Different from Obama TonyRoma. His cabinet and executive picks are an extention of Himself because they are an intergal part of His administration. Consider the President as the head of the Human Body and His Cabinet/Executive picks are His hands and feet that do the work of the Head. If the Head is placed on a body of a cadaver that has already been used how is that real change?? All You have is the Head that is different but the body is not. Tell Me where I am wrong in this. Please Tony.

Larry

If everyone in the Obama administration were unknowns people would bitch 'they have no experience'.

The CIA is an arm of the executive branch. Good to have someone Obama can trust will tell it to him straight. Panetta, as a former Chief of Staff, would have been privy to all the functions of various intelligence agencies that serve the President - CIA, NSA, NSC, etc.


If everyone in the Obama administration were unknowns people would bitch 'they have no experience'.


The CIA is an arm of the executive branch. Good to have someone Obama can trust will tell it to him straight. Panetta, as a former Chief of Staff, would have been privy to all the functions of various intelligence agencies that serve the President - CIA, NSA, NSC, etc.


#79 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2009-01-05 06:06 PM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

Your point would be valid if those unknown picks had no educational degrees nor previous work experience in said field of necessity. As long as they had the credentials who could argue against them AU??

Larry

Larry...

It comes down to what its always been. Obama will use the best minds possible to make the best, reasoned decisions possible for outcomes which benefit this nation and us, its citizens. Just because many have been at this rodeo before doesn't undermine that its management and its emphasis are under totally new control.

Take your concern and stretch it to its logical outcome. Should everyone within the entire bureaucracy be pink-slipped because they worked under 43 or Clinton since they don't represent change?

Change is listening and debating more than one's desired outcome and spinning the PR to fit. That is the change Obama offered and is in the process of putting in place. We need competence and professionalism and I see Obama delivering that with his picks. I see the need to be ready to govern last month. Obama has been governing in the eyes of the world. Change, to me, means a government that works FOR me instead of AGAINST my interests and civil liberties and for a more stable world, not one in which everyone is an enemy.

Give him a chance Larry before letting cynicism set in. Let him govern before drawing too many conclusions just from familiar names and faces. I have a feeling the former Clintonites are going to behave quite differently in the Obama Administration than they did over 8 years ago.

It comes down to what its always been. Obama will use the best minds possible to make the best, reasoned decisions possible for outcomes which benefit this nation and us, its citizens. Just because many have been at this rodeo before doesn't undermine that its management and its emphasis are under totally new control.

#81 | Posted by tonyroma at 2009-01-05 06:23 PM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

Can You honestly say out of 200 Million Adults out there the only ones qualified are former Clintonites. Honestly Tony if I wanted a bunch of Clintonites I would have voted for Hillary.

Larry


Good use of your imagination, fyi

Can You honestly say out of 200 Million Adults out there the only ones qualified are former Clintonites. Honestly Tony if I wanted a bunch of Clintonites I would have voted for Hillary.

Let's jump into the "way-back" machine Larry and go for a little ride....

Do you remember anyone complaining about the competence and professionalism of Clinton's appointee's except for those targeted by the rightwing smear machine? I don't seem to remember a clammoring for different folks except for some who were thought not to be progressive enough, but not a lot of problems on competence and in the quality of department leadership, was there?

If Obama is going to find experienced folks who happen to be Democrats/progressives/
liberals just where were they going to get their governmental experiences over the last 28 years?

There was only one place and that was in the 8 years of the Clinton Administration, wasn't it? I see Obama balancing both experience and fresh perspectives with his choices, particularly those in advisory capacities. A lot of Obama's choices actually turned on the Clintons when they backed Bush's insane Iraq policy, so calling them "Clinonites" as though its a monolithic bloc of idealouges isn't being remotely fair nor balanced about the diversity which Bill fostered in his Administration.

Again, the only difference which matters in the end is that they serve at the pleasure of Barrack Obama, NOT Hillary Clinton, and to me that difference is as wide and deep as the Pacific Ocean. Obama's perspective, vision, and leadership style makes all the difference in the world, imo.
(And this is NOT a slam on Hillary in any way. Given the choice, I prefer Obama for RIGHT NOW based on our needs and the state of the globe. He has more leeway than she ever would have with friends and foes alike.)

Still waiting for any actual intelligence experience that Panetta has. Saying his chief of staff position somehow qualifies him is like saying that the head of the PGA would automatically be a good golfer.

I liked every pick up until this one. I think head of the CIA is too important to bring in someone who has no experience there. Hope this doesn't come back to bite President Obama like a certain FEMA director did for Bush.

"Change" the positions of the Clinton Administration.

"Hope" it works.

I was expecting a gang of Chicago hacks. Instead we're getting another Clinton administration. Somehow I'm getting the impression that Bill is running the show from the background.

I will sleep very well at night knowing we have a 70yo CIA director with no expirence.

"Panetta has relatively little experience in national security matters, though he did participate in daily intelligence briefings with President Bill Clinton when he served as Clinton's chief of staff between 1994 and 1997."


So this is the bar for qualifications? I have heard of change but hmmm.....makes you wonder what the one is thinking?


I was expecting a gang of Chicago hacks. Instead we're getting another Clinton administration. Somehow I'm getting the impression that Bill is running the show from the background.


Posted by Ray at 2009-01-05 09:08 PM | Reply

It sure stinks to high heaven Ray.

Larry

"Instead we're getting another Clinton administration."

Oh NO!

'Cause that last round of 8 million jobs, reduced deficits each year, worldwide respect, a soaring Dow, and true surplus budgets delivered to his successor were painful.

lets see
the cia employs osama bin laden

maybe they'll fire him with this non cia insider runnin it

'Cause that last round of 8 million jobs, reduced deficits each year, worldwide respect, a soaring Dow, and true surplus budgets delivered to his successor were painful.

Posted by Danforth at 2009-01-05 09:13 PM | Reply

It would be one thing if Hillary was the next President but She isn't. I expected Change not a regurgitating of Old Administration players.

Larry

A political hack for head of the CIA is what Barry means by hope and change.

"I expected Change not a regurgitating of Old Administration players."

Maybe the change is from cronyism to competence. Not enough for you?

Maybe the change is from cronyism to competence. Not enough for you?

Posted by Danforth at 2009-01-05 09:24 PM | Reply

Out of 200 MILLION Addults the only ones competetent enough are from the Clinton Administration?? Even I am not THAT stupid.

Larry

What? Cindy Sheehan turned BHO down, so we wind up with Leon? This is beyond absurd.

"the only ones competetent enough "

Why are you pissing on competence?

Leon is not qualified--at all.

Sitting in on briefings is not what the CIA Chief would put on their resume.

In fact, Maxwell Smart is better qualified--and Leon resembles agent 86.


Now if there was another reason--like having Leon dismantle the CIA--that makes perfect sense.

OK, for everyone who thinks this is a flawed pick, just think about this. Panetta is experienced and he knows his way around DC politics. He is loyal. And he is not of the GOP inner sanctum of military-industrial clones that Cheney felt so comfortable with. In fact, Panetta, while being very smart is the anti-Cheney adviser. He will give great advice. He will analyze with a critical and judicious set of eyes and ears. And he won't take crap from neocons.

The CIA is the President's personal intel service and unofficial para-military special ops service. It's a big deal.

Given Panetta's credentials -- all important credentials, I'm for his selection. Anyone can run a bureaucracy. Knowing which bureaucrats are trustworthy and which ones aren't is what counts.

He knows nothing about security. Nothing!

He is better for the Department of Kissing Ass than protecting the country.

Why are you pissing on competence?

Posted by Danforth at 2009-01-05 09:38 PM | Reply

I voted for an Obama Administration. NOT a Clinton Administration with an Obama Face.

Larry

Leon Panetta??? wtf??? I mean, seriously, wtf is Obama doing here? This is gonna cost him a lot of points. Dumb Dumb Dumb choice.


OK, for everyone who thinks this is a flawed pick, just think about this. Panetta is experienced and he knows his way around DC politics. He is loyal. And he is not of the GOP inner sanctum of military-industrial clones that Cheney felt so comfortable with. In fact, Panetta, while being very smart is the anti-Cheney adviser. He will give great advice. He will analyze with a critical and judicious set of eyes and ears. And he won't take crap from neocons.


The CIA is the President's personal intel service and unofficial para-military special ops service. It's a big deal.


Given Panetta's credentials -- all important credentials, I'm for his selection. Anyone can run a bureaucracy. Knowing which bureaucrats are trustworthy and which ones aren't is what counts.

#16 | Posted by townncountry at 2009-01-05 09:40 PM |


Spot-on TNC. Panetta is a centrist to boot. If memories serves me right, the Bush Admin threw the last CIA head and right hand man under the bus w/ regards to Afghanistan and Bin Laden. Panetta will keep the house (no pun) in order.

One of Carter's problems was he brought his Georgia gang with him, and was left without enough DC insiders. Obama seems determined not to follow the same path.


Leon Panetta??? wtf??? I mean, seriously, wtf is Obama doing here? This is gonna cost him a lot of points. Dumb Dumb Dumb choice.

#19 | Posted by bellaspapa at 2009-01-05 09:46 PM


Why's that bella?

I voted for an Obama Administration. NOT a Clinton Administration with an Obama Face.

"You can't always get what you want.
You can't always get what you want.
You can't always get what you want.
But if you try sometime you'll find
You get what you need"

Rolling Stones

but hey, it's still a BIG step up from Shrub's hackery job.

Well, isn't this what we want, all politics all the time.

It so productive to choose people who are familiar with PLAYING politics, it gets a whole lot done and just they way we want it done.

It would be one thing if Hillary was the next President but She isn't. I expected Change not a regurgitating of Old Administration players.
#9 | Posted by LarryMohr

must not... say .... I told... you... so...

but seriously, change didn't necessarily mean that there would be fresh faces in every spot, but that what Obama did with these people would be different. At least that was the talking point.

That said, I don't know how you pick somebody whose highest position was essentially running the president's schedule, but I'm sure that Obama knows something that we don't know. He better know something that we don't know.

#19 | Posted by bellaspapa at 2009-01-05 09:46 PM

Why's that bella?

#22 | POSTED BY REDSOXFAN AT 2009-01-05 09:48 PM |

because he's gong to get eaten alive over this, from both sides of the aisle. I wasn't commenting on Panetta's qualifications one way or the other, I have no idea if he'll be good at this job or not. Who does? I only meant the political fallout for the big O.

change

maybe, if we're lucky

except Wall Street won't stand for it

Everyone is wondering what the Clintons have on Barry.

Yes that experience as a community organizer and head of the Harvard Law Review is really showing on this pick.

Yes, I will repeat it once again, Barack Obama is not qualified or experienced enough to be president!

Politically, Obama does not have to worry about the Republicans. But he should keep a good eye on the Clintonites that he has surrounded himself with. Maybe Governor Richardson realized that the best time to leave, was before arriving.

"Yes, I will repeat it once again, Barack Obama is not qualified or experienced enough to be president!"

WOW! President-elect Obama is not qualified or experienced enough to be, well, president.

No doubt the voters of America will take heed of that.

I wonder what they'll ultimately decide?

Hans

Obama is a puppet.

Question is -- who's pulling the strings?

Johhny-
Why do you think Obama is a "puppet"?

#20 | Posted by Redsoxfan

Excuse me mr socks--

But you are referring to George Tenet--who was a hold over from the Clinton Administration.

He had to go after 9/11.

Does this all ring a bell?

-----

And Leon is picked to dismantle the CIA--just like he did with the military when Clonton picked him for the Office of Management and Budget.

And look for all the national security secrets to be on display in the NYT.

And our enemies cheered!

"And look for all the national security secrets to be on display in the NYT."

Yeah! That would be new...

The Plame Game
Oops.

Hans

"Johhny-Why do you think Obama is a "puppet"?"

Because Boy George was a puppet, so everyone must be.

Danforth-
Well, that makes more sense than the affirmative-action-same-as-
the-black-quarterback Limbaugh bullshit that Johnny was pimping.

I just worry that God forbid we are attacked again its used against Obama because Panetta really isn't qualified to run the CIA. Just like Brown and his abysmal performance/qualifications wrecked Bush's second term after Katrina. I wish he had picked someone more in the mold of his NSA for this extremely important position.

Funny how Obama can't ever make a mistake or exercise poor judgement in some people's eyes. Dan your blind faith in the president-elect is nothing short of amazing. I can't stand Bush and am excited about the new administration but damn -- you talk like Obama has a paper asshole.

As to why I don't think he's pulling the strings it is apparent to most folks here that he's picking a lot of Clinton retreads. Which again, is fine with me but it makes me wonder....

Well, as long as Israel is happy with his choices, what difference does it make?

"Dan your blind faith in the president-elect is nothing short of amazing."

Whereas your condemnation of the man before he draws his first breath as President is par for the course.

Black quarterback Limbaugh bullshit? you've got me confused with someone else Betelg. With JohnnyHotSauce perhaps? Put your readers on.

Johnnylock-
So, your entire argument regarding Obama as a "puppet" is that he's choosing Democrats with executive branch experience to serve in his administration?

That's it?

Johnny-
re: Obama is a puppet.

Question is -- who's pulling the strings?

#31 | Posted by johnnylock at 2009-01-05 10:15 PM | Reply | Flag:

You haven't even kinda almost sorta made your case, so I just assumed you were a mimic.

Prove me wrong.

a very, very, very astute magical puppet, though:>)


ps knows when to keep his mouth shut





i.e. Gaza slaughter galore off topic for now until 1/20/12?

whoops 1/20/2013?

There's a lot worse choices we could make for important positions.

Like.. a one-term Senator who isn't even finished with that term yet.

whoops 1/20/2013?

Um... the world will be over by then. This batshit insane youtube video convinced me.

Not really, though.

There's a lot worse choices we could make for important positions.

Like.. a one-term Senator who isn't even finished with that term yet.

#46 | Posted by soheifox at 2009-01-05 11:57 PM

ff and also my first ever newsworthy flag

Sohei-
I'm truly sorry that whomever you voted for lost. Get over it.

Watching this election, one thing struck me sharply; it was something that was not political in the usual sense of the word:

One guy was ready, and on the ball. The other guy was flailing around like a half-gutted fish. Fortunately, the guy on his game won.

"a one-term Senator who isn't even finished with that term yet."

Truman wouldn't have been finished with his second term when he became President. He didn't turn out so bad. How about if we give the guy a chance in the Oval Office before condemning him?

An hour or two should do it for you guys.


"whoops 1/20/2013?"


Um... the world will be over by then. This batshit insane youtube video convinced me.

#47 | Posted by ZombieHunter

Satan minons coming thru the black hole...lol

now where have I heard that one before:>)

www.imdb.com

Truman wouldn't have been finished with his second term when he became President. He didn't turn out so bad.


Dear Yahoo!:
Which presidents have received the highest and lowest approval ratings?
...
The all-time worst numbers belong to Harry Truman (23%),

It's my own opinion -- not kinda of sort of -- it is. If I had proof of the Clintons strong-arming Obama do you honestly think my life would be so dull that I'd be posting on this site?

And if you cannot see that appointing old Clinton appointees is politically problematic and highly spurious, you're either incredibly naive or nothing but a hack for Obama. I'm going with the latter (that's me being nice btw).

I'll say it again. I'm thrilled/excited/happy about Obama but I do not understand this particular appointment. But I don't think you do either. Now go back to giving Danforth a reach around and leave me alone.