Patterico's Pontifications

11/9/2008

Obama: Who Would Be Good for AG? Hey, How About That Woman Who Erected the Wall Between the FBI and DoJ? That Sounds Good!

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 11:30 pm



Is this a joke? It has to be a joke.

Certainly Barack Obama can’t be seriously considering nominating Jamie Gorelick as Attorney General. He can’t truly be considering hiring the woman who erected the wall between FBI counterintelligence agents and DoJ with a memo that said:

We believe that it is prudent to establish a set of instructions that will more clearly separate the counterintelligence investigation from the more limited, but continued, criminal investigations. These procedures, which go beyond what is legally required, will prevent any risk of creating an unwarranted appearance that FISA is being used to avoid procedural safeguards which would apply in a criminal investigation.

Beldar says that “the prospect of Jamie Gorelick heading up the Department of Justice is worth filibustering, if anything or anyone is.”

Damn right.

This is the first test of the few conservatives we have left in Congress.

100 Responses to “Obama: Who Would Be Good for AG? Hey, How About That Woman Who Erected the Wall Between the FBI and DoJ? That Sounds Good!”

  1. God, I had heard this too. Timmothy Noah at Slate has flagged her as someone whom Obama should not appoint, though only for reasons of her involvement with Fannie Mae.

    JVW (f93297)

  2. But he’s a good man, Pat. Let’s give Obama the benefit of the doubt. He’s our President now. OUR President. Time to unify as a country, and whatever else John McCain said the night he lost the election.

    And did you read Obama’s account of his first meeting with George Bush? Such a decent man.

    Greg Ransom (ff5e16)

  3. I think that the criticism of Gorelick should be toned way down. It would be marvelous if she were nominated.

    Nose picker (fd7c16)

  4. Didn’t Gorelick also serve on the 9/11 Commission and have a hand in airbrushing the performance of the Clinton Administration?

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  5. But he’s a good man, Pat.

    Yawn.

    And you’re starting to become a predictable one.

    Why don’t you go back and actually read my posts about all this. If you can find the one where I say all his policies are going to be great I’ll PayPal you $100. Until then, this sort of predictable strawman bullshit is the kind of thing I expect from drive-by readers who don’t know me better.

    Patterico (cc3b34)

  6. Greg – I think you missed the point of Patterico’s post. Try reading it if you haven’t already done so. This time for comprehension.

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  7. “Certainly Barack Obama can’t be seriously considering nominating Jamie Gorelick as Attorney General.”

    What? When Ramsey Clark and Lynne Stewart are available?

    Dave Surls (165978)

  8. Nominating Gorelick would be an unforced error on Obama’s part. Assuming, that is, that the reasons for the filibuster ever reached the newspapers etc.

    Kevin Murphy (0b2493)

  9. Dave Surls wrote:

    What? When Ramsey Clark and Lynne Stewart are available?

    Sorry, they’re off the list. It’s not like they weren’t Obama’s type, but he can’t appoint “out” commies — just the stealth ones.

    And for all those folks who think “He can’t be a socialist! He’s a patriot!” Google Ramsey Clark.

    L.N. Smithee (ac4317)

  10. Nose picker:

    I hear what you’re saying, but after what we just went through with the media during the campaign, do you really want to bet that all the skeletons (and there are at least 3k just from 9-11 alone) in her closet won’t just stay comfortably there? I wouldn’t take that bet…

    ECM (de5660)

  11. Jamie Gorelick – Proudly undermining America since 1993.

    Perfect Sense (9d1b08)

  12. A Gorelick pick would be more evidence of a character problem — I doubt her policies would be more left wing than anyone else he might appoint.

    Obama seems to have a taste for people whose ethics should exclude them from the public arena.

    Gorelick knew she had a conflict of interest on the 9/11 panel — and took the job anyway and used her position to protect herself and Clinton.

    Obama sees that and says, that’s the kind of person I want heading my Justice Department. We know the guy is smart when it comes to bare knuckles politics, if nothing else. (Read a bit about how Obama rose to power in Chicago.)

    Greg Ransom (ff5e16)

  13. i don’t see what the problem is: this is exactly the sort of thing one could reasonably expect Juggy to do if he got elected, and *SURPRISE*, here he is doing it.

    as for a filibuster? forget it: that’s being racist, and divisive and all the other adjectives the MSM will throw out there to slant the story, assuming you could find enough RINOs to actually try. i’d put money down on McLame joining in the vote to break it.

    this is what they voted for, this is what they’re getting. we are now seeing the true nature of this “good man”. some of us just see better than others.

    redc1c4 (27fd3e)

  14. Republicans have been in power for 0.0 years since 1994

    Briefly they won some major legislative victories

    Welfare reform – the end of Aid for Dependent Childen

    Immigration Reform – 15000 new Border Patrol agents and the starting of wall

    NCLB – introducing accountability to school districts – no longer are they solely political patronage centers of dubious earning

    Tax relief – it wasn’t what Bush had asked for – it was less than half but it did pass

    Now with the minority Dems acting like the majority in the period 2002 to 2006 when this supposed 14 years of Republican rule started (who writes this stuff and more importantly who on earth ever believes it?)…

    Now let the new president and his anarchist buddies finally have to go on record as to how and who will govern.

    And watch – will the new meme be that low approval ratings equate to racism?

    Camelot – over for he even takes office

    EricPWJohnson (cc9286)

  15. redc1c4

    you know that “good man” thing is getting trite

    I got reamed on another blog for wishing Ted Kennedy a successful surgery

    when people rose up and attacked me – I reminded Them that he lost all his brothers in the service of our country and has defended his constituents consistenly and constantly never compromising his liberal principles.

    I never agreed with Ted – just pointed out that people loved him fiercely – family – friends – the public – and he a decent human being that does huge private charity work

    Obama’s family loves him – thats good enough for me

    And no I don’t agree with anything Obama says

    EricPWJohnson (cc9286)

  16. I doubt he will put her up as his pick. Rahm was around for the Clinton years and saw up close how the more contentious picks hurt things. I don’t think Obama wants too much controversy in his picks. Mainly because it would take away some of the momentum in the first year as he attempts to pass a lot of his ideas.

    voiceofreason2 (fcc9d3)

  17. Mary Jo Kopechne could not be reached for comment…

    Adriane (b8ecd8)

  18. As you say, I doesn’t sound like a serious move. Two possibilities: tout the possibility just to poke us in the eye, or, purposely do a few things that WILL cause filibusters so they can complain about obstructionism and reduce the possibility of further filibusters in the future.

    Ken in Camarillo (aa2192)

  19. oops. I = it

    Ken in Camarillo (aa2192)

  20. The same Gorelick who served as a director of Fannie Mae while the mortgage mess was building.

    Lots of credibility there. Right.

    Tregonsee (231c2f)

  21. Just raising the prospect without going through with it could make whoever Barack Obama does appoint look comparatively good.

    David Blue (aabb9d)

  22. Obama seems to have a taste for people whose ethics should exclude them from the public arena.
    Only when the noise gets too loud.

    I’m waiting to see where Sandy Berger ends up.

    MD in Philly (3d3f72)

  23. I’m waiting to see where Sandy Berger ends up.

    Ministry of Official Records

    Mossberg500 (9fd170)

  24. AZ Gov. Janet Napolitano – less controversial than Gorelick, but equally noxious. She’s desperate to leave AZ given the financial position the state is in and the convincing victories achieved by the Republicans in the State Legislature.

    Horatio (55069c)

  25. Obama is not a good man. Those people who think this are deficient in street smarts. Obama is a Chicago trained political thug. In his in youth he sold illicit pharmaceuticals. In his election campaign he besmirched his critics as racists. Obama encouraged a cult of personality. He has the ethics and demeanor of Huey Long. Obama and his minions are going appoint judges that will eviscerate the constitution of the US. And you persist in believing he is a good man.

    not a yanki (95ff42)

  26. Pat,

    I’ve been reading this site for years (along with PW, JoM, AoS, et cetera), Obama isn’t a “good man”, he’s a “greater-good man”.

    The Left’s fears about the Bush Regime turned out to be unfounded. As far as I know, tens of thousands of library patrons have not been rounded up for reading the wrong websites or books.

    Books haven’t been banned. Rachel Maddow, Keith Olbermann, the former Air America host who can’t handle her booze, Oliver Stone were not disappeared. AWOLBUSH.com stayed up for the duration.

    Andrew Sullivan found increasingly fancier digs to dry his crying towel.

    Hollywood made films which celebrated the assassination of a president. Dissent was allowed to be the highest form of patriotism.

    Scooter Libby was prosecuted, as was Ken Lay. Iran remained unbombed. Obama used Blackwater to do his security in Afghanistan.

    John McCain won the RethugliKKKan Nomination?

    I mean, jeez, where were the effing black helicopters? I was promised *black* *helicopters* … and fascism. I was promised that too.

    Now we’ve got Obama as President-elect and he, and his supporters, are set to implement what will likely be the most sweeping set of restrictions on personal freedoms ever. Hyperbole?!? Sadly, no! Witness what happened when Joe the Plumber asked a question that got Obama off-script. A well-intentioned government official, acting in the greater good, did some very bad things. That won’t have consequences.

    Dissent is the highest form of patriotism, Patrick.

    For the next three months.

    BumperStickerist (54b3a3)

  27. …but…but…but Obama is a good and decent man looking after the best interests of all Americans.

    Swriously Patterico, your position keeps looking silliere and sillier

    Fred Schwartz (fcf819)

  28. Gorelick?! Surely, this is a joke. It simply must be.

    JD (831256)

  29. Emmanuel = Fannie/Freddie
    Gorelick = Fannie/Freddie
    Raines = Fannie/Freddie

    Obama = $200K+ from Fannie/Freddie

    Is there any more math to do? Change my ass.

    Ted (db72a7)

  30. EVERY reason you cite against her is viewed as badge of honor among Democrats. Helping Fannie Mae? Great. Protecting our civil liberties (aka ‘the wall’)? ditto. Helping politicize the Justice Department with Clinton? Terrific!

    stevesturm (369bc6)

  31. She studied at the knee of Janet Reno, knows how to coverup and block for obama, knows how to extract money (fannie/freddie) and is willing to through the USA under the bus……PERFECT!

    Judith (76ca0a)

  32. I would filibuster. And when the Democrats vote to end the filibuster, all Republican senators should walk out and tour the country proclaiming what has happened.

    Ditto if Franken steals the Minnesota seat.

    There will be a small window of time to get the message out. This must happen in the spring.

    Amphipolis (fdbc48)

  33. Seriously, Patrick. Enjoy the next couple of months while dissent can be considered the highest form of patriotism.

    After that … who knows?

    ———–

    The only good that will come out of this will be watching Greenwald’s slowly dawning realization that electing The One ensures a Unitary Executive.

    BumperStickerist (54b3a3)

  34. Hmmm, the notorious Gorelick wall between agencies and Fannie Mae? Maybe the third time, as AG she would get it finally right? O! should pass on this when he has better choices available. Why not Lani Guinier? Clinton got stuffed on her, but now may be the right time. Lani is a great pic for AG or SCOTUS. Would be great to see some “fairness” forced on our racist society. You greedy rethuglican power hungry racists need to be taken to task. Our governmnet need show the world that we believe in real justice and righting wrongs. Guinier for AG- she could go after the Bush cabal and every other egregious conservative malcontent of the previous eight years. Also we need to look long and hard at reparations for oppressed blacks. The money is available in those 401k’s. And I like Guinier’s sensible stand on giving each black a multiple of votes, whether four or five, to balance out population numbers and give minorities their rightful due. Between bleeding heart white libtards and the extra black votes, there is no reason we could not be more united as a country, with firmer support for our Dear Leader. Looking forward to that new Obama holiday Nov.4th too. The man is a saint and had goldy qualities Born to lead and unite us and the world.
    Put Gorelick on the Supreme Court and better yet find some way to pack the court and dilute the influence of those four nasty conservatives.

    madmax333 (0c6cfc)

  35. This all just seems like a bad dream …

    JD (831256)

  36. Where she’d be in charge of making sure that the bailed out Wall Street firms’ executives aren’t taking outsized compensation.

    Dan Collins (4dc2da)

  37. Having taken $26.5 million at Fannie Mae herself. Only 40% or so of what Franklin Raines got for his role in driving them into the gutter (after paying back $25 million or so).

    Dan Collins (4dc2da)

  38. What Janet Reno isn’t available? Ron Kuby turned down the position? Allen Colmes wants to continue his sidekick role on Hannity? Pat Leahy likes his Senatorial privileges too much? Ralph Nader still not back on the liberal kiss list yet? Well then I guess Gorelick (imagine those two syllables in one name, ugh) will perfectly encapsule everything wrong with an Obama administration and everything that the right warned about but the nation refused to harken to.

    eaglewingz08 (c46606)

  39. Rahm, of course, was on the board of Freddie Mac. But as I was told by the MSM in the run-up to the elections, nothing to see here, casual acquaintances. This leaves out Johnson, of course.

    Dan Collins (4dc2da)

  40. Change we can count on. Clinton III — not II damn it!!!!!!!

    Anyway, why do the dirty work when you can hire the most partisan, unscrupulous to do it for you. Just a continuation of the campaign strategy to get your surrogates to be vile attack dogs while you sit in your throne and stay above the fray.

    Old saying in Spanish “El que dice menos interes tenien es el que mas le interesa.”

    Fidel Castro is also a very charming, disarming, dare say decent fellow, when he is not busy using the gov.t to feed his ego, kill and enslave his people to poverty. But hey the health care and education are “free” so long as you expect 1920’s health and education.

    In fact, history shows most socialist are quite fine fellows at the Club. Hussein not different so far. Still waiting for Hope and Change.

    Opposition 1 — Patterico 0

    Robert Rodriguez (54247e)

  41. Incidentally, no wonder all the Clintonistas jumped ship so fast. Promises to fulfill.

    Robert Rodriguez (54247e)

  42. For a guy who was selling “change” and “getting rid of programs that don’t work”, he seems bent on giving us a bunch of Clinton administration cronies.

    Steverino (647a08)

  43. The Powerpoint President.

    Pretty slides for the unwashed masses and advocates yet all repackaged crap.

    FOr us Biz types: Like getting the McKinsey pitch after the Bain pitch after the Booz Allen pitch after the BCG pitch.

    Robert Rodriguez (54247e)

  44. Makes sense to me, that will assure that the American people never know which terrorists organizations contributed $300 million+ to buy Hussein the white house. Anyone who believes the ‘poor’ in this country ‘gave’ $500+ million to Hussein should become permanent residents of GITMO. They are dangerously crazy. If the ‘poor’ are getting that much excess money from the welfare system it’s time for all of us to quit work and go on welfare.

    Scrapiron (ce69ff)

  45. the prospect of Jamie Gorelick heading up the Department of Justice is worth filibustering, if anything or anyone is

    No. There are bigger issues.

    Stacking the Supreme Court. Manipulating the census. Hate crime legislation designed to shut down the free press. If they intend to consolidate power in this way, they would have to do it right away.

    You can only filibuster once, and then they could cut the filibuster. At that point the Republicans must walk out. So make the issue count, make it big.

    Gorelick is a bad pick, but her pick would not permanently change our form of government.

    Amphipolis (fdbc48)

  46. Aside from her less than stellar act re FBI/DOJ, because of the still very fresh Freddie/Fannie mess is, Gorelick almost seems an in-your-face choice. Obama surely knows that selecting anyone at this point in time with involvement in either institution is not going to to go over well. So why provoke from the get-go?

    Dana (79a78b)

  47. Terrorist enabler, Jamie Gorelick is the perfect pick for Obama’s lead law enforcement officer.

    Considering her experience during and after the Clinton years, she can be counted on to continue her work opening the doors wide for additional terrorist attacks, and illegal immigration (except for young boys from Cuba), protecting Obama and his administration from the distraction of legal entanglements arising from voter fraud and improper foreign campaign funding, and of course blocking nosey inquires into alleged irregularities at FannieMae and FreddieMac (might disrupt ongoing DOJ investigations, don’t ya know).

    Pattrico asked if this possible nomination was a joke. The answer is yes, and the joke is on us.

    Ropelight (12b166)

  48. To Prestopundit, Fred Schwartz, and others:

    I’m really tired of the “good man” debate, but let me point out that in the first post I did about the concept I said this:

    What’s more, I think he will damage this country with bad policies. I’m not going to pretend otherwise. Inevitably, he is going to take actions that I think are disastrous, and somebody will come back and say: “Hey, Patterico! I thought you said Barack Obama was a good man!” Yes, but I never said he wasn’t going to do horrible things. It’s quite clear he will.

    So you’ve managed to PROVE ME WRONG!!!1!!1! by pointing out something that I already said (several times, in fact).

    (And PLEASE don’t respond to this comment by saying: “So how come you called him a good man, then?” Take it to another thread; we’ve heard it all before.)

    Looks like I’m going to need to keep that quote at my fingertips for all of you who glided right over it in your outrage.

    I’m not going to stop criticizing Obama just because people who didn’t read my posts insist on coming onto my site and pretending like my point was that Obama’s policies would be good. But I’m going to keep that quote handy so you don’t fool even more people.

    So why don’t you all give it a rest so we can talk about those policies? I somehow doubt I’m the only person tired of this discussion.

    Now: back to Gorelick, please?

    Patterico (cc3b34)

  49. Also check out how well Jamie is doing as attorney for Duke University. She would certainly do as fine a job as Janet Reno did!

    dfbaskwill (cd5aa9)

  50. I have to agree; this predictable preamble of snark already reached the sell – by date about two days ago. Like a bad comedian who only knows one punch line, and uses it no matter the subject at hand – it’s done.

    Dmac (e30284)

  51. You are going to be needled in posts using “good man” and “flawed” for months, if not longer…
    Think of it like being a fan of a football team whose QB sucks. You defended your QB preseason with a few remarks and now every time the QB throws a wobbly pass to the wrong guys your words get mocked at the water cooler.
    I think Obama’s flaws are a feature, and that he is a bad man for the job as President.

    I do not want to see conservatives fall into the same trap as when Clinton was President and I understand the attempts by conservative bloggers to preempt that.

    All that stuff above is to let you know that I’ll be needling you every time you see “good man” or “flawed”. I plan to over reach at times, and I’ll rarely be as funny as I think I am. I’ll be able to dish it out, but not take it, so when the tables are turned I promise to use bad language and/or change the subject to something more to my favor.

    The choice of Gorelick would be flawed.
    Pushing that choice through would be the action of a bad President who chooses ideology over our safety.

    I’d be just fine if Obama decided to go home in 4 years and be a good husband and father

    SteveG (71dc6f)

  52. I plan to over reach at times, and I’ll rarely be as funny as I think I am. I’ll be able to dish it out, but not take

    Trust me, you’re already tired and hackneyed. Planning a tour of the Catskills?

    Dmac (e30284)

  53. I plan to over reach at times, and I’ll rarely be as funny as I think I am. I’ll be able to dish it out, but not take it, so when the tables are turned I promise to use bad language and/or change the subject to something more to my favor.

    Funny. Pretty good description of a lot of blog commenters.

    Patterico (cc3b34)

  54. Patterico: Now: back to Gorelick, please?

    Okay, let’s try the syllogism route:

    Jamie Gorelick does not associate with good people.

    Barack Obama associates with Jamie Gorelick

    but, seriously folks, I’d prefer to wait until the person is nominated and find out from what gutter they crawled before casting an opinion.

    My first homework assignment will be to compare Gorelick’s qualifications with those outlined in Glenn(s) Green(s)wald’s book “How Would a Patriot Act?”. I mean, c’mon, Glenn’s a good guy.

    I’m hopeful that all the qualities found lacking in Boooooosh’s AG appointees will be apprent in Gorelick or whomever Barack nominates.

    BumperStickerist (54b3a3)

  55. Bring the nomination on! A Gorelick hearing would be a Fannie/Freddie corruption hearing by proxy, with all the fun of the Clinton administration’s implication in permitting 9/11 all rolled in.

    redherkey (9f5961)

  56. I’d reference “Young Goodman Brown,” but that would be racist.

    Dan Collins (4dc2da)

  57. What is it about Gorelick being given important jobs at which she keeps failing? I could understand it if she was really hot. Perhaps she pours a really excellent martini or something.

    MayBee (136bac)

  58. Ugh. She’s really been pounded with the ugly stick. That’s an awful lot of martinis, MayBee.

    Dan Collins (4dc2da)

  59. Maybe this is all just one giant feint as Dear Leader figures out how to shoehorn John Edwards into the AG position.

    JVW (f93297)

  60. I think it’s called the “Peter Principle,” MayBee – people being promoted above their level of competence; I’ve seen it in action for years in my business life. The dynamic is only compounded when failure becomes obvious to all, then those who promoted the incompetent are loath to admit their mistakes, so they promote the inept in order to keep covering their tracks. Governmental work only exacerbates this problem, of course.

    Dmac (e30284)

  61. What is it about Gorelick being given important jobs at which she keeps failing? I could understand it if she was really hot. Perhaps she pours a really excellent martini or something.

    Comment by MayBee — 11/10/2008 @ 7:53 am

    Compared to Janet Reno, she’s a stone cold fox.

    Mossberg500 (9fd170)

  62. “He seemed like such a nice but I guess ….”

    Lots of “good” fathers are in fact deeply immoral and unethical men. Even the worst tyrannies have accomplishments — like the trains running on time.

    JG as AG is a deeply cynical choice for this candidate. Same crap folks said about Bush vis-avis Ashcroft can be said here.

    Robert Rodriguez (54247e)

  63. The “lady” exemplifies the Peter Principle. One might wonder though just when she did reach her level of incompetency. Was she another of Bubba’s or Hillary’s loyalist/skanks? I mean what qualified her initially? Ok, she espoused the Gorelick wall, but someone approved it. I doubt her conscience ever bothered her after 911. But why in hell would she also be on the 911 commission? I guess that’s like asking why Sandy Burgler basically got a pass on purloining state secrets. People howled about Bush’s Brownie and the mass “genocide” of blacks and prisoners during Katrina and naturally the LA guv and NOLA mayor deserved a pass, but why no outrages over the acts of this c***?

    madmax333 (0c6cfc)

  64. Obama’s idea of “change”
    Gorelick served as Vice Chairman of the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae) from 1997-2003.
    Emanuel served on the board of directors of the Federal Home Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac) from 2000-2001.

    Ironically republicans got blamed for Fannie and Freddie’s downfall while the democrats that worked there are getting rewarded big time.

    “Change” that you hope doesn’t kill us.

    ML (14488c)

  65. I mean what qualified her initially?

    Her background is Harvard and Harvard Law, and that automatically qualifies you for a position in a Democrat Administration.

    JVW (f93297)

  66. Her name is Gore-lick. That ought to be enough to disqualify her.

    PCD (7fe637)

  67. Harvard, I can safely say, is a sewer of glittering garbage wrapped in faux intellectualism.

    Mediocrity abounds and it starts with the privelaged children who never has to work or worry a day in their life.

    No wonder they feel such guilt and vote Socialist — they have a hard time explaining the input/output model as it relates to MEMEMEMEMEME (themselves).

    Robert Rodriguez (54247e)

  68. Here is the current makeup of the Judiciary Committee. Unfortunately the top Rep is the weasel, Arlen Specter. Fortunately, there are some pretty strong voices from pretty safe seats on the committee. For those who like to have a quick reference as to what Senate seats are up in the 2010 election, here’s the list.

    There is a fair chance that Gorelick is a test on the same level as the proposal for involuntary servitude in the ObaPantherJugend. The commies want to measure reaction – and collect data in order to prepare rebuttals.

    It’s not as if the data concerning Gorelick’s history are unavailable to Rep Judiciary Committee members. I don’t think wasting fuel on burning Obama strawmen is worthwhile. Gorelick in particular has a slime trail of a career that is remarkably easy to follow.

    Time might better be spent militating for the removal of Specter as ranking member of Judiciary.

    Rick Ballard (e3e91f)

  69. Even the mention of this woman for a position in government should be grounds for censure. Her actual nomination, grounds for impeachment.

    rrpjr (e98cdc)

  70. Appointment as AG?

    Hell, she should be indicted, not appointed!

    But, confirmation hearings could be a wonderful path towards the destruction of her personal,
    and professional, reputation.
    A destruction that is so deserved.

    Another Drew (d51d84)

  71. Well, she probably needs the money–$26 million in “earnings” from her service at FM doesn’t go as far as it used to.

    Patricia (ee5c9d)

  72. Could Gorelick be impartial at DoJ during the domestic trials of Obama supporters? I sure hope the trials are held in nice blue states with good sanctuary “laws”.

    Rick Ballard (e3e91f)

  73. Well, she probably needs the money–$26 million in “earnings” from her service at FM doesn’t go as far as it used to.

    She probably invested a significant chunk of it in Al Gore’s carbon offset extortion scheme, so she ought to be financially set.

    JVW (f93297)

  74. Remember the last two times a Democrat appointed an Atty General…..

    Hope her details and dealings are in order…

    EricPWJohnson (cc9286)

  75. This is the first test of the few conservatives we have left in Congress.

    You. Have. Got. To. Be. Kidding.

    The conservatives in Congress are going to be drowned in a sea of legislation and appointments. Every one will be a test.

    The trick will be to focus on certain discrete issues and hammer them hard. And those issues should be the ones that preserve the future path to power and reform.

    We need to have a strategy to address the possible elimination of the filibuster. There is little hope without the filibuster, and I see no reason why they would not sweep it away immediately, reducing cloture from 60 to 55 or something. It was lowered to 60 in 1975.

    Does anyone seriously think there would be a public outcry for the filibuster? Especially during the honeymoon, when there will be a dozen major changes in the news simultaneously? Has any issue the alternative media raised over the past year gained any traction?

    Amphipolis (fdbc48)

  76. I’ve given up any hope of Republicans doing what is right. Although, with Gorelick at the helm our chances of 9/11 Part Deux probably increase 10-fold. Maybe Republicans will get their heads out of their nether regions after that.

    Peg C. (48175e)

  77. The filibuster will die at the hands of the Media, who will declaim it as an anachronism blocking ‘real change’ in Washington.

    There will be no ‘picking your fights’ among the Republicans in Congress, there are too many RINOs to make that even a remote possiblity.

    The only significant hope is the mid term elections. Let us pray that the Obama administration is as foolish and as full of hubris as they seem to be, and they ultimately overplay their hand while there is chance to prevent major structural changes to our Republic.

    If they are wise they will not do anything drastic for the first 18 months. Fortunately, I do not think they are wise.

    ThomasD (211bbb)

  78. Could Gorelick really fit the primary function of a Democratic AG – doing anything and everything to cover for the big guy? Would she take a legal bullet for Obama? Would she be 200% loyal?

    She is not obscure enough to be controlled. She has ideas of her own. She won’t do at all.

    Amphipolis (fdbc48)

  79. Well, since John Edwards let Little Johnny stray, is it really a surprise that Obama would choose someone like this?

    Icy Truth (aedb2f)

  80. fillibuster Fillibuster FIllibuster FILlibuster FILLibuster FILLIbuster FILLIBuster FILLIBUster FILLIBUSter FILLIBUSTer FILLIBUSTEr FILLIBUSTER!

    fillibuster Fillibuster FIllibuster FILlibuster FILLibuster FILLIbuster FILLIBuster FILLIBUster FILLIBUSter FILLIBUSTer FILLIBUSTEr FILLIBUSTER!

    fillibuster Fillibuster FIllibuster FILlibuster FILLibuster FILLIbuster FILLIBuster FILLIBUster FILLIBUSter FILLIBUSTer FILLIBUSTEr FILLIBUSTER!

    fillibuster Fillibuster FIllibuster FILlibuster FILLibuster FILLIbuster FILLIBuster FILLIBUster FILLIBUSter FILLIBUSTer FILLIBUSTEr FILLIBUSTER!

    fillibuster Fillibuster FIllibuster FILlibuster FILLibuster FILLIbuster FILLIBuster FILLIBUster FILLIBUSter FILLIBUSTer FILLIBUSTEr FILLIBUSTER!

    fillibuster Fillibuster FIllibuster FILlibuster FILLibuster FILLIbuster FILLIBuster FILLIBUster FILLIBUSter FILLIBUSTer FILLIBUSTEr FILLIBUSTER!

    fillibuster Fillibuster FIllibuster FILlibuster FILLibuster FILLIbuster FILLIBuster FILLIBUster FILLIBUSter FILLIBUSTer FILLIBUSTEr FILLIBUSTER!

    fillibuster Fillibuster FIllibuster FILlibuster FILLibuster FILLIbuster FILLIBuster FILLIBUster FILLIBUSter FILLIBUSTer FILLIBUSTEr FILLIBUSTER!

    Joe (dcebbd)

  81. Sorry for being repetative, but it is a point well worth making.

    Joe (dcebbd)

  82. What’s more, I think he will damage this country with bad policies. I’m not going to pretend otherwise. Inevitably, he is going to take actions that I think are disastrous, and somebody will come back and say: “Hey, Patterico! I thought you said Barack Obama was a good man!” Yes, but I never said he wasn’t going to do horrible things. It’s quite clear he will.

    I asked this before, but you didn’t see my question or chose not to answer; what has Obama done/said to give you the opinion that he was a good and dececnt man.

    I honestly believe that his past, current positions, associations, and behavior during the campaign indicate otherwise. If you want specifics, I will give them to you.

    He does have some sleek packaging..and his articulateness can be argued…but God, man…how did you come to your conclusion?

    Fred Schwartz (fcf819)

  83. But don’t worry….Obama is a “good, decent person”. A good person to FARC perhaps. But not to the US of KKKA.

    Roy Mustang (2f688e)

  84. By the way, whose church here actually celebrated right after 9/11? Obama is a sick, disgusting piece of crap. America, getting the change we deserve.

    Roy Mustang (2f688e)

  85. Doug Ross noted that Ms. Gorelick has the unique distinction of having presided over two trillion dollar disasters.

    Aldo (4ca181)

  86. I hope that this potential nomination is just intended as a distraction; if not, :facepalm:.

    htom (412a17)

  87. redherkey wrote:

    Bring the nomination on! A Gorelick hearing would be a Fannie/Freddie corruption hearing by proxy, with all the fun of the Clinton administration’s implication in permitting 9/11 all rolled in.

    I wish I could agree with you. There are few James Inhofes in D.C. That is to say, GOPers who can be counted on to stick their necks out for the sake of a principle.

    Instead we get guys like retiring Congressman Tom Davis, senior Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, who apparently was the only one in the party willing to stay the entire session when Valerie Plame was before the committee (way to rally the troops, Tom). Scooter Libby had just been convicted of an offense peripheral to the investigation of the leak of her name to Robert Novak, and the Dems were mining for a causal link to Dick Cheney so they could impeach him at the least. OTOH, Chairman Henry Waxman — bipartisan as he is handsome — and his all of his Dem buds were there, lauding Plame and nodding their heads at her likely stories. Of course, it wasn’t as if Davis was any less a potted plant on the HJC than he was before 2007, when he himself was Chairman.

    L.N. Smithee (e1f2bf)

  88. “Chairman Henry Waxman — bipartisan as he is handsome”

    Well-played L.N.

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  89. I agree that was well played…. like hitting for a birdie out of the pond.

    SteveG (71dc6f)

  90. Not a chance.

    Her problems on the “Wall”, her presence on the 9/11 Commission, and her former employment at Fannie Mae all rule her out.

    Most likely — Eric Holder, as a stepping stone to being DC Circuit Court Judge, and later potentially SC Justice. Not Obama’s first nominee, but if Obama gets 2 or more nominees, Holder’s name will come up. The only downside for Holder is that he’ a little old at this point to be a SC nominee — mid-50s now, closer to 60 by the time he would be nominated.

    WLS Shipwrecked (26b1e5)

  91. Maybe Obama should appoint a personal attorney, who will see himself as loyal to the individual, rather than the country?

    imdw (cd4b7a)

  92. Comment by imdw — 11/10/2008 @ 4:31 pm

    That’s the job of the White House Counsel.
    The AG is the People’s Attorney.

    Another Drew (d51d84)

  93. I asked this before, but you didn’t see my question or chose not to answer; what has Obama done/said to give you the opinion that he was a good and dececnt man.

    I answered this before, but you didn’t see my answer or chose not to acknowledge it.

    I know you won’t like my answer and will find it unsatisfactory, but can you please register your disagreement there and not here?

    Patterico (cc3b34)

  94. “That’s the job of the White House Counsel.
    The AG is the People’s Attorney.”

    I know.

    imdw (ad9d6f)

  95. Remember how Clinton’s first two choices, Zoe Baird and Kimba Wood had slight background problems with their nominations and had to withdraw them. I’m thinking liberals today would view those same issues in a positive light.

    POWAH TO DA PIPPL!!!!!!

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  96. I answered this before, but you didn’t see my answer or chose not to acknowledge it.
    (snip)Comment by Patterico — 11/10/2008 @ 5:28 pm

    Woe…are you really a prosecutor? That is a very weird and insufficient defense of your position.
    I’ll go out on a limb here and say that even the most notorious and destructive characters in history have articulated very positive positions. But, when their actions are contrary, are not these statements then negated?

    The platitudinous conceit not withstanding.

    I will ask again…and please try to do better…what has Obama actually done to convince you that he really is a good and decent guy?

    Fred Schwartz (fcf819)

  97. Is it I..or does anyone else think Patterico is morphing into Andrew Sullivan?

    Do you need Trig’s birth records?

    Fred Schwartz (fcf819)

  98. #97 Fred Schwartz:

    Is it I..

    Yes, so give it a rest already.

    EW1(SG) (4cdcbc)

  99. Evidently, Fred, your english comprehension skills need work.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  100. Fred,

    I clearly asked you to take this to the appropriate comment thread. I even gave you the link.

    Are you dense or just stubborn?

    Patterico (cc3b34)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.4891 secs.