Patterico's Pontifications

1/12/2012

Daley Stepping Down in “Rare” White House Shake-Up

Filed under: General — Karl @ 7:40 am



[Posted by Karl]

The New Hampshire primary preempted my mockery of this New York Times article, which had the audacity to run the above headline — without the quote marks — in marking the departure of White House chief of staff William M. Daley:

It was a distracting shake-up in a White House that has prided itself on a lack of internal drama, with a tightly knit circle of loyal senior advisers playing a steadying role.

In the real world, no president has gone through as many chiefs of staff in their first term as Obama has to date.  And that’s just for starters, well beyond the shuffling of people like David Axelrod to Obama’s reelect campaign.

Consider Obama’s original economic team.  Peter Orszag, Christina Romer, Larry Summers and Jared Bernstein are all gone, as is Austan Goolsbee, leaving tax-cheating Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner as the anchor of Obamanomics.

Press Secretary Robert Gibbs is gone, as is Deputy Press Secretary Bill Burton and White House communications director Anita Dunn.

Melody Barnes was the White House’s chief domestic policy adviser. Not anymore.

Gen. Jim Jones is no longer Obama’s National Security adviser, after a tenure marked by sniping that sent Deputy National Security Adviser and Chief of Staff to the NSC Mark Lippert back to military service.  That happened before Obama’s major Pentagon shakeup last April in which the vacancy caused by the departure of Secretary of Defense Robert Gates was filled by Leon Panetta, whose seat at the CIA was filled in turn by Gen. David Petraeus.

Moreover, two books suggest there were plenty of factions and infighting during the president’s term.  One of them was written by Jodi Kantor — a reporter for the New York Times.

The NYT’s propaganda here is risible, but interesting nonetheless.  Reporting on a White House in disarray would underscore what happens when we elect someone with no executive experience.  It would also raise the issue of whether any of these people were simply scapegoats  for the failures of progressive policy.

–Karl

80 Responses to “Daley Stepping Down in “Rare” White House Shake-Up”

  1. Ding!

    Karl (5a613f)

  2. Racist

    JD (318f81)

  3. ______________________________________________

    underscore what happens when we elect someone with no executive experience

    That comment bothers me only because it reminds me of when various liberals will say someone is stupid instead of saying that person is a conservative and they, in actuality, dislike folks on the right and conservatism overall. (Notice how a person of the left similar to Joe Biden truly seems stupid, yet most liberals rarely point that out?) Or they mouth off about a politician being “stupid” instead of saying that rightists or rightism is stupid.

    I don’t think Obama’s lack of experience in managing a large organization has helped him, but I think the core of his incompetency — and foolishness (or symbolic lack of experience) — comes from something far more crucial: he has the gut instincts and preferences of an ultra-liberal. And he’s well past his teenage or college years when such biases may have been understandable or a tiny bit excusable.

    Mark (411533)

  4. Executive experience is definitely one of the best reasons to support Mitt. Ideologically, I think Mitt is very liberal… my impression is that he’s much more liberal than his current positions suggest.

    But he ran a state, ran those olympics, was accountable for all those investors. Sometimes the results were so successful that it’s hard to imagine he doesn’t have a good team of trusted advisers and the ability to delegate, etc etc. This, rather than judicial nominations, is something from Romney’s background that would present a major improvement over Obama, but much more relevantly to the primary, gives him an edge over Santorum and to some extent Newt.

    Newt also has had advisers and employees, and he’s managed major undertakings, but never has he managed a truly autonomous organization like a state or a company.

    I think Newt’s successes are simply much more relevant to a mission of reform than Romney’s, but Romney has the edge on sheer executive experience.

    And what a shame people won’t give Perry a second look and realize his campaign snafus are minor compared to what he brings to the table on this factor!

    Dustin (cb3719)

  5. ________________________________________________

    As another sign of just how volatile or peculiar the current White House is, one more person needs to be added to the list.

    I read comments a few months ago that it was unusual for an administration to publicly announce that a lower-level or non-official staffer was departing from the team. No surprise, therefore, when rumors begin to swirl about what such a person and a president really meant to each other.

    abcnews.com, November 2011: Nearly every day, [Reggie] Love takes a right turn out of his office, walks a few steps and opens a door to the most famous office in the world: the Oval Office. Whatever President Obama happens to need once inside, from a copy of a speech to a newspaper, Love gets for him. As the president’s personal assistant – a job known as a body man – Love also keeps him on schedule, often deciding who gets the president’s ear.

    The 29-year-old Love hardly ever speaks on the record. But after the White House announced 12 days ago that he would be leaving his position by the end of the year to attend the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School of Business, he granted an exclusive interview to ESPN’s Rachel Nichols…

    Love and Obama are also seasoned travel teammates. According to a group of researchers at ABC News, they have flown some 880,780 miles together since the start of the presidential campaign.

    Mark (411533)

  6. The evil lord’s minions are instantly edible.

    gary gulrud (1de2db)

  7. Are there any adults left in the room?

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  8. Not the resignation I was praying for.

    sickofrinos (44de53)

  9. The story, post and comments you have read and will be reading are true. Only the names have been changed to protect the innocent guilty sumb*tch who currently occupies the Oval Office.

    Colonel Haiku (b486eb)

  10. William Daley?

    Never heard of him.

    Charles Gibson (298dce)

  11. To the best of my recollection, Daley was supposedly brought in because he is a deal-maker and was expected to be able to bridge differences between House Republicans and Senate Democrats so that legislation could be passed and signed in the Rose Garden. The fact that he is leaving is further proof that Obama is not at all interested in accomplishing anything this year, he is simply going to subject us to a ten month reelection campaign.

    JVW (4d72aa)

  12. And what a shame people won’t give Perry a second look and realize his campaign snafus are minor compared to what he brings to the table on this factor!

    I’m afraid Perry has killed any chances he had for national office someday. He has sounded stupid and makes people wonder who is actually responsible for Texas’ success.

    He seems determined to go on with his attacks on capitalism while Newt looks smart enough to back off a bit.

    Mike K (9ebddd)

  13. Remember all this, folks. The Goal™ is to get these people all out of the Oval Office, and on the lecture and book circuits. It’s win-win for everyone.

    The major problem, as always, is ego among voters. People felt superior and ethical voting for Obama. But now they cannot say that they were played (or as Glenn Reynolds puts it, “hey, rube!”). So they defend and defend and defend. Because otherwise, they would have to admit their own, um, rubeness.

    As for executive experience, I am more and more convinced that governors would do best. But, and this is again relevant, a great group of advisors makes all the difference.

    Simon Jester (54d408)

  14. Perry keeps digging and digging he’s like that little guy in the dig dug game at chuck e cheese

    happyfeet (a55ba0)

  15. _________________________________________

    He has sounded stupid

    I’m puzzled why Dustin is so wedded to Perry and Colonel Haiku is so wedded to Romney.

    A person, who’s a liberal/Democrat, asked me yesterday what I thought of the various Republican candidates. I couldn’t help but say I had mixed emotions about all of them, in that they have some good but also no shortage of weak points.

    When I was asked about Romney in particular, I said he leaned left more than I’d prefer. The conversation dropped after that. But if I had elaborated on what I meant, I’d have said that anyone who believes the government can force people to buy health insurance is full of it, and Romney and Obama are more alike than different in that regard.

    Mark (411533)

  16. “I’m puzzled why Dustin is so wedded to Perry and Colonel Haiku is so wedded to Romney.”

    Mark – I think you have it slightly off. Dustin has been on an anti-Romney jihad since the Summer of 2010. He hates him with the heat of 1,000 suns. He has actually flip-flopped rapidly like accuses Romney between who he supports, but the anti-Romney vitriol remains constant. Once Perry declared, Perry criticism became unacceptable, unfair and beyond the pale of civilized discourse, but Romney bashing with out of context quotes, unsupported conspiracy theories, class warfare, was fair game.

    Just sayin’.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  17. n the real world, no president has gone through as many chiefs of staff in their first term as Obama has to date.

    That doesn’t really amount too much. Note it’s not the record for changes in Chief of Staff (since there have been Chief of Staffs) in a short time, but only in the first term of a President.

    If Mayor Richard M. Daley had not decided not to run for re-election, Rahm Emanuel would still be Chief of Staff or would only have recently quit.

    When a President loses a chief of staff or some other White House aide he’s comfortable with, sometimes he goes through a few people in a few years. Usually the first one is someone he’s comfortable with so he doesn’t get replaced but this time the opportunity to become Mayor of Chicago opened up a few years earlier than expected, he took it. You could wonder if Mayor Daley quit just so his brother could become Chief of Staff. Well, Obama didn’t accept him right away, and he didn’t follow his political advice, and in the end he curtailed his powers while still expecting William Daley to remain, so h quit. Obama forgot, or didn’t realize, that somebody who’s like William Daley, who’s held high paying jobs isn’t like the recent college graduate usually hired on Capitol Hill, and isn’t taking the job for the salary, at all,
    and if they don’t need the salary, or psychic income, or opportunity for advancement or getting other jobs they would like, people don’t stay in jobs they are not too happy with. This was a real surprise for Obama – somebody turning down – wait, that he could understand and had experienced – but somebody quitting a high level government job.

    If somebody cared about the salary, they’d never take it in the first place. But the problem is, salary is a big motive for many jobs. A person could also want prestige, but there isn’t so much for this, as opposed to a Cabinet position, so without much authority, Bill Daley didn’t want to stay around.

    Sammy Finkelman (9a6ee5)

  18. This is the list of Chief of Staffs (from your link) corrected (Carter error)

    Chief Years President

    Sherman Adams 1953-1958 Eisenhower
    Wilton Persons 1958-1961 Eisenhower
    H. R. Haldeman 1969-1973 Nixon
    Alexander Haig 1973-1974 Nixon
    Donald Rumsfeld 1974-1975 Ford
    Dick Cheney 1975-1977 Ford
    Hamilton Jordan 1977-1980 Carter
    Jack Watson 1980-1981 Carter
    James Baker 1981-1985 Reagan
    Donald Regan 1985-1987 Reagan
    Howard Baker 1987-1988 Reagan
    Kenneth Duberstein 1988-1989 Reagan
    John H. Sununu 1989-1991 Bush I
    Samuel K. Skinner 1991-1992 Bush I
    James Baker 1992-1993 Bush I
    Mack McLarty 1993-1994 Clinton
    Leon Panetta 1994-1997 Clinton
    Erskine Bowles 1997-1998 Clinton
    John Podesta 1998-2001 Clinton
    Andrew Card 2001-2006 Bush II
    Joshua Bolten 2006-2009 Bush II
    Rahm Emanuel 2009-2010 Obama
    Pete Rouse (Interim) 2010-2011 Obama
    William M. Daley 2011-2012 Obama
    Jacob Lew 2012-present Obama

    Sammy Finkelman (9a6ee5)

  19. I wouldn’t count Pete Rouse as a Chief of Staff since he never really had the job. It just took a lot of time for Obama to to decide on a replacement

    Sammy Finkelman (9a6ee5)

  20. 12, 15. I believe Dusty is off the Perry stagecoach as of the holidays.

    Perry on Laura this AM reported SC as “awesome” but had trouble with multiword sentences thereafter.

    gary gulrud (d88477)

  21. 7. Are there any adults left in the room?
    Comment by daleyrocks — 1/12/2012 @ 8:30 am

    — Were there ever any adults there in the first place?

    Icy (d8098c)

  22. The Times:
    It was a distracting shake-up in a White House that has prided itself on a lack of internal drama, with a tightly knit circle of loyal senior advisers playing a steadying role.

    The translation:
    The First Lady has been criticized for poking her beak into West Wing affairs; she responded by — SHOCKA! — playing the race card; therefore, we have to provide her cover by playing the “rare event” card. Initiate START sequence . . .

    Icy (d8098c)

  23. Pro-Tip: Do not peepee on the bodies.

    happyfeet (a55ba0)

  24. Let’s face it. Obama has never had an executive government (or non-government) job before, so he has never had to have a large group of staffers. By hooking into the DNC’s list of political appariticks, he doesn’t necessarily get anybody who he can really work with.
    I’m sure that Romney, Huntsman, and/or Perry would come with a fairly large group of top staffers who they have known for some time, so things would go much more smoothly.

    [note: released from moderation. –Stashiu]

    Neo (d1c681)

  25. “The fact that he [Daley] is leaving is further proof that Obama is not at all interested in accomplishing anything this year, he is simply going to subject us to a ten month reelection campaign.”

    Obama has gone from being the guy who could “get a group of people to sit down in a room” to the guy who has locked himself in the room by himself.

    [note: released from moderation. –Stashiu]

    Neo (d1c681)

  26. If somebody cared about the salary, they’d never take it in the first place. But the problem is, salary is a big motive for many jobs. A person could also want prestige, but there isn’t so much for this, as opposed to a Cabinet position, so without much authority, Bill Daley didn’t want to stay around.

    Would you like a hankie to wipe that Obama™-brand fecal matter off your face?

    The obvious reason for it is that it expands your connection set quite a bit. Yes, even for someone with the name “Daley”.

    “Note it’s not the record for changes in Chief of Staff (since there have been Chief of Staffs) in a short time, but only in the first term of a President.”

    Dude, just clean that mess off. It’s starting to smell.

    It’s as many as ANY PotUS has ever had — after only three years, to boot, and all it will take is one more (hopefully, he won’t get the chance) to set a record even for two terms.

    The man’s an incompetent lackwit, as ineffectual and useless as Jimmy Carter. He has no business being in the office, period.

    I Got Bupkis, Fomenter of "small-l" libertarianism (8e2a3d)

  27. The NYT’s propaganda here is risible, but interesting nonetheless.

    Maybe I’m jaded, but I can no longer find it risible. What else can anyone expect from the Old Grey Whore, the keeper of the journalistic traditions established by Walter Duranty and Jayson Blair?

    The thing is, I firmly believe that the people at the NYT has a firm grasp on the character and the intellect of their few remaining subscribers. These are true believers.

    Not only can the NYT inform them that Daley is departing the WH. The NYT can tell them what to think about it; it is a “rare” occurance.

    They read it in the Times. It’s a fact. And if tomorrow the NYT tells them to draw a different conclusion, they will.

    I’ve had a couple of brushes with such people, and I found the tribe so fascinating I couldn’t even get angry. One such incident particularly stands out. I was sitting in a bar and some guy listening in on my conversation learns I lived in Japan. So he decides to butt in and starts expounding on all the things he loves about Japan. He’s never been there, but he read about it in, among other media, the Times.

    I love Japan, too. But a lot of things people think they know about it is a load of crap. It’s what the Japanese gub’mint is selling. To pick one example, Japan at the time had a very low rate of unemployment. Because there’s all sorts of games you can play with statistics, and the Japanese government apparently knows all of them. How many hours can a person work per week before they’re no longer unemployed? 8? 4? 1? 1/2?

    Babysit for your sister for an hour in Japan while she does her grocery shopping, and you’re no longer counted among the ranks of the unemployed. Here, unless the Obama admin has torn a page out of the Japanese playbook, you’d still be unemployed.

    So this guy is going on and on with the BS he read in the times, and every once in a while I try to gently nudge him with the fact that, no, what he heard about “life time employment” is a myth, that most Japanese don’t work for large employers like Mitsubishi but smaller businesses that come and go, and even at Mitsubishi lifetime employment is not the rule, etc.

    But he’s not having any. He read it in the effin’ TIMES! He’s going to tell me how things are. So I gave up, turned to my wife and said in Japanese, “Listen up, babe, this guy’s going to tell us all about Japan.” Then I turned to him and said in English, “Go ahead. We’re listening. Tell us about Japan.”

    The guy got so insulted he stood up and left. “Good night, sir!”

    I managed to contain my laughter until the guy got out of earshot. I was deathly afraid I would do something that would provoke him into not leaving. OK. The NYT tribe of subscribers isn’t all THAT interesting.

    Recall, if you will, how when Jill Abramson was coronated as the first woman ever to become the executive editor of the Times, she let slip that in her house as she was growing up the Times was their Bible.

    Now, it is true the Times has replaced the Bible among its dedicated readership. But what happened after that was the interesting thing.

    The people at the Times found that the truth that can be shared among friends was a public liability.

    So they scrubbed their website. It was there one minute. Gone the next. And the subscribers who can be told that what frequently happens in the Obama WH rarely does promptly forgot about it.

    The NYT didn’t really replace their Bibles. It’s more accurate to say it replaced their New Soviet Encyclopedia. Ask a good Soviet person about Levrenty Beria. A great man!

    What? Beria has fallen out of favor with Stalin. The publishers of the New Soviet Encyclopedia have sent you an expanded article on the Bering Sea. Paste it over the article concerning the individual who can no longer be spoken of, and forget he ever existed.

    Now ask a good Soviet person about Lavrenty Beria.

    Now that the USSR is out of business and no one is printing new updates to cut-and-paste into their New Soviet Encyclopedias, all that these people have to bitterly cling to is the NYT. Not even Pravda is propping up their world view anymore.

    [note: fished from spam filter. –Stashiu]

    Steve (1f4b7c)

  28. The NYT’s propaganda here is risible, but interesting nonetheless.

    Maybe I’m jaded, but I can no longer find it risible. What else can anyone expect from the Old Grey Whore, the keeper of the journalistic traditions established by Walter Duranty and Jayson Blair?

    The thing is, I firmly believe that the people at the NYT has a firm grasp on the character and the intellect of their few remaining subscribers. These are true believers.

    Not only can the NYT inform them that Daley is departing the WH. The NYT can tell them what to think about it; it is a “rare” occurance.

    They read it in the Times. It’s a fact. And if tomorrow the NYT tells them to draw a different conclusion, they will.

    I’ve had a couple of brushes with such people, and I found the tribe so fascinating I couldn’t even get angry. One such incident particularly stands out. I was sitting in a bar and some guy listening in on my conversation learns I lived in Japan. So he decides to butt in and starts expounding on all the things he loves about Japan. He’s never been there, but he read about it in, among other media, the Times.

    I love Japan, too. But a lot of things people think they know about it is a load of crap. It’s what the Japanese gub’mint is selling. To pick one example, Japan at the time had a very low rate of unemployment. Because there’s all sorts of games you can play with statistics, and the Japanese government apparently knows all of them. How many hours can a person work per week before they’re no longer unemployed? 8? 4? 1? 1/2?

    Babysit for your sister for an hour in Japan while she does her grocery shopping, and you’re no longer counted among the ranks of the unemployed. Here, unless the Obama admin has torn a page out of the Japanese playbook, you’d still be unemployed.

    So this guy is going on and on with the BS he read in the times, and every once in a while I try to gently nudge him with the fact that, no, what he heard about “life time employment” is a myth, that most Japanese don’t work for large employers like Mitsubishi but smaller businesses that come and go, and even at Mitsubishi lifetime employment is not the rule, etc.

    But he’s not having any. He read it in the effin’ TIMES! He’s going to tell me how things are. So I gave up, turned to my wife and said in Japanese, “Listen up, babe, this guy’s going to tell us all about Japan.” Then I turned to him and said in English, “Go ahead. We’re listening. Tell us about Japan.”

    The guy got so insulted he stood up and left. “Good night, sir!”

    I managed to contain my laughter until the guy got out of earshot. I was deathly afraid I would do something that would provoke him into not leaving. OK. The NYT tribe of subscribers isn’t all THAT interesting.

    Recall, if you will, how when Jill Abramson was coronated as the first woman ever to become the executive editor of the Times, she let slip that in her house as she was growing up the Times was their Bible.

    Now, it is true the Times has replaced the Bible among its dedicated readership. But what happened after that was the interesting thing.

    The people at the Times found that the truth that can be shared among friends was a public liability.

    So they scrubbed their website. It was there one minute. Gone the next. And the subscribers who can be told that what frequently happens in the Obama WH rarely does promptly forgot about it.

    The NYT didn’t really replace their Bibles. It’s more accurate to say it replaced their New Soviet Encyclopedia. Ask a good Soviet person about Levrenty Beria. A great man!

    What? Beria has fallen out of favor with Stalin. The publishers of the New Soviet Encyclopedia have sent you an expanded article on the Bering Sea. Paste it over the article concerning the individual who can no longer be spoken of, and forget he ever existed.

    Now ask a good Soviet person about Lavrenty Beria. Lavrenty who?

    Now that the USSR is out of business and no one is printing new updates to cut-and-paste into their New Soviet Encyclopedias, all that these good Soviet people have to bitterly cling to is the NYT. Not even Pravda is propping up their world view anymore.

    [note: fished from spam filter. –Stashiu]

    Steve (1f4b7c)

  29. I’m puzzled why Dustin is so wedded to Perry and Colonel Haiku is so wedded to Romney.

    I like Perry’s record the best. However, I don’t really think I’m wedded to him. In fact, I’ve been critical of him in some respects and pretty much gave up on his campaign (while allowing for some miracle that simply ain’t gonna happen).

    At this point, and for some time now, I’ve been saying Newt is the most conservative who can win in my opinion. And that’s a major compromise for me.

    Hell, even in this thread I’m trying, desperately, to find some merit in Romney. I can’t support Romney in the primary simply because I find some of his record actually not acceptable, but I can admit some aspects of Romney’s resume that are better.

    It’s not that I’m wedded to Perry at all, so much as I’ve got some very basic standards that this primary is disastrously falling short of.

    Also, I find much of the punditry on the right to be amazingly out of touch today, basically broadcasting the notion that the GOP is completely out of touch on economic issues. The fact is a lot of ruthless high level businessmen are part of the problem. Pretending that isn’t so is stupid and it’s also terrible politics.

    Ronald Reagan was able to present a support of capitalism and a view that not all capitalists were equal. “Let him have the Fortune 500,” he said. “I want our campaign to stand for Main Street, not Wall Street. I want us to stand for the worker, the shopkeeper, the entrepreneur, and the small businessman.” It’s just realism.

    I would rather this party be more charitable about that.

    But anyway, I don’t think Perry can win, Mark. He’s got the conservative part down pat, and it’s very unfortunate that he doesn’t have the winning part down. Blame doesn’t even matter, either. It just isn’t happening.

    Dustin (cb3719)

  30. 25. Evidently our recta have not been lacerated enough.

    There is a clear and evident danger that Romany would devastate conservatism in inept, duplicitous imitation of same.

    gary gulrud (d88477)

  31. 27. Brilliant news via zerohedge:

    Treasuries of 10 and 30 year bonds are past the inverse tipping point and headed back up.

    How high she goes nobody knows.

    gary gulrud (d88477)

  32. That’s very well said, Gary.

    The GOP could be on its way to a very painful lesson, and many of the loudest purists today are those rejecting the more conservative guys in the name of what amounts to a very superficial and stupid version of conservatism that amounts, more or less, to a speech code.

    Dustin (cb3719)

  33. What is the romneybots obsession with lacerated anuses?

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  34. 28. Thanks. Helps that Palin has joined the fray, defending Perry. We could see a sizable swing by SC, especially if Santorum and Cain prove useful idiots.

    Its not like SC isn’t aware they’ve made questionable choices.

    gary gulrud (d88477)

  35. Santorum and Cain useful idiots for Romney?

    Why do you think that?

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  36. That times piece, suggests that double even triple think, is part of their daily diet, for Susskind
    (who I take with a grain of salt) and Kantor, have
    made the infighting clear, yet they pretend it isn’t happening,

    narciso (87e966)

  37. Only an useful idiot thinks there were no jews who died.

    But at least some admit the Jews didn’t do 9-11.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  38. 31. Santorum was lamenting the badmouthing of capitalism, and Cain promised an “unconventional endorsement” before talking up Romany’s taking the reins.

    Don’t be shocked if Cain backs Romney, former Fed KC chair.

    gary gulrud (d88477)

  39. 🙄 🙄 😆

    You say so slick.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  40. If you say so slick*

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  41. I know consider the source, but it’s yet another bodyblow to that perfect image;

    http://www.buzzfeed.com/buzzfeedpolitics/book-depicts-cranky-obama-on-baghdad-visit

    narciso (87e966)

  42. The Democrats could not possibly have done a better job of rehabilitating George W. Bush’s reputation for simple competency in office than by giving us this SCOAMF Obama as a contrast.

    Beldar (1d6209)

  43. Ain’t that the truth, Beldar.

    Dustin (cb3719)

  44. The Democrats could not possibly have done a better job of rehabilitating George W. Bush’s reputation for simple competency in office than by giving us this SCOAMF Obama as a contrast.

    I’m reminded of what Bertholt Brecht wrote following the 1953 East German uprising, “The Solution:”

    After the uprising of the 17th of June
    The Secretary of the Writers Union
    Had leaflets distributed in the Stalinallee
    Stating that the people
    Had forfeited the confidence of the government
    And could win it back only
    By redoubled efforts. Would it not be easier
    In that case for the government
    To dissolve the people
    And elect another?

    I believe I’ll withhold judgement on the Cook County Messiah’s competence until I see how his administration’s multi-pronged effort to “dissolve” the the vote of his opposition through massive fraud and his efforts to import and naturalize a new electorate pan out.

    Steve (1f4b7c)

  45. I’ve been asking my Democrat friends: if W was so incompetent why is he so hard an act for Obama to follow? You’d think the contrast would be marked.

    Kevin M (563f77)

  46. Obama is slowly descending into the throes of insanity.

    God help his useful idiots if they cease being useful.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  47. I’ve been asking my Democrat friends: if W was so incompetent why is he so hard an act for Obama to follow? You’d think the contrast would be marked.

    Kevin, I’d be curious to know what they say. Not that I’d imagine for a minute it makes any sense. Nor do imagine it would need to make any sense for them to parrot it. It’s the party line, so they’ll stick to it.

    The NYT is both the Bible and the New Soviet Encyclopedia for its remaining subscribers. Jill Abramson said so when she was elevated as the first woman ever to be chief editor at the Old Gray Prostitute. She gushed that when she was growing up the NYT was the family Bible. That proved embarrassing, so the NYT scrubbed the quote from the website.

    If it’s in the Times, it’s gospel. If it’s not in the Times, it never happened. A good Soviet person will promptly erase any awareness from memory. Just like in the good old days when somebody like Beria fell out of paper, the publishers of the New Soviet Encyclopedia would send out an expanded article on the Bering Sea to be pasted over any reference to Beria. Who was never to be spoken of or thought of again.

    If the NYT says this is a rare event, then it’s rare. And there is no famine in the Ukraine, comrade.

    We’re talking about a bunch of people who will be able to forget, on command, that Obama’s been President for three years, that for two years he was able to ram through anything he wanted, or that he has anything to do with what’s going on in DC in general.

    So I’d be curious to know what the people who tell them what to think have to say about how Obama only appears to compare poorly to Bush.

    Steve (1f4b7c)

  48. That would be

    …when somebody like Beria fell out of favor…

    I had the mental image of people all over the USSR dutifully papering over his memory, and my fingers ran away from me all over the keyboard.

    Steve (1f4b7c)

  49. They would say that Obama inherited a bunch of problems Bush left.

    And I actually think there is a lot of truth in that.

    Image rehab, sure, Obama’s incompetence makes Bush seem like the greatest President in history.

    But Obama did inherit a lot of severe problems, such as an out of control deficit. Is it fair to blame Bush? He’s only partly responsible, but yes, he left a real mess on spending.

    On many other problems Obama inherited, such as entitlements being unfunded and the mortgage crisis aftermath, Bush sounded the alarm. He didn’t win any reforms, but he was trying.

    That should be a stark warning. Even then, when our fiscal problems were much more solveable and our president wanted to solve at least some of them, it wasn’t nearly enough.

    Dustin (cb3719)

  50. Of course, it goes without saying that Obama inherited problems he said he wanted to solve, and then knowingly made those problems much worse, and then complained that he found himself expected to do the job he said he wanted to do.

    A shameless con who actually ran as though he had a fiscal conservative streak.

    Dustin (cb3719)

  51. Buckley, had a mock ad featuring Fidel,’ I got my Job through the New York Times, (referring to Herbert Matthews slobbering coverage of the M-26 movement, Halberstam, likely with the imput of the likes Holbrooke, among others, so misrepresented what was going in South Vietnam, that even Mary McCarthy took notice.Salisbury, weeped crocodile tears in Hanoi, Sydney Schmaberg celebrated the Khmer Rouge till Year Zero,Ray Bonner cheered the guerillas in Central AMerica,

    narciso (87e966)

  52. TRy to guess who said this, and how deluded he is;

    I just don’t think Romney can get in the weeds of each accusation without making things worse. So he has to do something much bigger.

    This is Mitt’s Jeremiah Wright moment. Can he meet it, the way candidate Obama did?

    narciso (87e966)

  53. You can’t make this stuff up You don’t need to make this stuff up:

    Laura Ingraham: “You know I am going to raise the issue of Texans for Public Justice. Their analysis of your campaign contributions since 2000 [indicates] you have received more than $7 million from private-equity firms and private investment firms. Are any of those “vulture” firms?”

    Rick Perry: “Listen, I didn’t paint with a broad brush and say that every private equity firm out there is…”

    Ingraham: “Only Romney’s are vultures? None of your guys, only Romney’s?”

    Perry: “Look, Romney is running for president.”

    Ingraham: “Yeah, you are running for president too, and you have benefited from these firms.”

    Perry: “Correct, and I don’t have a problem with that.”

    Colonel Haiku (b486eb)

  54. Well the lion’s share of sums from employees of investment firms, almost all who were bailed out,
    and then proceed to mishandle the funds, still seems
    to go to Obama, why is that. Maybe it’s to avoid
    the Vercotti treatment that the Auto TaskForce
    dealt and the NTSB did toward Toyota, ‘gangster
    government’ was one thing Bachmann got right,

    narciso (87e966)

  55. I just don’t think Romney can get in the weeds of each accusation without making things worse. So he has to do something much bigger.

    Honestly, he just needs to get out of the shell.

    I mean, who is this guy? He’s extremely ambitious and ruthless. He hates to lose and he loves to win and he enjoys running a tight ship.

    He should build up the caricature of himself as this heartless bastard whose staff know the consequences for screwing up are high.

    Presented with a sense of humor, this could be a good way for Romney to connect with folks who are sick and tired of three administrations of huggers.

    Granted, I’m assuming a lot here… being more generous than the facts really show… in saying Romney is this kind of elite leader. But other than ideology, one thing that Romney really lacks is his inability to present an authentic image, and if this is his genuine personality, he should roll the dice and display it.

    One way he could do this without looking like a phony is to admit that ideology is a means rather than an ends to him. He’s not your guy if you require ideological reliability (then again, who is your guy anymore?). If you aren’t too worried about what gets accomplished, but want that stuff to be accomplished with the t’s crossed and the i’s dotted, with an end to the constant screwing up that is the Obama administration… well… that’s basically what half the Romney fans admit at the end of the long ugly arguments anyway… so why not just lead with that and spare us a little agony? It’s actually more compelling, too.

    Dustin (cb3719)

  56. Please burn in hell Colonel.

    I’m looking for someone who is a consistent conservative and Romney never was one.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  57. That was an interesting segment, Dustin, they are caught between the dual poles of evil genius, (to which they had they found a way assign to Cheney, the next time around) and idiot, with they always
    assume is the default for the GOP,

    narciso (87e966)

  58. The teachers strike even if you surrender to them………………….fruitless folly these unions will never appreciate you.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  59. The Chicago Tribune’s John Kass with a nice “What Would Bill Daley Do” column.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  60. Chalk another one up in the “Texas-size Miscalculation” column:

    http://hotair.com/archives/2012/01/12/perry-backer-bails-over-bain-attacks/

    Colonel Haiku (b486eb)

  61. 56. Kass is delightful.

    gary gulrud (d88477)

  62. Why do you hate america?

    /Colonel Haiku

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  63. Was Romney working at Bain when this was alleged to have occurred, narciso?

    Colonel Haiku (b486eb)

  64. “Rare” White House shake-up?!? Please. This one was telegraphed a while ago. Right around late November, if memory serves … http://www.ombudizen.com/2012/01/09/now-who-would-have-predicted-that/

    ombdz (2a81ef)

  65. Yes obots…………teh economy is approving…………..not.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  66. Wow I guess jews can be victims of hate crimes is the msm’s mind.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  67. If he’s elected, Romney will make his decisions on economic matters based on a complete understanding of the critical components – finance and capital – and how crucial these are to our nation’s economy.

    And Gingrich, Perry and what remains of their backers who persist in pandering to leftwing, anti-capitalist populism – a brand of populism that even Huckabee says goes way overboard – in hitting Romney with ignorant Alinsky-style slander over Bain, most certainly will not… because, a) they don’t have the tools, and b) they lack even a clue.

    Seems like a no-brainer, if we want to see growth, prosperity and JOBS.

    Colonel Haiku (b486eb)

  68. Don’t insult my intelligence.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  69. Wow peeing on a taliban is a war crime………….but decapitating infidels because they have a different religion than yours isn’t.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  70. Except he is promoting rather meek policies on taxes and other measures, it seems the opposite
    of what he would be advocating

    narciso (87e966)

  71. Let’s see where you’re at with all this on February 12th, Narciso… m’kay?

    Colonel Haiku (b486eb)

  72. such as an out of control deficit.

    Words… fail. WtF?

    How does a “deficit” get “out of control” in your loony, imbecilic version of the world?

    Either you are buying crap you don’t need on credit cards, or you are not.

    Things like a gold-plated health insurance policy with no upper limits and zero deductibles — as opposed to making a rational choice about a policy with limits you can afford.

    Your freaking spending is what is out of control, not your ephing “deficit” you addlepated halfwit dumbass.

    Geez. Just when I thought I’d heard some nitwit utter the stupidest, most retarded thing possible, some lefty, dunderheaded twit comes along and utters something that just blows that former pinnacle of idiocy out of the water.

    Are you guys required to self-trepan with a power drill in order to get your Lefty Union Card?

    …How many times?

    [note: released from moderation. –Stashiu]

    I Got Bupkis, Agoggle with Lefty Obfuscatory Efforts (8e2a3d)

  73. Of course, it goes without saying that Obama inherited problems he said he wanted to solve, and then knowingly made those problems much worse, and then complained that he found himself expected to do the job he said he wanted to do.

    A shameless con who actually ran as though he had a fiscal conservative streak.

    Agreed, but you should understand you made my point.

    Bush damaged the house by starting a grease fire in the kitchen.

    Obama “inherited” the house.

    Then burnt it to the ground, and damaged his immediate neighbors’ houses in the process.

    Now he needs four more years to “finish the job.” And for some reason it makes sense to his die hard supporters to give him four more years.

    Along with matches and gasoline.

    Speaking of the homeless, how much do you want to bet the press rediscovers them if a Republican gets elected?

    Steve (1f4b7c)

  74. Agreed, but you should understand you made my point.

    You’re stealing my point!

    Dustin (cb3719)

  75. I’m shameless, Dustin.

    While I’m no great shakes at coming up a point all by my lonesome, I can say, in my own humble opinion, that I can come up with some fairly original analogies that capture the distilled essence of Obama’s magical economic genius.

    The Republicans drove the car into the ditch. So Obama took the keys away from them.

    Then he high-centered the car on a rock, punched a hole in the crankcase, and burned out the clutch.

    So he had the EPA declare the ditch a federally protected wetland. And declared a moratorium on all new oil exploration and heavily fined all US oil companies to punish them for producing that oil that ended up in the bottom of the ditch.

    Now he wants to steal your 401(k) so he and all his friends can have new Chevy Volts. Then this kind of crap won’t keep happening.

    But it’s not really stealing because only racist haters who’ve grown fat at the expense of the 99% have 401(k) retirement accounts to begin with.

    A lot of what I wrote is just conjecture, but I’m sure about everything in the previous paragraph. I read it in the New York Times.

    Steve (1f4b7c)

  76. I can come up with some fairly original analogies

    Yes, I can see that now.

    It bothers me to compare anyone to Obama because he has been so awful on spending and regulation. His economic platform is insane, and history will look back at this time and wonder how he was allowed to be this bad at his job.

    It’s as though he’s trying to screw it all up, and I worry what his lame duck months will be like.

    Dustin (cb3719)

  77. His economic platform is insane

    Yes. Quite. It’s sort of a sick joke based upon the adage, “When life gives you lemons, make lemonade.”

    Except in his case, it’s more like, “When life gives you clunkers, overcharge the taxpayer and pay cash for them.”

    I considered working that into my previous analogy, but I decided that would be excessively gilding the lily.

    I honestly can’t say I’ve not benefited from the Obama administration’s policies. I briefly toyed with selling my Toyota Matrix back in 2008. Back then, it was worth just over $4K per the Kelly Blue Book. After Obama worked the same sort of magic on the used car market via his “cash for clunkers” program that the raiding Visigoths once wreaked on Rome, my car with a few extra years and tens of thousands of additional miles on it was worth just over $5,700.

    Ladies and gents, I give you the miracle of Obamunomics.

    A shortage in used cars just doesn’t happen. It’s gotta be legislated into existence. And what of the working poor, who once but no more can afford a used car to take them back and forth between home and work in the vain hope they might lift themselves out of their situation into a better life?

    Let them ride high-speed rail (which doesn’t exist)! Or Occupy Wall Street. One of the two.

    Just go away.

    Reminding the Obama’s of the working poor absolutely ruins their various Hawaiian, Martha’s Vineyard, Costa Del Sol, etc., vacations.

    How can we expect the Obamas to enjoy their Clams Casino and Poire de Brillet Martinis if we endlessly bring up the working poor?

    [note: fished from spam filter. –Stashiu]

    Steve (1f4b7c)

  78. I can’t honestly can’t say I’ve not benefited from the Obama administration’s policies. I briefly toyed with selling my Toyota Matrix back in 2008. Back then, it was worth just over $4K per the Kelly Blue Book. After Obama worked the same sort of magic on the used car market via his “cash for clunkers” program that the raiding Visigoths once wreaked on Rome, my car with a few extra years and tens of thousands of additional miles on it was worth just over $5,700.

    Ladies and gents, I give you the miracle of Obamunomics.

    And what of the working poor, who once but no more can afford a used car to take them back and forth between home and work in the vain hope they might lift themselves out of their situation into a better life?

    Let them ride high-speed rail (which doesn’t exist)! Or Occupy Wall Street. One of the two.

    Just go away.

    Reminding the Obama’s of the working poor absolutely ruins their various Hawaiian, Martha’s Vineyard, Costa Del Sol, etc., vacations.

    How can we expect the Obamas to enjoy their Clams Casino and Poire de Brillet Martinis if we endlessly bring up what they’re doing to the working poor?

    [note: fished from spam filter. –Stashiu]

    Steve (1f4b7c)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.1053 secs.