The Cleaning Lady said...Sometimes a not-so-good president (we've had a few of those) is just a 'cog in the wheel.'
(But don't tell the boyz@BC who are outdoing themselves on the subject of Obama's psychological pathologies.)
The Republicans are making the identical mistake. If by some miracle they take back the executive office in 2012 it'll all be Obama's fault. Rather than identify, groom, support, and elect a leader with the skills to execute and the connections to surround himself with competent staff and bench depth, the GOP generals are flailing their arms with profiles and rhetoric.
to surround himself
ReplyDeleteto surround herself
Momma Griz of course.
(don't worry Deuce, the selection is made before I even get to vote)
Thanks Deuce. Now I expect hostile BC spillover condemning me for my lack of insight and cavalier dismissal of this looming existential threat to the American way of life. If you diss them, they will come.
ReplyDeleteBack to my bomb shelter.
(John Kasich, ran in 2000 IIRC but got no traction. Palin will divide the country, not unlike the accusations leveled at Hillary Clinton. I cross my fingers she will not run. A naif can be just as dangerous as a "narcissistic psychopath who can't interact directly with reality.")
A naif
ReplyDeleteA damnable prejudiced accusation, based on nothing.
She booms out of Wassila, takes half the country by storm, is right up there with the big boys, the moneyed boys like Romney, and she's a naif
She made a stunning, letter perfect speech not long ago, that was headlined right here.
naif, bah
And, the country is divided anyway.
But, not to worry, she probably won't get the nomination.
Sarah Sophia Pulchrituda
ReplyDeletedamnable maybe but prejudiced hardly. I'd vote for a purple monkey-eater if I thought *it* had the right skill set.
ReplyDeleteAnd I think we've already seen that speechifying alone does not de facto correlate with being an effective leader. A place in the cabinet maybe, say energy?
My ride is almost here.
ReplyDelete"Naif" was meant to rile, but the gist still pertains. People yell for the fresh and new and then bitch when the 'fresh new' version can't work within the existing Potomac structure - Jimmy Carter, Richard Nixon, Bill Clinton.
Which is why I think Mitt Romney might be a better choice at this juncture. The country needs someone in office who can prioritize and execute. Sarah Palin might fit the executive shoes after the pending transition, say 2 or 3 election cycles down the road when the policy paths have been defined and require administration only. Right now the country needs someone to define and defend forward direction. I don't think that person is Sarah Palin.
Did ypu know that California schools have an underfunding problem?
ReplyDeleteLatinos now make up a majority of California's public school students, cracking the 50 percent barrier for the first time in the state's history, according to data released Friday by the state Department of Education.
Almost 50.4 percent of the state's students in the 2009-10 school year identified themselves as Hispanic or Latino, up 1.36 percent from the previous year.
In comparison, 27 percent of California's 6.2 million students identified themselves as white, 9 percent as Asian and 7 percent as black. Students calling themselves Filipino, Pacific Islander, Native American or other total almost 7 percent.
While the result was no surprise to educators, experts say the shift underscores the huge impact Latinos already have on California's politics, economy and school system.
That influence will only grow as Latino parents - now in the majority - realize many of the schools their children attend are underfunded, said Bruce Fuller, a professor of education and public policy at UC Berkeley.
Read more: here
I thought our strength was in our diversity. Oh , at 27% , we are no longer diverse are we?
ReplyDeleteFamily values do not stop at the border. Who said that must have forgot that we really have no border, thanks in large amount to the person who said that.
ReplyDeleteUpdate:
ReplyDeleteOur strength is in our immersion.
My wife's for Romney.
ReplyDeleteBut it causes no arguments.
Migrate north, deuce.
ReplyDeleteUnderfunded California schools - what is a construction like that called again?
ReplyDeleteSomething about a chaste whore?
heh
Christie is tempting; but I think I would go with Pawlenty (at this moment.)
ReplyDeleteJohn Bolton is thinking of running.
ReplyDeleteI doubt he'd get to first base.
Anybody but Huckabee.
Obama may well have some competition in his primaries.
Oh My Lord! You have Got to see This. The Greatest Video in the History of the World: Quantitative Easing, Explained
ReplyDeleteWe have "the deflation."
ReplyDeleteThe Fed would rather have "the inflation."
"The only thing deflating is the Fed's credibility."
"The Ben Bernanke has no business experience."
ReplyDeleteJohn Bolton would get my vote.
ReplyDeleteDrudge has a story up showing how many unions and companies have opted out of the health care plan, 111 or so, and been given permission to do so.
ReplyDeleteHere is one of the comments:
aravoth
3 hours ago 3
Fuck this Health-care bill, I'm not paying for this horseshit. Obama and the Congress can go fuck themselves. You can't force me to buy insurance anymore than you can force me to to buy a big mac.
Who elected this asshole anyway? And what in the FUCK were they thinking?
.
ReplyDeleteQuantitative Easing, Explained
:)
I thought the best part was,
"You've got to be shitting me."
.
hahahaha
ReplyDeleteRuf you found a good one there.
"Do not bang your head against the wall, The Obama Care is too expensive."
------
Palin/Bolton 2012
The Ben Bernanke has a nice beard.
ReplyDeleteematactical
ReplyDeleteClick on pistol/rifle conversion on the right.
Was listening to a Sunday gun on the radio.
Probe much Q?
ReplyDeleteAgree completely that GWB lacked the requisite leadership and executive skills at a critical time in our history, which is why I mentioned the historical footnote that he was expected to lose against Al Gore who, in hindsight would have been challenged by a similar set of deficiencies.
Cheney's 'stovepiping' is well known and well documented, as is the antagonistic relationship between CIA and GWB.
Also well documented - as if anything further was required in the post-911 world - were the intel failures leading to the event. From what I understand, the indicators were picked up, but they had nowhere to go. IOW the interagency and intergovernmental relationships were broken. Hence Cheney's 'stovepiping.'
Condi Rice is an interesting character. Obviously she had responsibilities that were not completely fulfilled but just as obviously she functioned as a close confidante to GWB. It strikes me that she was severely constrained in what she could accomplish when opposed by Cheney, the neocons, and not to forget the CIA. Tough role for anyone.
Nice p-riff on that last post. You do have a talent. Do you do Q's as well?
On the gravitas issue, I disagree - Pelosi, Reid, Frank, Waters, and the rather lengthy list of Republicans who no longer grace the Potomac with their presence. I repeat what I have written before: the Repubs got cleaned out with GWB and now it's the Dems' turn. They will be routed and god knows who will replace the empty seats once occupied by the serious-for-me-not-you elites in Congress. The self indulgence cannot be ignored nor do I think it unduly harsh to file the misplaced sense of obligation under the category of absence of gravitas. There is a dignity in presence and bearing and communication that is missing.
On the system vs people issue, you criticized DR for focusing on the Farmer and letting the Daughter go (RE the Israel-Palestine conflict.) Same structural issue with government. And no, I am not advocating a (violent) putsch but the intel failures facilitating the successful execution of the 9-11 attack need review and repair. Some of that will be people and some of that will be structural.
The Quantitative Easing is from
ReplyDeleteManolo's Shoe Blog
Two great threads!
ReplyDeleteManolo on Croc's
ReplyDeleteThe only stovepiping that I am aware of is that done by Jaime Gorelick during the Clinton years. The same Gorelick who served on the 9/11 Commission and according to Slate:
ReplyDeleteAlthough Gorelick had no background in finance, she joined Fannie Mae in 1997 as vice chair and departed in 2003. For her trouble, Gorelick collected a staggering $26.4 million in total compensation, including bonuses
Slate 2008
ReplyDeleteFannie Mae and the Vast Bipartisan Conspiracy
Stovepiping
ReplyDelete.
ReplyDeleteProbe much Q?
I try.
Cheney's 'stovepiping' is well known and well documented, as is the antagonistic relationship between CIA and GWB...
Cheney's stovepiping? What about Bolton, Under-Secretary-of-State for Arms Control? When he didn't get the story he wanted out of Greg Theilman the laison at state who fed him "vetted" intelligence on Saddam's nuclear capabilities, Bolton froze Theilman out and set up his own intelligence group.
What about Rumsfeld? You forget that Rumsfeld once chaired a commission that criticized intelligence analysts because they weren't providing estimates that went beyond the actual evidence they had in hand. The first thing Rumsfeld did when he became Secretary of Defense was to set up his own intelligence agency within the Pentagon. Stovepiping? I'd say so.
Did Cheney stovpipe. Of course. Was he the only one? In an administration full of neocon idealogues, like Feith and Wolfowitcz, looking to spread the joys of democracy to a waiting world, I don't think so. He was just high enough to get the smoke from a lot of stovepipes and pass it on.
The Darth Vadar meme has Cheney pulling all the strings not as disinterested consigliere but as powerful under-boss with all the power, Bush's brain as many called him. I see him as merely another Capo fighting for his own agenda along with all the rest. I personally think Bush was already predisposed to invade Iraq and that the 'stovepiping' was welcomed.
It strikes me that she was severely constrained in what she could accomplish when opposed by Cheney, the neocons, and not to forget the CIA. Tough role for anyone.
I don't want to come across as a misogynist but I have to say you are sounding like a philogynist.
Fighting the neocons? She was a neocon. Tough role for anyone? It was her job not Cheney's. Most of your post was about people not stepping up and doing their job.
Do you do Q's as well?
Yes, but my specialties are B's
and S's.
They will be routed and god knows who will replace the empty seats once occupied by the serious-for-me-not-you elites in Congress. The self indulgence cannot be ignored.
On this we can agree but it misses the point of my post. If I read your intial post correctly, you indicated that our problem is a broken system. In response, I was arguing that it was not the system that was broken but the people we elected that have been gaming that system.
On the system vs people issue, you criticized DR for focusing on the Farmer and letting the Daughter go (RE the Israel-Palestine conflict.)
Sorry, I don't know what this reference is to.
Rat and I criticize each other all the time. Sometimes it's hard to keep track.
.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteBefore I made my comment I Googled stovepiping and the top hits (first ten pages) were all from center left, in most cases rabidly anti-Bush partisan, progressive website/blogs.
ReplyDeleteI don't see one credible article in the first ten pages of the Google results. Many were based on Seymour Hersh's allegations.
I suspect the term was widely used by the left as payback because of conservative critism of the actual stovepiping which resulted in 9/11 information not being shared between our foreign intelligences services and the FBI.
RE: th stovepiping issue.
ReplyDeleteIf the system were working as well as you imply then why the intervention - by multiple players? Is that not a symptom of 'systematic' failure?
Rumsfeld and the rest of it is close to ancient history by now and quite beside the point.
The philogymist thing was just stupid. Incite much? I had to look it up.
RE the "system". It's not broken but it needs an upgrade. New people are good but new rules would be better.
And whit RE the stovepiping
ReplyDeleteTrish can fill in those blanks.
But she's not here.
And I wish she were.
ReplyDeleteThe New York Times reported in early 2007 that both parties' presidential hopefuls announced their candidacies earlier than ever, due in large part to the wide open nature of the race. A bigger field triggers heightened competition for fundraising bundlers, top staff and notoriety - and the GOP field for 2012 continues to expand with approximately one dozen candidates eyeing bids. But Politico reported last week that because former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin is a wildcard, some Republicans are considering delaying the opening shots of their candidacies.
So far, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich has said he'll announce whether he is running in March. Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty expects to announce a bid at roughly the same time.
Romney said last week that he and his wife, Ann, would discuss his options over Christmas. Aides have said that there is a debate about the timing of the potential announcement, but they acknowledge again this time the importance of a traditional speech with top-notch stagecraft and point to precise and well-staged events during the last campaign.
Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels is focused on the first session of the next legislative term, which ends in April, and would not enter the race until after business closes.
Indiana Rep. Mike Pence, who is weighing a bid for president versus a bid for governor, said on ABC's "This Week" that he would make a decision early next year. South Dakota Sen. John Thune has said he'll decide in late winter or early spring next year.
Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour told RealClearPolitics at a campaign stop in Portland, Oregon, last weekend that he wouldn't discuss even a timeline until after the midterms ended.
Huckabee's timeline and intentions, like Palin's, are unknown. Together with Romney, the trio of GOP breakout stars from the 2008 campaign led Iowa exit polls on Tuesday.
The question remains: Who among the top contenders will step out first and be the early target -- or the one to set the standard?
RCP
As whit's link to that 2008 Slate article, referencing Fannie and Fraudie, the rot in DC is systemic and bi-partisan.
ReplyDeleteThe revolving door benefits players on both sides of the partisan aisle.
With paybacks of perks, power and in kind donations back to the those that sponsor the Federal gravy train.
This is easily seen in the scandalous Fraudie and Freddie fiasco. It is evident in other Federal programs, as well.
As to "stove-piping", that too is systematic within the Federal system.
Turf protection and credit mongering are endemic to the Federal system, as it directly relates to glory garnering and budget appropriations competition between the various flavors of Federal alphabet soups.
It goes beyond the people involved, to the nature of the System, itself.
As whit's link to that 2008 Slate article, referencing Fannie and Fraudie illustrates, the rot in DC is systemic and bi-partisan.
ReplyDelete.
ReplyDeleteIf the system were working as well as you imply then why the intervention - by multiple players? Is that not a symptom of 'systematic' failure?
I didn't imply the system was working well. What I responded to was
...And right now that's all we're doing - whining - because the federal infrastructure is not equipped to respond to the challenges of the modern world.
Perhaps I misread your intend but when I read 'federal infrastructure' I took it to mean our current system of republican government, with executive, judicial, and bicameral legislative branches.
I still consider that 'infrastructure' adequate, not as efficient as China's perhaps, but still better than most. And I contend that the problem is with the people we have operating within that infrastructure rather than with the infrastructure itself.
Rumsfeld and the rest of it is close to ancient history by now and quite beside the point.
You were the one using Cheney as the example. I thought he and Rumsfeld were pretty much contemporaneous.
The philogymist thing was just stupid. Incite much? I had to look it up.
I thought it was kind of cute. You need to lighten up a little CL. Whenever you post a broad statement of opinion, you're usually going to get some pushback from someone. There was no intention to incite. I was just kidding around a bit.
As a matter of fact I see the rat has already agreed with you.
New people are good but new rules would be better.
Unfortunately, you won't get any new rules until you get new people.
.
Dolphin Bubbles
ReplyDelete.
ReplyDeleteAs to "stove-piping", that too is systematic within the Federal system...
It goes beyond the people involved, to the nature of the System, itself.
As it is does in any large bureaucracy.
Heck, do you think there is any stove-piping going on in the goverment in China. What about the media? How about blogs? The British Parliament? The Iraqi Parliament?
Ever worked for a large company? Should we get rid of the capitalist model?
If stove-piping is a problem then the solution is to appoint qualified people who will get rid of the stove-piping.
.
The "System" has grown well beyond the three branches of government.
ReplyDeleteFannie and Fraudie exemplify that.
The Federal Reserve exemplifies it, too.
The vast Federal holdings of land, 20% of all the United States just another sign of the socialist times.
The Federal System has grown into a leviathan that far surpasses what was envisioned by the Founders. No involvement of "new people" will change it.
They will be co-opted by it.
.
ReplyDeleteGreat stuff Sam.
.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteStove piping is a symptom, not a cause.
ReplyDeleteThe solution would be to dismantle the bureaucracy, which will not happen.
We exist in the "new normal" and there is no going "back". Not to Jacksonian times, not to Lincoln or Teddy "the Progressive" Roosevelt, not to FDR or even the Fifties. Not even to the "Real New Deal" policies of Ronald Reagan.
We cannot go "Back to the Future".
Welcome to the 21st century.
Welcome to tomorrow.
.
ReplyDeleteFannie and Freddie were created by Congress and what Congress gives Congress can take away. I think, merely from talk I've heard, that in the next few years the structures of Fannie and Freddie will be modified significantly.
The Fed is troubling but let's face it every other country has a national bank. Hamilton would have been proud.
Government lands? As you know, I disagree with you on this subject.
"No involvement of "new people" will change it.
They will be co-opted by it."
Then the new people are co-optible. Why make excuses for them?
.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete.
ReplyDelete"Stove piping is a symptom, not a cause."
I disagree.
It is neither.
It is a tactic, to promote either an agenda or yourself.
.
Dolphins blowing and playing with smoke rings, like we used to do, neat Sam.
ReplyDeleteRemember the dolphins.
ReplyDeleteOur friends.
Buy only certified dolphin free tuna.
g'nite
Government lands? As you know, I disagree with you on this subject.
ReplyDeleteQuirk gets one right.
Even some men of pavement, suburbs and cities know to appreciate the valuable.
You are to be praised.
Incredible video, Sam. Just freakin' incredible.
ReplyDeleteAmazing and in a way very sad that we can be so ignorant of the natural world around us.
ReplyDeletegood catch Sam.
.
ReplyDeleteRemember the dolphins.
Our friends.
Sure, until they start killing a few elk.
.
Into Space
ReplyDeleteIt's too rugged to hunt them out of there. You couldn't do it with a helicopter gunship. You are forgiven for not knowing that.
ReplyDeleteIf a wolf kills, say, 20 elk a year, you are saying it's being 'kind to the animals' to trade away 20 elk versus one wolf.
When do the elk get a vote? Where are their animal rights?
They are quit peaceful, and only rut about among themselves in the fall.
The forest is now a hell for the elk, and the wolves we have introduced, are the devils, tormenting them. And they kill often not for food, but just for the fun of it.
It's the way most of us around here look at it. we peaceful farmers and ranchers, say 80% of us, and lawyers too, like my new Mrs. Lady Law.
So Quirk, you are really for a slaughter of the innocent, it is what you are really saying. Or that killing machine for sport and meat eaters are of much more value than peaceful vegetarians.
I'd like to know what PETA's official position is on such matters. They must have taken a vote, and come to some resolution.
.
ReplyDeleteIt's too rugged to hunt them out of there. You couldn't do it with a helicopter gunship.
Sarah Palin would laugh her ass off at you.
If a wolf kills, say, 20 elk a year, you are saying it's being 'kind to the animals' to trade away 20 elk versus one wolf.
You make it sound like elk is the only thing wolves eat.
There are like 1650 wolves total in Wyoming, Montana, and Idaho.
...we are peaceful farmers and ranchers...
But evidently not very good hunters.
So Quirk, you are really for a slaughter of the innocent, it is what you are really saying...
Aw heck no Bob, I'd prefer as you suggested that they just go out and poison the wolves so that a bunch of drunken yahoos can go out and slaughter those vegetarian elk. Much more civilized.
"To Edmund Ziegler, the animal is already a menace, competing with sportsmen for prized elk." (Quoting a peace loving Montanan.)
I'd like to know what PETA's official position is on such matters.
No you wouldn't.
There is an Anti-PETA website though that carries quotes like this:
"If it's not in the food chain of man, it is competing for out food. Tell a starving child they can't eat because animals have rights!"
How many kids you got starving in Idaho because they haven't got their daily ration of elk meat Bob?
.
ah Quirk, you make me feel so bad.
ReplyDeleteActually most of the drunken yahoos out here are from back east. Every year Search and Rescue has to go out and save three or four them.
And I would like to know what PETA's official position is, maybe I'll try to look it up tomorrow. Or maybe you would. Kinda interesting thing to know, what they came up with, if anything.
ReplyDeleteThe wimp.com web site (dolphin bubbles) is a lot of fun. Two clips over is a video of lizards with rainbow colors I have never seen before. How does Sam find these sites? I can't recall him ever posting links from the same site twice.
ReplyDeletePerhaps I misread your intend but when I read 'federal infrastructure' I took it to mean our current system of republican government, with executive, judicial, and bicameral legislative branches.
ReplyDeleteYes, you did misread. I was referring specifically to the intel failures leading to 9-11, the military failures in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the Congressional oversight failures contributing to financial crash of 2008.
I'd rather people not come knocking on my door. Bad enough I get patted down at Every airport. Nothing random about it.
Whit, agreed on Gorelick.
ReplyDeleteQuirk, yes Condoleeza Rice did call herself a neoconservative, but I also note the 180-degree role reversal within the space of one or two posts where I argued for more professional accountability among Washington elites while you offered excuses. On the subject of Rice, my vision from a distance may be flawed as it was with GWB because I liked her personally, as I did GWB. But, in a remarkable accomplishment for a VP, Cheney set an official tone not conducive to cooperation and negotiation among the diverse opinions existing without benefit of solid ground intelligence within the tense post-911 atmosphere. I condemn Cheney for being a Vader-like character NO more than I blame Rice for failing to get the guys to play well together.
'posts' should probably read 'threads'
ReplyDelete.
ReplyDeleteI make no excuses for Cheney.
I opposes most of the views he espouses.
What I argue is that you give the man too much credit.
.
I understand.
ReplyDeleteI began with the premise that people were giving GWB 'too much credit' and started with Cheney as an example of the importance of support staff in administering an effective bureaucracy.
Another time.