Jump to content
Rex Kickass

The Republican Thread

Recommended Posts

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1208/16600.html

 

Jay Carney is leaving Time magazine after 20 years to be Vice President-elect Joe Biden's communications director

 

might as well make it official i suppose. even though hiring the guy that runs Time to be a mouth piece of the Democrat party seems a bit redundant.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I found this pretty classy. You don't see this kind of respect shown very often in politics. Bush sure didn't see it when he got into office, that is for sure.

 

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=08...;show_article=1

 

Bush, who promised president-elect Barack Obama a smooth transition into office, has invited the Democrat to a White House breakfast on January 7, along with former presidents Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter and his father, George HW Bush.

 

Obama proposed the breakfast get-together when he visited the White House on November 10, six days after winning the presidential election, Bush said.

 

"I'm sure he's going to ask us all questions, I would guess. If not, we'll just share war stories," Bush said about the meeting.

 

Bush reiterated his intention to completely give up the limelight to Obama after the inauguration.

 

"One thing I don't want to do is stay on the stage. The spotlight needs to shift to president-elect Obama ... because he's the president.

 

"Therefore, I won't try to get it to shift to me. And I'll be very respectful of him during his presidency."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 19, 2008 -> 11:53 AM)
I found this pretty classy. You don't see this kind of respect shown very often in politics. Bush sure didn't see it when he got into office, that is for sure.

 

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=08...;show_article=1

I've been impressed all along with the transition efforts of Bush and Obama, particularly Bush.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 19, 2008 -> 11:56 AM)
I've been impressed all along with the transition efforts of Bush and Obama, particularly Bush.

Democrats just want to trash GWB all they can. The man is a stand up decent man of good character, but he has definitely made some mistakes along the way.

 

I'm not sure what to think of the moral character of Obama. As a comparison to Bill Clinton, Obama has good moral character. However, I think that Obama has some very shady dealings in the past as well as right now that we don't even begin to know about. I don't know, but I'll give him the benefit of the doubt until time proves otherwise.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/16836

 

Obama's five rules of scandal response

 

Tuesday's report from the transition, detailing contacts between members of Obama's inner circle and embattled Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich and concluding that "nothing at all inappropriate" was discussed, won't be the final word on the subject—but it did provide some telling insight into the way the White House's new occupant will operate.

 

Here are five rules of Obama scandal-management based on his team's handling of its first post-election crisis.

 

1 - Be transparent, to an extent

 

Obama's internal review was entirely voluntary and intended to demonstrate that his team had nothing to hide, and was committed to its pledge to run "the most open and transparent transition in history."

 

But after announcing the review, his team declined to reveal who would conduct it, who would be interviewed or whether the resulting release would include any transition e-mails or records to support its conclusions.

 

The review itself answered just one of those questions — we now know that White House Counsel Greg Craig led the review, which didn't include any documentation of what materials it went over — but it raised others, among them: Why did Obama confidante Valerie Jarrett communicate with Craig through her lawyer, whom the report does not name; how many conversations did incoming White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel have with Blagojevich; and why was Obama himself interviewed by prosecutors?

 

The report says Emanuel urged Blagojevich to tap Jarrett for the Senate seat during "one or two telephone calls." But in the next paragraph, it refers to "those early conversations with the governor," and in a conference call unveiling the report, Craig said Emanuel "had a couple of conversations with the governor."

 

Equally unclear is what exactly was reviewed in the report that concludes that nothing inappropriate occurs, and whether there were any transition e-mails or other records covering the Senate seat selection process.

 

 

 

"We asked each individual who we thought might have had some contact or some communication that would be meaningful" to reconstruct "any contacts or communications, and that would include checking cell phone records or e-mails, and we inquired about that," Craig said. He added that "we've got the information that is required," and said he didn't know of any written communications.

 

Also, the report revealed that prosecutors interviewed Obama, and did so after he had publicly declared he had been unaware of Blagojevichâ€s alleged plot to sell off the Senate seat Obama had vacated after winning the presidency, raising questions about why they took the unusual step of interviewing the president-elect, what they asked him and whether he was under oath.

 

2 - Don't let the news cycle dictate response

 

Freed from the rapid fire back-and-forth of the campaign, Obama, a stickler for preparation, resorted to his methodical instincts in trying to create order amidst the swirling scandal.

 

But in taking his time, he's let the story linger into a third week.

 

After drawing criticism for a listless initial response the day Blagojevich was arrested and accused of trying to sell the Senate seat vacated by the president-elect, Obama went a step further the next day by calling on the governor to resign. On the third day of the story, he announced the internal review. By the next week he acknowledged frustration over not being able to clear up inaccuracies about the case.

 

Still, Obama resisted the temptation to spout off and stuck to the original plan: He would allow a written report to speak for him.

 

When the transition released the five-page review Tuesday, the day before Christmas Eve, Obama was far removed from the action as he relaxed in Hawaii with his family. The physical distance served the same purpose as the report itself, separating Obama from the swirl of scandal

 

3 - No freelancing

 

The report suggested Obama wants his advisers to get his permission before even ostensibly private conservations with outsiders.

 

Longtime Obama family friend Eric Whitaker seemed to follow this rule when he was approached by Blagojevich deputy Louanner Peters asking who could speak for Obama's preferences for the Senate seat.

 

"Dr. Whitaker said he would find out," according to the report. After Whitaker was told by Obama that "no one was authorized to speak for him on the matter," the report states Whitaker "relayed that information to Deputy Governor Peters" and "had no other contacts with anyone from the governor's office."

 

On the other side of that ledger was Emanuel, a much newer member of Obama's inner circle, who broke the rule by calling Blagojevich and recommending he tap Jarrett for the seat.

 

"He did so before learning -- in further conversations with the president-elect -- that the president-elect had ruled out communicating a preference for any one candidate," according to the report. Later, when Emanuel chatted with Blagojevich's then-chief of staff, the report indicates it was "with the authorization of the president-elect."

 

4 - Aides take hits to protect the boss

 

Twice in handling the Blagojevich scandal, top Obama lieutenants were singled out for botching the message.

 

The report makes clear that Emanuel was the only person in Obama's transition who had any contact with Blagojevich about filling the Senate seat and that his contact wasn't authorized by Obama.

 

And Obama political guru David Axelrod made a public mea culpa after his boss contradicted a statement from an interview he gave last month, before the governor's arrest.

 

In it, Axelrod unambiguously described a conversation between Obama and Blagojevich about filling the seat, saying, "I know he's talked to the governor and there are a whole range of names, many of which have surfaced, and I think he has a fondness for a lot of them."

 

But after Obama declared he hadn't spoken to Blagojevich, Axelrod issued a statement saying, "I was mistaken when I told an interviewer last month that the president-elect has spoken directly to Governor Blagojevich about the Senate vacancy."

 

5 – Shy away from even justified fights

 

It seems only logical that Obama would want a say in picking his successor in the Senate, since the next junior senator from Illinois will represent the president-electâ€s home and could be an important congressional ally.

 

But Obama, whose penchant for avoiding tough stands on controversial issues frustrated opponents trying to land a clear shot in the presidential race, also steered clear of the Senate-seat derby, according to the report and Craigâ€s teleconference.

 

Craig said Obama “was not engaging on this in any personal way and had no interest in dictating the result of the selection process.”

 

The report says Obama talked with his top aides about a range of prospective Senators, but never winnowed down the group, dispatching Emanuel to relay a list of acceptable candidates to Blagojevichâ€s office.

 

And according to the report, Obama was ambivalent about the Senate aspirations of Jarrett, contradicting the widely reported claim that she was his top choice for the Senate seat. Rather, the report says, Obamaâ€s “preference (was) that Valerie Jarrett work with him in the White House." But it also states he made clear "he would neither stand in her way if she wanted to pursue the Senate seat nor actively seek to have her or any other particular candidate appointed to the vacancy."

 

To the extent that the report succeeds in its goal of establishing the distance between Obama and Blagojevich, it necessarily raises the question: Why was the president-elect and leader of the Democratic party playing no role in a key appointment to national office being made in his home state, and by a Democratic governor?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I was really not happy with the way he handled that scandal, if you can even call it a scandal if they didn't do anything wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (lostfan @ Dec 24, 2008 -> 11:38 AM)
Yeah, I was really not happy with the way he handled that scandal, if you can even call it a scandal if they didn't do anything wrong.

 

They did nothing wrong, I just don't like the fact we were lied to at every step of the way by the Obama camp.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 24, 2008 -> 11:40 AM)
They did nothing wrong, I just don't like the fact we were lied to at every step of the way by the Obama camp.

^^^^

 

Some change we have here.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (kapkomet @ Dec 24, 2008 -> 03:21 PM)
^^^^

 

Some change we have here.

There is some change. They didn't do anything wrong. That's totally new. :lolhitting

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 25, 2008 -> 12:08 AM)
There is some change. They didn't do anything wrong. That's totally new. :lolhitting

So far that we know. And yet, they STILL felt the need to lie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123033501646236333.html

Sen. Reid, however, faces a potentially tough fight. A recent Research 2000 poll of likely voters put his approval rating at 38% and his disapproval rating at 54%, a possible reflection of voters' displeasure with gridlock and partisanship in Washington

 

 

how sweet would that be. Harry Reid could lose his Senate seat. He has 2 years of bumbling left ahead of him before the election. those numbers could go much lower.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (mr_genius @ Dec 27, 2008 -> 05:58 PM)
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123033501646236333.html

 

 

 

how sweet would that be. Harry Reid could lose his Senate seat. He has 2 years of bumbling left ahead of him before the election. those numbers could go much lower.

I'd be ecstatic to get rid of Reid. He was a horrible choice for Senate Majority Leader.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 29, 2008 -> 08:05 AM)
So much for no connection between the two...

Who ever said there was no connection? The real estate deal was always one where we knew (or at least I thought we all knew) had connections with Rezko. The reason it wasn't a big deal is that it appeared that the deal itself was legit, and there was no other evidence of connection to Rezko other than this one legitimate business deal.

 

Not sure about this article showing Rezko's attorney owns the Obama house though - very strange. Is this attorney someone who still represents Obama in some fashion? Is there some sort of power-of-attorney thing going on now that Obama is the prez-elect? Seems very strange to me.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 29, 2008 -> 09:05 AM)
So much for no connection between the two...

Who ever said there was "no connection between the two?" Not even Obama has said that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The woman who was kinda sorta alleged in the most vague way possible to be having a possibly inappropriate possible relationship with possible candidate John maybe McCain by the New York iffy times is suing the paper for defamation. This should be fun for all sides.

 

(Did I adequately capture the number of qualifiers the NYT put in their original story there?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (mr_genius @ Jan 2, 2009 -> 03:26 PM)
Hmm, I have an idea, how about cutting spending as to not be that much in debt? of course thats not an option

Because in the middle of a dramatic consumer and business spending downturn, a government spending downturn is another path towards a depression.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 2, 2009 -> 06:06 PM)
Because in the middle of a dramatic consumer and business spending downturn, a government spending downturn is another path towards a depression.

 

this next great derpression will be caused, if anything, by massive debt and currency failure. the spending you are suggesting is path to another depression.

Edited by mr_genius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (mr_genius @ Jan 2, 2009 -> 04:31 PM)
this next great derpression will be caused, if anything, by massive debt and currency failure. the spending you are suggesting is path to another depression.

A few years down the road, yes, that's a major worry, it's a gift left to us by the people who built it, and a major problem. But worrying about inflation spirals when deflation is a real possibility is going to make the current mess that much worse. It didn't work when the Republicans tried it in 1930-32, it didn't work when FDR tried it in 1936, and it won't work now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 2, 2009 -> 06:42 PM)
A few years down the road, yes, that's a major worry, it's a gift left to us by the people who built it, and a major problem. But worrying about inflation spirals when deflation is a real possibility is going to make the current mess that much worse. It didn't work when the Republicans tried it in 1930-32, it didn't work when FDR tried it in 1936, and it won't work now.

 

Obviously big spending and deficits don't work either (aka GW Bush). Surprisingly enough, wasting money doesn't help the economy. You don't want to continue the failed Bush regime policies right? I demand change and hope!

 

I guess we could get a new deal type thing and hope WWIII breaks out and have the rest of the world in shambles except the US; like WWII. Yea lets go for that one. Use the new deal combined with world war blueprint to get us out of this economic downturn; as the new deal alone doesn't work.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×