What the Panetta appointment means
posted at 10:57 am on January 6, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Barack Obama sent a message with the selection of Rahm Emanuel as his chief of staff, but apparently didn’t think enough people understood it. He sent a stronger message yesterday with his choice of Leon Panetta for Director of CIA, and this time, it’s unmistakable. Political considerations will trump competence and experience, even in the most critical roles Obama has to fill:
President-elect Barack Obama stunned the national intelligence community by selecting Clinton White House chief of staff Leon E. Panetta, a longtime Washington insider with little intelligence experience, to serve as the next head of the CIA.
The decision — which was also met with wariness on Capitol Hill — reflects a desire to change the intelligence power structure, officials close to the selection said yesterday. Obama has chosen retired Navy Adm. Dennis C. Blair as the director of national intelligence, a job he intends to reinforce as the “lead horse” on intelligence issues, an official close to the selection process said.
Panetta, 70, is widely regarded as a good manager who knows the government bureaucracy well. Panetta, a former eight-term member of Congress who has run a think tank in California for the past decade, has no significant ties to the agency that Obama has criticized for using harsh interrogation methods. Panetta has openly objected to the use of such methods, writing in an essay last year that the United States “must not use torture under any circumstances.” Obama had trouble filling the CIA slot in part because other candidates were perceived as tainted for having supported aspects of the Bush administration’s interrogation and intelligence programs.
Yet Panetta, who also served as director of President Bill Clinton’s Office of Management and Budget, has no institutional memory of the intelligence agency and no hands-on experience with its thorniest challenges, including the collection of human intelligence overseas. His lack of experience drew immediate questions, most notably from Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), the incoming chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, who said she was not briefed on his selection and learned about it from news accounts.
The US is currently fighting an asymmetrical war on two hot fronts, but more to the point, in every corner of the world. We need our best people at the helm at Defense and in the intelligence arenas, people with insight into the problems and challenges facing America at war. Barack Obama either doesn’t understand that or cares less about security than he does about politics.
Leon Panetta only has indirect experience with intelligence. As budget director in the Clinton administration, Panetta has familiarity with their funding, and Panetta also served on the Iraq Study Group for several months, which looked at the role that intelligence failures played in our invasion and during the occupation. There must be thousands of people more qualified to run the CIA from an experience and competence standpoint, including several members of Congress, notably Jane Harman, who should have chaired the House Intelligence Committee in the last session of Congress but ran afoul of Nancy Pelosi.
Even the notion of “change” doesn’t apply here. Obama has no executive experience in government, and neither does Panetta, but Panetta hardly represents a breath of fresh air in Washington. He’s another Clinton-era retread, only in this case, put in charge of an organization about which he knows nothing. He’s there to exercise Obama’s political will and nothing more.
Obama deserves the benefit of the doubt on his political appointments, but this is one selection that should get a lot of scrutiny from Congress. If Obama wants a political hatchet man in a high-level appointment, have Panetta run OMB — or Commerce, where there’s a late opening. America deserves the benefit of experience and wisdom in the position of CIA director.
You must be logged in to post a comment.

















Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
hope
change
D2Boston on January 6, 2009 at 11:01 AM
“Panetta, 70, is widely regarded as a good manager who knows the”
WHOA WHOA WHOA!! 70? You mean like only 2 years younger than McCain who, as we were told over and over by the left, was only moments away from dropping dead from old age?
angryed on January 6, 2009 at 11:02 AM
Maybe one of Barney Frank’s house mates can volunteer to be appointed ambassador to Russia?
The art is lovely over there, and the theater is to die for!
jeff_from_mpls on January 6, 2009 at 11:02 AM
Why is that? It’s not as if BHO actually knows any of the people he’s appointing. He’s heard about some of them, but it doesn’t go too much further than that.
The fact is, with regards to BHO’s picks, the doubt deserves the benefit.
progressoverpeace on January 6, 2009 at 11:03 AM
Funny. I thought only Bush was capable of “political” appointments.
Panetta, although a decent man, is the wrong person and will be blocked.
vinman on January 6, 2009 at 11:04 AM
What it means is pretty clear. Obama doesn’t give a damn about having a solid intelligence force during a global War on Terror.
He cares about the leftie loons who want impose war crimes tribunals on Bush, Cheney and anyone else connected with Gitmo.
Woe for us.
bigred on January 6, 2009 at 11:04 AM
2012. What’s it gonna be..NO HOPE AND RE-CHANGE? How about “EXCHANGE”?
Brat on January 6, 2009 at 11:05 AM
These days, the career CIA and the President often have competing foreign polices, so Panetta will be there to negotiate between the two sides–maybe come down in the middle somewhere.
RBMN on January 6, 2009 at 11:05 AM
a think tank in California
I just thought that was a funny phrase.
Topics, you know, like, how to use hemp, how to clean your bong, etc.
jeff_from_mpls on January 6, 2009 at 11:06 AM
If it wasn’t so scary, I would love this. The implosion of the Dems. Lets just hope smarter minds will prevail. WOW!
DJ from MA on January 6, 2009 at 11:06 AM
It means Obama really is a sexist pig because Jane Harmon was a 100x more qualified, sweetie.
Someone said that Obama wants to give a message that there will be no more illegal wiretaps. What illegal wiretaps? And those wiretaps, listening in on terrorists outside the US, saved lives. So, Obama is all about not saving lives. You can bet that he will have no problems bending rules to save his own ass and family.
Blake on January 6, 2009 at 11:07 AM
Some needed editing, compliments of UltimateBob
UltimateBob on January 6, 2009 at 11:08 AM
Obama is completely inexperienced and not fit for his job. Why should he think those things are even desired for government positions when he just won a national election?
Esthier on January 6, 2009 at 11:09 AM
Enemies of America, foreign and domestic, are rubbing their hands and giggling with glee.
“The One” is not even in office yet and is already sending the wrong signals out to our enemies.
kingsjester on January 6, 2009 at 11:10 AM
Pardon the interruption:
BREAKING NEWS!
Obama is “concerned” about Gaza situation.
tgillian on January 6, 2009 at 11:10 AM
I never thought I would say this, but Bill Clinton truely is the foundation of the modern Democratic party. Obama’s entire high-level staff was essentially born of the Clinton era. It’s testimony to Clinton that his mentoring of what would have been fairly inexperienced appointments in the early and mid-nineties has benefited Obama greatly.
I’m not a political junkie, but I think it’s safe to say that Clinton didn’t draw exclusively on the most recent Democratic presidents cabinet (or maybe a few), but rather had the unenviable job of creating one from scratch? Am I off base here?
OK, enough Clinton praise..I need to lie down now.
Waterboy on January 6, 2009 at 11:11 AM
tgillian on January 6, 2009 at 11:10 AM
Thanks. I feel so much safer now.
Pass the Tylenol.
kingsjester on January 6, 2009 at 11:11 AM
I’m sure if Panetta gets confirmed, Bill will have him finish the job Sandy Berger started of sanitizing the archives.
CP on January 6, 2009 at 11:11 AM
I remember thinking when Obama won the Democratic nomination that there was one positive about the whole ordeal: “Well, at least the Clintons will no longer have any influence in the White House anymore.”
So much for that.
MB007 on January 6, 2009 at 11:12 AM
Yeah, he can lead the CIA. /s/
Fletch54 on January 6, 2009 at 11:12 AM
To an unbiased observer, it is like the democrats WANT another attack on the USA’s soil.
jukin on January 6, 2009 at 11:12 AM
This country will be tested by terrorists, God help us.
grapeknutz on January 6, 2009 at 11:13 AM
How can you talk about politics trumping competence without mentioning the appointment of Hillary Clinton as SECSTATE? Unlike Powell, Rice, or Albright there is absolutely nothing in her background that suggests that she has the experience necessary to be America’s top diplomat. Aside from dodging fictional snipers, the woman has no foreign experience and should be voted down by the Senate (though it isn’t going to happen).
highhopes on January 6, 2009 at 11:13 AM
If there’s still anything left to be sanitized, then Bush should be impeached.
Esthier on January 6, 2009 at 11:14 AM
Yeah, concerned that:
1. he cannot vote “present”
2. must confront a large segment of his support that we was hoping to ignore from Day 1
3. the middle east is 8 hours time difference, so very likely that urgent calls, etc would come during morning workouts
Waterboy on January 6, 2009 at 11:14 AM
Like I said yesterday and believe firmly, Obama sent the worst possible signal to Russia and China.
These guys don’t play softball but now they know Obama does.
This is the Obama on the Unicorn in JibJab video.
Sad day for the CIA, sad day for the USA and the World really.
FireBlogger on January 6, 2009 at 11:15 AM
Leon Panetta = Jamie Gorelick
God save us all.
If I wanted to relive the 1990’s Why didn’t we just invent a time machine? It would have been cheaper than calling all the old players back in to reprise their rolls as the Keystone Cops.
portlandon on January 6, 2009 at 11:15 AM
And cronyism, too. Notice how none of Obama’s longtime Chicago buddies now-turned-presidential-advisors are “cronies” the way Bush’s Texas crew was?
BigD on January 6, 2009 at 11:16 AM
I remember when that was on the news back in the day. I remember because I thought “what kind of douchbag says “”I, personally”. I mean, doesn’t the word “I” mean you are talking about yourself?”
Once a douchebag…
Waterboy on January 6, 2009 at 11:16 AM
What this appointment really does is to demoralize the intelligence community, because obviously Obama and his team thinks that none of the hard working people in intelligence is remotely qualified. Obviously they’ve all been tainted by the Bush regime and have blood on their hands.
Obama to all the hard working folks tracking down the bad guys: FU! You’re no better than the enemy. CIA=AbuGraib
Way to govern. Must have been some skill he learned with his executive experience… oh wait, he has none.
We’re screwed.
pt on January 6, 2009 at 11:16 AM
Gird your loins!!!
pt on January 6, 2009 at 11:17 AM
Thought experiment for Mr Panetta:
Several of your close family members have been abducted by terrorists who have announced that they will be beheaded on live internet stream within 60 minutes.
The US government has a suspected member of the terrorist organization in custody and believe the suspect may know the location of your family members.
The suspect refuses to provide information. Is torture out of the question under these circumstances?
DarkCurrent on January 6, 2009 at 11:18 AM
“You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. And what I mean by that is an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before.” Rahm Emanuel, November 19, 2008
Brat on January 6, 2009 at 11:19 AM
This is slightly off-topic, but I just thought the other day, if Obama has any sense of humor, he’ll call his new Secretary of State at 3am in the morning of January 21.
factoid on January 6, 2009 at 11:19 AM
Once again, the time honored American tradition of changing horses in the middle of a stream.
unclesmrgol on January 6, 2009 at 11:19 AM
The change we need. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
crazy_legs on January 6, 2009 at 11:21 AM
Blocked? By whom? A Senate with only 41 Republicans, and Burris, Caroline Kennedy, and Al Franken? Dianne Feinstein, to her credit, is a rather fair-minded Senator from a huge blue state, but does she have enough clout to resist the tidal wave of freshman Democrat Senators eager to rubber-stamp whoever the Big O picks?
Panetta will probably be confirmed, and everybody will be just fine and dandy while the CIA turns a blind eye to our enemies, until a few years from now something blows up somewhere and kills a few thousand people. Then suddenly people will turn on Obama and ask him WHY?
Unless he skates by while ignoring terrorism like Bill Clinton did, and the next terrorist attack comes during the first year of the Palin Administration, so everybody blames HER.
Steve Z on January 6, 2009 at 11:21 AM
Obama deserves the benefit of the doubt on his political appointments…
BS. We know what Obama is. We know what his philosophy, his politics, his beliefs are. He doesn’t deserve the benefit of the doubt. Certainly not on this appointment.
Obama has made it clear, as you state, that experience doesn’t matter. Hell, the American people have made that clear by electing Obama.
Why wouldn’t Obama take full advantage of that?
catmman on January 6, 2009 at 11:22 AM
Don’t forget Hillary in that little mix
ToddonCapeCod on January 6, 2009 at 11:22 AM
I don’t know man, I’m tempted to give this one to Obama. I mean, the CIA rank-and-file are the heroes. It’s the sack of sh*t CYA-types that screwed Bush over on Iraq (then Iran) just to save thier jobs and justify failure. If Obama was smart (and no one says he isn’t), he would obviously make sure he had his guy in there, former secret agent or not. It just makes good political sense.
As for national security, how exactly is this guy suppose to weaken the US vis-a-vis Russia, Iran? You don’t think the head of Putin’s KGB is a political animal? Heck, they were probably laughing at us for constantly staffing the head of this key agency with inside career climbers.
Waterboy on January 6, 2009 at 11:23 AM
That’s true. But tell me, I’d like to know what successful executive experience he has in anything?
INC on January 6, 2009 at 11:24 AM
Yeah, like create a huge new government department, or get Congress to pass legislation giving the executive branch unprecedented powers to snoop on people or start a war whose main aim is to correct a mistake your Dad made when he was President. You really wouldn’t want to let a crisis like that go to waste.
factoid on January 6, 2009 at 11:24 AM
Another interesting point that the posters here seem to have missed is the fact that Obama is stepping on the toes of Congressional leaders. The fact that the chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence has to hear about this appointment through news accounts is quite extradinary.
Obama is going to need these people to get his agenda through. Yet he goes out of his way to ignore and insult them.
MarkTheGreat on January 6, 2009 at 11:25 AM
After Obarfy takes office, I suggest staying away from tall buildings and subway systems.
Carry a gun whether or not the local laws allow for it.
You can get good deals online for bulk ammo.
Anyone know how to make a ghillie suit?
Bishop on January 6, 2009 at 11:25 AM
He’s clearly a brilliant man – California is indeed tanking, I think.
LimeyGeek on January 6, 2009 at 11:27 AM
Think about it DJ- Obama was elected, the lowest favorable rated Congress was returned nearly intact, the MSM had to clean its jeans whenever the topic of his Obamaness came up.
We are getting exactly what a democracy gives and what the Founders stridently and fervently worked to prevent and what they warned us about: mob rule and orderly anarchy.
We are witnessing the consequences of our ignoring their dire warnings and refusing believe history.
Amendment X on January 6, 2009 at 11:27 AM
They do.
crazy_legs on January 6, 2009 at 11:28 AM
BWAAAAAAAA! i’m going to have to take a shower but wandered over to a couple of the lefty blogs this morning. After wading through their vile and putrid screed for about 30 minutes I have the impression that they are less than pleased with The Messiah? BWAAAAAAAAA!
Now I really have to go clean up! I feel violated mentally and physically…in a nasty kind of way…
sabbott on January 6, 2009 at 11:28 AM
Awwww Ed……you worry too much. Now that Obama is going to be president, our enemies will mean us no harm…….Or something like that.
tgharris on January 6, 2009 at 11:28 AM
Anyone know how to make a ghillie suit?
Bishop on January 6, 2009 at 11:25 AM
Just wear an Obama T-shirt, you’ll be fine…
catmman on January 6, 2009 at 11:29 AM
MarkTheGreat on January 6, 2009 at 11:25 AM
His overblown ego spurs him to do stuff like this. He’s the POTUS-Elect. It’s HIS staff. He feels like he has a mandate to nominate whoever he wants to.
kingsjester on January 6, 2009 at 11:29 AM
What is really happening Foreign Policy and Intelligence services will remain stagnant while crucial economic decisions will be made based upon European-style economies using HUMINT and SecState influence. Once the Socialist conversion wheels begin rolling, look for The One throw a lot of Capitalists under the bus. This should be easy to do given the anti-Capitalist (but still remarkably wealthy) Democrat majority in Congress and a complacent, dumbed down American public.
SeniorD on January 6, 2009 at 11:30 AM
Kept your ass safe for 7 1/2 years (which is probably half of your entire life junior.)
Brat on January 6, 2009 at 11:31 AM
This is that judgment thing we’ve heard so much about these past months. Politics and deals is all dear leader knows.
Hope not too many of us get killed before he gets a clue
billypaintbrush on January 6, 2009 at 11:31 AM
This appointment just further reinforces the idea that a lot of political capital was expended to get Obama elected and now everyone wants their pound of flesh in return for their support. Obama got what he wanted and now all the power brokers that bought it for him want their pay off.
So much for that Kennedy line ” Ask not what your country can do for you but what you can do for your country”. The Obama version would be “Ask not what Obama can do for you but what you can do for Obama”.
Dreadnought223 on January 6, 2009 at 11:31 AM
Perhaps this was a deception, as in he did not observe any of this activity during his personal, away-from-the-job hours. Maybe some reporter should have followed up with “How about you professionally?”
Patrick S on January 6, 2009 at 11:31 AM
From the same people who rightly criticized Bush for some of his appointments (Michael Brown at FEMA?)
Illinidiva on January 6, 2009 at 11:32 AM
Oh great, and we know how valuable the ISG recommendations turned out to be! I can’t wait to see where Jim Baker surfaces in the Obama administration!
drunyan8315 on January 6, 2009 at 11:32 AM
But…..but….but…isn’t he the MESSIAH?
grapeknutz on January 6, 2009 at 11:32 AM
An illustration of Obama’s inexperience, he evidently believes experienced people in National Security positions are also unnecessary. Funny, though, I never thought of national security management positions as ones that were learn-on-the-job. But then, I don’t think of the Presidency that way, either.
Socratease on January 6, 2009 at 11:33 AM
When the Obama administration hires and fires justice department prosecutors, or fires others for reasons that are nothing different from what Bush’s administration did – don’t expect the press to bat an eyelash.
wise_man on January 6, 2009 at 11:33 AM
It is the Botoxed leading the Blind I tells ya! This is the single worst apt made and IMO the most dangerous. With HRC at SoS I felt comfortable sleeping at night knowing she is a hawk and wont take any crxp, but now here we are with Pelosi calling the shots on NATIONAL SECURITY APPTS??? Good gawd almighty help us…
Jane Harman creds were right in line, and Feinstein and Rockefeller had recommended the career CIA agent Ed refs above…
ginaswo on January 6, 2009 at 11:33 AM
The bloom is starting to come off The American Beauty.
sherry on January 6, 2009 at 11:34 AM
Medium-weight fishing net and jute (in a variety of colors – from straw through dark-to-light green, some brown and black)
Make a poncho from the net. Tie on jute building it up mostly around the shoulder area. Get a rectangle of net long enough to reach from your forehead, over your head to between your shoulder blades, and wide enough to cover between the tops of your ears. Tie on jute heavily and attach to a camo ‘beanie’ hat, or camo peak cap. The idea is to build up a ‘grassy clump’ effect that obscures the typically human head-shoulder outline. You should look like a shambling mound of grass. You can add location-specific camo when you are in the field.
The deer don’t stand a chance when I’m around ;)
LimeyGeek on January 6, 2009 at 11:35 AM
I am going to speak up in defense of the appointment. The Intelligence Reform Act was designed to reduce the power of the DCIA to the level shared by the Defense Combat Support Agencies (NSA, NGA, DIA)and centralize control of IC in the Director, National Intelligence. Denny Blair, who by the way is an operator who did not come up through the Office Intelligence, was picked to run the IC.
CIA is in need of reform and having someone with no institutional memory or axes to grind is a positive trait not a negative.
jerryofva on January 6, 2009 at 11:35 AM
Why?
Why do you keep saying things like this?
Obama’s background and cronies means that everything he does should be carefully scrutinized.
Yesterday, Kevin in Southern Illinois linked to a great article by Andrea Tantaros:
INC on January 6, 2009 at 11:35 AM
Well, the majority of the American electorate chose a President based on that criteria in November, so we shouldn’t expect anything better from the man they chose. PEBHO lacks competence and experience for the Office of the President, so it should come as no surprise when his appointees share in his (lack of) qualifications.
Michael in MI on January 6, 2009 at 11:36 AM
Clinton Presidential Term 3
Just imagine the influence that Bill and Hillary Clinton will have on all the Clinton-appointees in the Obama administration. Bill and Hillary will be the shadow government.
albill on January 6, 2009 at 11:36 AM
Sorry, I forgot the link to the Tantaros column. Ethically Challenged? What Does the Richardson News Say About Obama?
INC on January 6, 2009 at 11:38 AM
Obama also sends his great disdain for intelligence.
Speakup on January 6, 2009 at 11:40 AM
Deep insight – to paraphrase and extrapolate a bit, choosing the most ignorant is the best choice!
DarkCurrent on January 6, 2009 at 11:42 AM
Ed, I disagree.
Everyone’s strength can be a weakness. Conservatives in general are accepting people. An overused phrase, we are more “tolerant” than the Left could hope to dream. We want things to work, and we’re willing to put up with a fair amount of bad to get to the good.
There is a problem with this tolerance of Obama. Out of their acceptance many in talk radio and the blogosphere have said they want him to succeed. Considering everything Obama has said he wants to accomplish, I do not want him to succeed. In light of his party and positions on the role of government in our lives, I want Obama to fail.
If that means we have four years of not much more than what we’re going through now, so be it.
macummings on January 6, 2009 at 11:42 AM
Then why not appoint Whoopi Goldberg, who fits both of your criteria?
No axes to grind? You do know of Panetta’s stance on the “torturing” of prisoners, don’t you? Come back again when you’ve got a clue.
fogw on January 6, 2009 at 11:42 AM
Awesome
macummings on January 6, 2009 at 11:44 AM
You should look like a shambling mound of grass. You can add location-specific camo when you are in the field.
The deer don’t stand a chance when I’m around ;)
LimeyGeek on January 6, 2009 at 11:35 AM
Hey that’s actually pretty cool, thanks. I’ll have to delve a bit deeper into the construction but this is a good start. The store-bought suits are a bit spendy.
How do I make myself look like a shambling snow mound in the winter? I live in MN, so when the revolution comes and I’m forced to defend me and mine from more than just deer, I need to have every advantage no matter the season.
Bishop on January 6, 2009 at 11:44 AM
Why is anyone surprised?
Obama is not interested in finding people to do a competent job. He’s interested in advancing social justice & appointing the people who will be his puppets!
So now we will weaken, even further, America’s intelligence network. Dear God! As if it wasn’t bad enough already!
Badger40 on January 6, 2009 at 11:44 AM
And now he’s leaving office. Are you a hypocrite who only believes those are abuses when Bush is in office, or will you hold Obama to the same standards?
Esthier on January 6, 2009 at 11:46 AM
What Osama Obama deserves is not to have been elected in the first place. Hell, he wouldn’t even have been considered by a Democrat party before the ascent of the loony left during the past three decades.
I don’t think Feinstein will have much to say about Panetta’s confirmation. Her primary reason for opposing the pick seems to be that Obama didn’t drop by to tell her about it personally. And don’t forget that she got her knickers in a twist about Bush’s persecution of Ramos and Compean, too…see how much good that did?
We are in for a bad few years. Thanks to his spayed and neutered Congress, Obama is essentially impeachment-proof, no matter what he does. And we can’t drag all of the America-hating greedhead jerks out of Washington as long as the average voter keeps re-electing them. Or, in the case of Minnesota, electing new ones.
MrScribbler on January 6, 2009 at 11:48 AM
This Obama is sounding more like Cromwell every day.
OldEnglish on January 6, 2009 at 11:49 AM
Dark Current and fogw:
Paneta was in the White House and Director of OMB. In both positions he encoutered the work of CIA. Is he a intelligence professional? No. But neither is Denny Blair. He is a naval aviator. Panetta has executive experience; he is intelligent and is quite capable of running the CIA and understanding what it does and how it needs to change.
jerryofva on January 6, 2009 at 11:49 AM
Robert KKK Byrd says, “Try a nice big sheet, poke two eye holes in it.”
fogw on January 6, 2009 at 11:50 AM
“What the Panetta appointment means”
Lefty Gay Lib – Rachel Maddow on the today show this morning
was practically slobbering about how great the Panetta pick was.
She said anyone in the Bush intelligence community was dead
to the world now.
“What the Panetta appointment means”
It means Obummer is will be running the country like a high school
where popularity and favortism rule.
“What the Panetta appointment means”
It means Obummer is not serious about the security of America.
“What the Panetta appointment means”
Gird your loins and gear up for attacks.
izoneguy on January 6, 2009 at 11:50 AM
Excellent point!
Red State State of Mind on January 6, 2009 at 11:51 AM
I’m not sure I’d go with a ghillie shuit in winter….if I did, I’d probably make one from white, grey and black to try and emulate the stark leafless twiggy plants around me. Normally I’d go with regular white snowsuit camo with a white woolen ski mask.
LimeyGeek on January 6, 2009 at 11:51 AM
Hmmm, you ever visit Hereford?
Oldnuke on January 6, 2009 at 11:51 AM
Wow, you need to take your troll glasses off and loosen the tinfoil hat.
I believe congessional democrats pressured this one into existance.
Yeah, snooping on people who are talking to terrorists planning a potential attack is so wrong.
Never mind Hussein (Saddam that is) ignored 17 UN sanctions, funded suicide bombers, and massacered his own people (including using chemical weapons)and was making billions starving the people of Iraq.
BDS just doesn’t make any sense to me.
loudmouth883 on January 6, 2009 at 11:52 AM
You are absolutely right.
INC on January 6, 2009 at 11:55 AM
And we can’t drag all of the America-hating greedhead jerks out of Washington as long as the average voter keeps re-electing them. Or, in the case of Minnesota, electing new ones.
Hey! To reelect you must first elect; Minnesota is simply taking its cues from the rest of the nation.
Murtha, Kennedy, Byrd and Pelosi have been around a lot longer than Senator Fran…Senator Fra…*ahem*…Sen-a-tor Al Frank…*gag*…I just can’t say it!
Bishop on January 6, 2009 at 11:55 AM
I’m sure the world’s terrorists are jumping up and down with glee, awaiting the ‘changes’ a pantywaist like Panetta will bring to the CIA.
Do you dine with Panetta often, since you have all of this personal insight into his true capabilities?
fogw on January 6, 2009 at 11:56 AM
LOL…actually, yes, but not to learn 100 ways to kill with a frozen sausage.
LimeyGeek on January 6, 2009 at 11:58 AM
Now Hillary calling from Foggy Bottom has a friend in Langley.
Mr. Joe on January 6, 2009 at 11:59 AM
I’m no fan of a partisan such as Panetta, but the move makes perfect sense for Obamma, especially if he watched what happened with the CIA during the Bush administration.
Basically it seems to me that a number of officials went rogue, talking to newspapers every time a Bush administration plan based on Bush’s policies differed from the CIA’s ass-covering policies. There was leak after leak after leak. If I were President, I’d send in a partisan operator on day one and tell him to start cutting
throatsjust about everyone near the top. Then remind those that remain that their pensions are not etched in stone.The same so-called spooks who leaked during the Bush administration will go running right back to the press as soon as Obama doesn’t take their advice.
doufree on January 6, 2009 at 11:59 AM
My impression is that the US intelligence community does not play well together. Someone without alligences to the CIA or FBI may need to come in and knock some heads.
jim m on January 6, 2009 at 11:59 AM
Normally I’d go with regular white snowsuit camo with a white woolen ski mask.
LimeyGeek on January 6, 2009 at 11:51 AM
I’m leaning towards the new urban digital camo; a bit of gray, a little white, a hint of black.
I figure I may have to skulk through ravaged towns and ghost-filled cities to scavenge for food and porno mags, better that I am wearing something which makes me blend in to the crumbling, snow-covered detritus of urban civilization.
Bishop on January 6, 2009 at 11:59 AM
Remember that “private meeting” 0bama and Hillary had just before she dropped out of the primary race? Think Barry had to promise to make any of these appointments (including hers as SoS) to get her to concede to him?
Brat on January 6, 2009 at 12:01 PM
Only former NJ governor Jim McGreevey (D, of course) made a worse appointment when he appointed his young Israeli boy toy Golan Cipel to be head of HOMELAND SECURITY!
wildweasel on January 6, 2009 at 12:01 PM
Yes. That new ‘digital’ stuff is very versatile.
LimeyGeek on January 6, 2009 at 12:03 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »