Comments on: The Re-Up http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/01/08/the-re-up/ Wed, 05 Jan 2011 21:59:36 -0600 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.2 By: macaquerman http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/01/08/the-re-up/#comment-5766 macaquerman Thu, 08 Jan 2009 22:11:20 +0000 http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/01/08/the-re-up/#comment-5766 <p>I think you’re onto something here. Did you hear any of the stories about Brennen involving marmosets, funnels and hydrogenation? There was even something about Unilever, the parent company of the Skippy people, having to burn crop fields.</p> I think you’re onto something here. Did you hear any of the stories about Brennen involving marmosets, funnels and hydrogenation? There was even something about Unilever, the parent company of the Skippy people, having to burn crop fields.

]]> By: LizDexic http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/01/08/the-re-up/#comment-5760 LizDexic Thu, 08 Jan 2009 19:51:37 +0000 http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/01/08/the-re-up/#comment-5760 <p>I don’t agree with “ideally Patrick Fitzgerald”…he’s not the White Knight he appeared to be when he was prosecuting Scooter Libby. Why didn’t he pursue that to its natural conclusion (i.e. Bush and Cheney)? Everyone knows Scooted did not mastermind the outing of Valerie Plame on his own. Furthermore, the real story of the US attorney firing wasn’t who lost their jobs but who KEPT them and what they did to keep them. We learned from Monica Goodling that Fitz must have taken an oath of loyalty to GWB to get that job!</p> I don’t agree with “ideally Patrick Fitzgerald”…he’s not the White Knight he appeared to be when he was prosecuting Scooter Libby. Why didn’t he pursue that to its natural conclusion (i.e. Bush and Cheney)? Everyone knows Scooted did not mastermind the outing of Valerie Plame on his own. Furthermore, the real story of the US attorney firing wasn’t who lost their jobs but who KEPT them and what they did to keep them. We learned from Monica Goodling that Fitz must have taken an oath of loyalty to GWB to get that job!

]]> By: macaquerman http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/01/08/the-re-up/#comment-5759 macaquerman Thu, 08 Jan 2009 19:08:59 +0000 http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/01/08/the-re-up/#comment-5759 <p>I thought that the bulk of the ill-conceived deregulation, along with the regressive restructure of the tax base,occurred at the behest of the Bush administration.</p> I thought that the bulk of the ill-conceived deregulation, along with the regressive restructure of the tax base,occurred at the behest of the Bush administration.

]]> By: constantweader http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/01/08/the-re-up/#comment-5757 constantweader Thu, 08 Jan 2009 17:55:11 +0000 http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/01/08/the-re-up/#comment-5757 <p>Yeah, or maybe the real story is just that Brennan has something non-torture-y in his dirty little past that he doesn’t want us to hear about or that he/Obama think they can’t get by the Senate. Spooks do scary things and lots of them tend toward creepy, so who would be surprised if Brennan’s skeletons were bone-rattling awful.</p> <p>The Constant Weader at RealityChex.com</p> Yeah, or maybe the real story is just that Brennan has something non-torture-y in his dirty little past that he doesn’t want us to hear about or that he/Obama think they can’t get by the Senate. Spooks do scary things and lots of them tend toward creepy, so who would be surprised if Brennan’s skeletons were bone-rattling awful.

The Constant Weader at RealityChex.com

]]> By: Hugh http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/01/08/the-re-up/#comment-5755 Hugh Thu, 08 Jan 2009 17:38:59 +0000 http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/01/08/the-re-up/#comment-5755 <p>Having Clintonites and conservatives supervising economic policy seems like a good idea. If I remember correctly, thee economy under Clinton was in slightly better shape than it present.</p> <p>Where to begin? A lot of the Clinton era prosperity was based on Greenspan’s policy of easy credit at the Fed. Remember too that he had his own bubble, the dot com one. Major parts of Obama’s economic team are Rubin and Summers who under Clinton pushed for a lot of the deregulation that got us into this mess. And Geithner for his part is a Summers protege and sat on his ass at th NY Fed while the housing bubble went on, as the meltdown occurred, and his principal response was to structure the sweetheart deals behind what was done for JP Morgan’s buy out of Bear Stearns and the bailout of AIG.</p> Having Clintonites and conservatives supervising economic policy seems like a good idea. If I remember correctly, thee economy under Clinton was in slightly better shape than it present.

Where to begin? A lot of the Clinton era prosperity was based on Greenspan’s policy of easy credit at the Fed. Remember too that he had his own bubble, the dot com one. Major parts of Obama’s economic team are Rubin and Summers who under Clinton pushed for a lot of the deregulation that got us into this mess. And Geithner for his part is a Summers protege and sat on his ass at th NY Fed while the housing bubble went on, as the meltdown occurred, and his principal response was to structure the sweetheart deals behind what was done for JP Morgan’s buy out of Bear Stearns and the bailout of AIG.

]]> By: Ella http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/01/08/the-re-up/#comment-5754 Ella Thu, 08 Jan 2009 17:10:17 +0000 http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/01/08/the-re-up/#comment-5754 <p>Totally confer, Bonkers.</p> <p>As a long time reader of FDL, I don’t even bother to look at comments anymore because most of them regarding Obama are better poster over at Larry Johnson’s No Quarter. I suspect that it stems from a kind of P-PTSD: Progressive-Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, in which these folks still are having recurring nightmares in which we really re-elected Bush in 2008.</p> <p>And I agree with macaquerman and others who remind us that having the excellent remnants of the Clinton era is a terrific idea. If you don’t believe me look at Krugman’s “Conscience” Blog today, and the just released CBO GDP Gap charts. The last time we had Clinton-style prosperity appears to be for a short period around 1972, and only better during the late 50’s through mid-60’s boom. It’s time to bring it back, doncha think?</p> Totally confer, Bonkers.

As a long time reader of FDL, I don’t even bother to look at comments anymore because most of them regarding Obama are better poster over at Larry Johnson’s No Quarter. I suspect that it stems from a kind of P-PTSD: Progressive-Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, in which these folks still are having recurring nightmares in which we really re-elected Bush in 2008.

And I agree with macaquerman and others who remind us that having the excellent remnants of the Clinton era is a terrific idea. If you don’t believe me look at Krugman’s “Conscience” Blog today, and the just released CBO GDP Gap charts. The last time we had Clinton-style prosperity appears to be for a short period around 1972, and only better during the late 50’s through mid-60’s boom. It’s time to bring it back, doncha think?

]]> By: reader http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/01/08/the-re-up/#comment-5753 reader Thu, 08 Jan 2009 17:08:23 +0000 http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/01/08/the-re-up/#comment-5753 <p>It’s got to be unfair to critisize Obama as a PRESIDENT until AT LEAST 12:01 pm on January 20th. Until then he is operating under President-Elect rules which are just not the same. I believe there are DANGEROUS unintended consequences to his speaking as a President before then. Besides, he’s just a bit busy with the economy. I would be too.</p> <p>bonkers @ 24: hear, hear!</p> <p>JohnMacLeren @ 23: hear, hear!</p> <p>My initial reaction to this assignment: SO?</p> It’s got to be unfair to critisize Obama as a PRESIDENT until AT LEAST 12:01 pm on January 20th. Until then he is operating under President-Elect rules which are just not the same. I believe there are DANGEROUS unintended consequences to his speaking as a President before then. Besides, he’s just a bit busy with the economy. I would be too.

bonkers @ 24: hear, hear!

JohnMacLeren @ 23: hear, hear!

My initial reaction to this assignment: SO?

]]> By: macaquerman http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/01/08/the-re-up/#comment-5752 macaquerman Thu, 08 Jan 2009 16:57:09 +0000 http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/01/08/the-re-up/#comment-5752 <p>Having Clintonites and conservatives supervising economic policy seems like a good idea. If I remember correctly, thee economy under Clinton was in slightly better shape than it present.</p> Having Clintonites and conservatives supervising economic policy seems like a good idea. If I remember correctly, thee economy under Clinton was in slightly better shape than it present.

]]> By: Knut http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/01/08/the-re-up/#comment-5751 Knut Thu, 08 Jan 2009 16:52:06 +0000 http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/01/08/the-re-up/#comment-5751 <p>I think we are going to have to make unfortunate distinctions between those who physically carried out the torture, those who enthusiastically pushed it at the highest levels, and the ‘good Germans’ who just went along because they knew it was going to happen anyway. Brennan is probably one of the latter. I think anyone who defended the procedure publicly should be dismissed, but those who kept out of the line of sight ought to let off. I know this is morally reprehensible, but it seems the safe way through this minefield. It’s a little like De-Nazification. We let alot of bad guys go, but caught at least some of the worst. If Obama were to try to clean out the whole chain of command root and branch, he’s have a revolt on his hands, and we know what happened to Kennedy.</p> I think we are going to have to make unfortunate distinctions between those who physically carried out the torture, those who enthusiastically pushed it at the highest levels, and the ‘good Germans’ who just went along because they knew it was going to happen anyway. Brennan is probably one of the latter. I think anyone who defended the procedure publicly should be dismissed, but those who kept out of the line of sight ought to let off. I know this is morally reprehensible, but it seems the safe way through this minefield. It’s a little like De-Nazification. We let alot of bad guys go, but caught at least some of the worst. If Obama were to try to clean out the whole chain of command root and branch, he’s have a revolt on his hands, and we know what happened to Kennedy.

]]> By: Hugh http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/01/08/the-re-up/#comment-5750 Hugh Thu, 08 Jan 2009 16:41:52 +0000 http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/01/08/the-re-up/#comment-5750 <p>A) we already have evidence of what Obama will do based on what he did on FISA and the Paulson bailout.</p> <p>B) Obama’s first tier choices are all Clintonites and conservatives</p> <p>C) Why does Obama have to hint? He’s the President elect. He has said that he not his subordinates will be the one calling the shots so why all of a sudden is it that he is being buffaloed by the Village?</p> A) we already have evidence of what Obama will do based on what he did on FISA and the Paulson bailout.

B) Obama’s first tier choices are all Clintonites and conservatives

C) Why does Obama have to hint? He’s the President elect. He has said that he not his subordinates will be the one calling the shots so why all of a sudden is it that he is being buffaloed by the Village?

]]>