The NY Post giveth and the NY Post taketh away. Two days ago their breaking news was that Caroline Kennedy had the NY Senate appointment in the bag. But that was soo like, yesterday. Twice over. The latest from the Post - Caroline has withdrawn from the field:
Kennedy's decision removes the highest-profile name in the ring to step into Clinton's now-vacant seat, as she departs after getting confirmed today as President Obama's Secretary of State.
We will see what the morrow brings [Not quite the morrow - she was in again, briefly, then her candidacy turned back into a pumpkin around midnight]. Hard to believe that with Obama in her corner along with major pols from across the nation and her Uncle Ted in the hospital that NY Governor David Paterson would be inclined to dis her, but maybe he got hung up on her utter lack of qualification.
PRESS BRUTALITY: Rather a low blow of the Times to, you know, print the raw transcript of their meeting with Ms. Kennedy:
Following is a transcript of an interview with Caroline Kennedy conducted by Nicholas Confessore and David M. Halbfinger of The New York Times.
DH: Thank you for doing this.
CK: Thank you. (Laughs)
DH: Yeah, sure. I think we want to try and avoid questions you’ve already answered before and just get to the ones that would be somewhat newsworthy.
NC: Let’s talk a little bit about some of the other candidates who are interested in this job. Andrew Cuomo: he’s been attorney general, he’s been a cabinet secretary, he’s been a close adviser to a governor. He has an extensive record and knows upstate like the back of his hand. Tell me why the governor should pick you over Andrew Cuomo.
CK: I’m, you know, actually, Andrew Cuomo is someone I’ve known for many, many years and we’ve talked, you know, throughout this process, so, you know, we have a really good relationship and I admire the work he’s doing now and what he’s done, so I’m not really going to kind of criticize any of these other candidates, because I think there are a lot of people with great experience, and, you know, any one of which the governor could easily pick and they’d do a good job.
NC: I’m not asking you to criticize; I’m saying, why should he pick you over any of these other ones, what makes you the best candidate?
CK: Well, it obviously depends what the governor is looking for. I can tell you what I think I’d bring to this, which is, you know, I’m not a conventional choice, I haven’t followed the traditional path, but I do think I’d bring a kind of a lifetime of experience that is relevant to this job. I think that what we’ve seen over the last year, and particularly and even up to the last — is that there’s a lot of different ways that people are coming to public life now, and it’s not only the traditional path. Even in the New York delegation, you know, some of our great senators — Hillary Clinton, Pat Moynihan — came from, you know, other walks of life. We’ve got Carolyn McCarthy, John Hall, both of them have an unconventional background, so I don’t think that that is, uh — so I think in many ways, you know, we want to have all kinds of different voices, you know, representing us, and I think what I bring to it is, you know, my experience as a mother, as a woman, as a lawyer, you know, I’ve been an education activist for the last six years here, and, you know, I’ve written seven books — two on the Constitution, two on American politics. So obviously, you know, we have different strengths and weaknesses. And I think I also bring kind of a lifetime commitment to public service, a knowledge of these issues, and I’ve spent a lot of time encouraging people, and younger people, to go into public service, through a lot of the, you know, nonprofit work I’ve done. So I think it’s a whole, it’s different, it’s completely different, and it really is up to the governor to decide who would do the best job. But in terms of a family commitment —
NC: But do you think, in your own view, those things would make you a better pick for this job than other candidates?
We know.
If Caroline K proved incompetent, it would not be good for Guv Pat's re-election chances. Perhaps Guv Pat felt that with MSM in the tank for NewPrez0, it would prove its objectivity by scrutinizing Caroline K's performance.
I actually feel bad for Caroline K. I think that with her ability to draw smart advisors, she would have been an adequate Senator, which would have put her way above many other Dems in the US Senate. I'd rather have Caroline K types in the Senate than Friends of Angelo Dodd types or trashing US soldiers Durbin types.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | January 21, 2009 at 08:24 PM
I guess in my last post I gave Guv Pat too much credit by mentioning his chances for "re-election" to the guv chair. I had forgotten about No. 9's Ashley liaisons being the reason for Pat being Guv.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | January 21, 2009 at 08:29 PM
Like, you know, she really, really, you know, was doing this as a family favor. And, you know, she didn't realize how hard it would be, you know, to do all this stuff - like, you know, be a Senator, and a socialite, and an icon. She just didn't, you know, need the headache.
Posted by: centralcal | January 21, 2009 at 08:37 PM
My guess is that those advising her suggested that when she had to face the voters in 2010 she might very well lose, and the Kennedys would much rather avoid a contest altogether than run the risk of what would be a humiliating loss. Even star-struck New York voters know a dilettante candidate when they see one.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | January 21, 2009 at 08:57 PM
My first thought is that Teddy has about a week left, and she declined to do justice to the funeral.
That's probably really really mean.
Posted by: Jane | January 21, 2009 at 08:59 PM
Let's not presume that her "personal reasons" do not pertain to feeling that she might be more comfortable in the family seat in MA. The Swimmer seems to be on his last lap.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | January 21, 2009 at 09:05 PM
Too bad if it means Andrew Cuomo joins the august body, but it'd be a good thing for NY since it gives Giuliani an easier ride into the Gov job.
Posted by: Extraneus | January 21, 2009 at 09:07 PM
Extraneus, your view of Cuomo's strength is probably shared by Guv Pat. This way, Guv Pat avoids a Cuomo primary challenge, and can devote his energies to raising funds for the contest against Giuliani.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | January 21, 2009 at 09:17 PM
Isn's she to the manure born?
============================
Posted by: kim | January 21, 2009 at 09:18 PM
You're probably right, TC. The Dems will back the former caretaker if the vile Cuomo is out of the way.
Posted by: Extraneus | January 21, 2009 at 09:20 PM
This is off-topic, and I raised the issue on another, longer thread (to which I dread returning), but please bear with me.
The serious discussion about the validity of yesterday's oath all hinges on the fact that the constitutional language is explicit and unambiguous. Granted, it is. But is there anything ambiguous about this language?
"No Senator or Representative shall, during the Time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil Office under the Authority of the United States which shall have been created, or the Emoluments whereof shall have been increased during such time; and no Person holding any Office under the United States, shall be a Member of either House during his Continuance in Office."
Since Hillary Clinton was elected for the 2007-2013 term, how can she be appointed Secretary of State?
Posted by: Danube of Thought | January 21, 2009 at 09:28 PM
what the morrow brings.
Inspired by yesterdays poetry, no doubt...
Posted by: bad | January 21, 2009 at 09:36 PM
Danube - They are applying a fix they have used before, cutting her pay back to where it would have been. (The fix is named after former senator Saxbe.)
I won't speculate on the constitutionality of that fix, since constitutional scholars appear divided on the subject. There was considerable discussion of the problem at the Volokh site a month or so ago.
Search on "emoluments clause + Clinton" for more.
Posted by: Jim Miller | January 21, 2009 at 09:51 PM
How many years before some indie rock band names itself The Saxbe Fix?
Posted by: Porchlight | January 21, 2009 at 10:06 PM
Obama isn't a judge, why?
Posted by: One | January 21, 2009 at 10:16 PM
more comfortable in the family seat in MA
Bingo, Rick.
Posted by: Porchlight | January 21, 2009 at 10:24 PM
Thanks Jim. I do recall reading about Senator Byrd's serious reservations about the Saxbe Fix, but I suppose that old fool is so seriously compromised now that it would be unkind to draw him out on the subject.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | January 21, 2009 at 10:25 PM
more comfortable in the family seat in MA
Will there be issues with the MA political hierarchy similar to the issues in New York?
Posted by: bad | January 21, 2009 at 10:48 PM
Good question, Bad. Maybe Jane can fill us in. It might afford us a good measure of the degree of their loss of self-respect: will they, or will they not, countenance the appointment of this nice, dopey lady to the US Senate simply because her name is Kennedy?
Posted by: Danube of Thought | January 21, 2009 at 10:52 PM
Of course I'm kinda fond of the name "Clarice's Pistolas" myself...
What about "Next/Prev Hell" for the name of a rock band?Posted by: cathyf | January 21, 2009 at 10:54 PM
I always thought if I could get a good rock band together and put on big concerts in huge venues, I would name the band "Event Staff." That oughta mess with their minds.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | January 21, 2009 at 10:58 PM
"Clarice's Pistolas" Absolutely!!! LOL
Posted by: Ann | January 21, 2009 at 11:03 PM
Caroline K as Mass. Senator? In my opinion, near unanimous support from the politicians (only Mass. politicians with a death wish for their political lives would oppose Caroline K succeeding her uncle), and overwhelming support from the voters. MSM? Total Caroline K. lovefest from The Boston Globe.
If she wants to succeed Uncle Ted whenever Ted retires or passes, she succeeds Uncle Ted. There is a greater chance that Reverend Wright would renounce Black Liberation Theology than there is a chance that Mass. would reject Caroline K.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | January 21, 2009 at 11:04 PM
Thanks TC, that is exactly what we needed to know.
Posted by: bad | January 21, 2009 at 11:14 PM
Hey Ann! How about this for a band name:
Geithner Sucks
or
Holder Sucks
Posted by: bad | January 21, 2009 at 11:16 PM
The HOBOs traded the MA seat for their daughters and NY is going to Hilly's daughter and Illinois stays in the non family dynasty that the HOBO began. Kennedy was having seizures because the HOBO knew it was going to happen because his luciferian pals(Obama hears voices and sees things that aren't there) told him it would; as long as it's not in the dynasty it's okay cause of the time travel stuff that he plans on doing like billy and powell. So, no stroke for his family or dynasty, but it should be in the first year cause there is only four anyway and we need to build a monument to the HOBO like Lincoln and MLK and cry and make more money.
Posted by: GenistheHOBOempowered | January 21, 2009 at 11:18 PM
There is a greater chance that Reverend Wright would renounce Black Liberation Theology than there is a chance that Mass. would reject Caroline K.
This is so sad and really pathetic, isn't it?
Posted by: Pal2Pal (Sara) | January 21, 2009 at 11:19 PM
The serious discussion about the validity of yesterday's oath all hinges on the fact that the constitutional language is explicit and unambiguous.
I think the hinge is that supporters of the new chief defender of that deeply flawed document recognized an opportunity for a painless demonstration of his commitment to its explicit and unambiguous language. I imagine strict constructionism polls well, and Obama and his fellow constitutional law scholar sidekick will want to be able to lay claim to it when they propose some constitutionally dubious scheme in the next few months.
Posted by: bgates | January 21, 2009 at 11:19 PM
TC,
Look on the bright side - it's impossible for the average IQ of the MA Senate delegation to drop so at worst you just break even.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | January 21, 2009 at 11:20 PM
Illinois stays in the non family dynasty that the HOBO began.
Maybee was right. HOBO is Obama as stated above.
Until the luciferians take over, then all bets are off...
Posted by: bad | January 21, 2009 at 11:23 PM
bad, How about "Typepad Sucks"! :)
Was anyone else jolted out of their peaceful morning bliss to see Obama sitting in President Bush's chair today (picture on Drudge)?
I haven't been able to shake the fear instilled in my mind this morning. And then to hear what his priorities were today, it just reinforced all my fears all over again.
Posted by: Ann | January 21, 2009 at 11:32 PM
'it should be in the first year'
Yes, he's already seen the 'bugs out of the corner of his eye' and that's his daddy helping on to the next world and I'll use as he dies of the stroke to make sure he gets where he belongs, heaven. It's not a big deal, people die of strokes all the time and it really is good money.
If you like the things and their culture, go home and do what Obama does and get money and power.
Posted by: GeOempod | January 21, 2009 at 11:42 PM
Ann, maybe you just need a little something to laugh at.
Posted by: Dave | January 21, 2009 at 11:48 PM
That's a comforting thought, RB. Also, I think I would rather have Caroline K as my senator than Al Franken.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | January 21, 2009 at 11:50 PM
MediaBlog brings you a twofer. Dem hires the reporter digging into his past for a job she has no qualifications for and her salary increases substantially.
Sam Adams LUN
Posted by: bad | January 21, 2009 at 11:52 PM
His
Oneness
Barack
Obama,
right?
I'd rather have Caroline K types in the Senate than Friends of Angelo Dodd types or trashing US soldiers Durbin types.
And we know Caroline is not a small-time grifter or an empty-headed anti-American leftist because...
Ann, if Dave's link didn't bring a smile to your face, try this.
Posted by: bgates | January 21, 2009 at 11:55 PM
Is Caroline passing up NY and waiting for uncle to die so she can get his Senate seat?
Sort of like Barchester Towers in reverse.
Posted by: Uncle BigBad | January 21, 2009 at 11:57 PM
Ann: I know exactly what you mean. I have been feeling unsettled since yesterday and even more today in knowing that "W" no longer has
myour back.Posted by: Pal2Pal (Sara) | January 21, 2009 at 11:57 PM
Anyway, just saw on Rachel Maddow that Caroline hasn't withdrawn from the NY race.
Posted by: Uncle BigBad | January 21, 2009 at 11:58 PM
Uncle BigBad is right. AP is reporting that Caroline has not withdrawn, according to HotAir.
Posted by: centralcal | January 22, 2009 at 12:02 AM
I just heard that the Senate is going to seat Al Frankin without the due process accorded Norm Coleman. Heck, give the terrorists their day in court but not a Republican Senator.
And on top of that Obama plans to name former Senator George J. Mitchell (D-Maine) as his Middle East envoy: Israel is Screwed
Where are those plans for St. Jane Island?
Posted by: Ann | January 22, 2009 at 12:04 AM
Was anyone else jolted out of their peaceful morning bliss to see Obama sitting in President Bush's chair today (picture on Drudge)?
I thought he looked really small and insignificant, and overwhelmed...
like he was playing office in that chair.. rather like a child in their father's chair at work... all he needed was a typewriter to occupy him with banging on the keys so daddy could get some work done...
Posted by: Stephanie | January 22, 2009 at 12:04 AM
Stephanie: I agree. When I saw a news report that showed him sitting behind the desk in the Oval, my first thought was that someone better get a smaller chair for him or the photo ops are going to look like Daddy let him sit in his chair. He looked lost in it.
Posted by: Pal2Pal (Sara) | January 22, 2009 at 12:09 AM
Leahy plays the race card: LUN
How post-racial of him...
Posted by: bad | January 22, 2009 at 12:12 AM
And in that photo you also see that Zero really is into recycling... they found a good use for Michelle's dress from yesterday.
Posted by: Stephanie | January 22, 2009 at 12:12 AM
It was noted at Townhall (citing CNN, believe it or not) that Obama broke the Reagan/Bush rule of wearing a suit jacket in the Oval Office. Next we will see photos of him with his cap on backwards and a nifty "O" t-shirt?
Posted by: centralcal | January 22, 2009 at 12:15 AM
Well since he is an expert at double standards, I guess that settles it.
Posted by: Stephanie | January 22, 2009 at 12:15 AM
Dave, that picture would be funny except I think I looked that way this morning for different reasons. :(
bgates, I can't get to your link. Is it me or Katrina Typepad that I should balme?
Posted by: Ann | January 22, 2009 at 12:19 AM
Next we will see photos of him with his cap on backwards and a nifty "O" t-shirt?
I'm gonna be more concerned if he changes from cigarettes to cigars...
Posted by: Stephanie | January 22, 2009 at 12:21 AM
**blame**
Posted by: Ann | January 22, 2009 at 12:24 AM
Repost from the prior thread.. since it looks like everyone has migrated.
Thanks to Clarice and everyone for the suggestions on the cookbooks. I am ordering several.
Posted by: Stephanie | January 22, 2009 at 12:24 AM
Andrew Cuomo
I don't think he's so bad BUT he did give a HUGE assist to Spitzer in ignoring the spying charges.
It's something he should be asked about. There was a good guy who put his neck out for Spitzer and Spitzer welded a knife.
It was the under the radar scandal that Spitzer dodged since he - DEMOCRAT- liked sleep with people other than his wife.
Posted by: Topsecretk9 | January 22, 2009 at 12:31 AM
Thanks, Clarice, thanks Jean & Mel for
everything, sorry for some of my griping earlier. I'm really enthused about going now.
On a less charitable point, which I hate to bring up, because it would spoil the good cheer. But how does the official White House
site, square their accounts of Katrina assistance with Biden and the One's actual votes for the Gravina Bridge to Nowhere, before Sarah showed up in Juneau, instead of
Katrina relief, who were they logrolling up there. Sen. Stevens, Murkowski.
Posted by: narciso | January 22, 2009 at 12:33 AM
Ann, either typepad or I screwed up.
Second try.
Posted by: bgates | January 22, 2009 at 12:34 AM
Also, inspired by the link at HotAir: "Chirac hospitalised after mauling by his clinically depressed poodle", I give you this.
Posted by: Dave | January 22, 2009 at 12:36 AM
'stepped-up presidential engagement rather than the specifics of a U.S. role, and empathy and aid toward humanitarian suffering.'
It's just like Georgia: Build a huge army, finance and have them kill their own people. Let the US President play and donate 3 billion dollars like Joe. It's the HOBOs new toys and playground. Real Israelis killing the poor Gazians. Jets bombing little kids and burning babies alive. With the ONE HOBO helping(and some cash), it might get solved.
Soon, the ONE HOBO will be helping you every day.......especially the AARP cause we know about them.
Posted by: Gd | January 22, 2009 at 12:44 AM
I'll be danged if those fellas at Hillbuzz don't have some of the best information.
Everything you were afraid to ask about Michelle's ball gown and the designer.
Be sure to scroll down and get all the info.
Posted by: centralcal | January 22, 2009 at 12:46 AM
Can't top Chriac getting bitten by a poodle, but the Guardian has this little nugget flagged up.
Obama's cap-and-trade agenda might take a hit.
Is environmentalism a form of scientism or is it closer to witchcraft? And Mark Lewis should have run that statement by PR people.
Can a bailout of Al Gore be all that far behind? The price has dropped from 31 &euros; to 10 &euros;, and with a contraction in Germany and other industry work arounds, the credits will end up as wallpaper like they did last time around.
Can't happen soon enough.
Posted by: RichatUF | January 22, 2009 at 12:46 AM
Because, bgates, small time grifting is too boring for the Caroline K types, and the Caroline K types, although playing to leftist sensibilities, have a visceral instinct that preserving their way of life is better than the temporary high of serving as useful idiots for the Maos and Stalins of the world. Can I prove this? Nope, it's just my visceral instinct. If I had my way, the Senate would be populated with a tapestry of George Marshall, Sarah Palin, Andrew Jackson, Booker T. Washington, Viet Dinh, Annie Oakley, Thomas Sowell, and Clare Booth Luce types in their seventh and later decades of life, folks of solid accomplishment and diverse background whom we could cherish as an aristocracy of merit serving in our top deliberative body. I obviously don't have my way, so I make these comparisons in light of the ethical and intellectual midgets our system seems to be producing at the moment.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | January 22, 2009 at 12:47 AM
Dave, that was funny!! Blame the poodle. LOL I bet it was his girlfriend or wife. (Was that her/him in the back seat?)
bgates,
I loved this part from your link:
"According to the official, at least three of the detainees had their eyes put out by their interrogators, who accused them of providing Israel with wartime information about the location of Hamas militiamen and officials."
Is it not ironic and cruel that Obama wants to give terrorists due process in our country by closing Gitmo and ending legal tribunals but the first world leader he calls is Abbas who believes in putting an eye out. Makes water boarding seem like a tickle.
Posted by: Ann | January 22, 2009 at 01:03 AM
Do not miss this photo essay. Fantasic!
Posted by: Pal2Pal (Sara) | January 22, 2009 at 01:17 AM
Or even Fantastic! Oops.
Posted by: Pal2Pal (Sara) | January 22, 2009 at 01:26 AM
For those who haven't been following the bouncing Kennedy.. she was out at 6, in at 9, out at 10:30, in at 11:30, and out at 12:30...
Obama must be sharing his waffles...
Posted by: Stephanie | January 22, 2009 at 01:27 AM
LUN BTW... confirms it herself...
Posted by: Stephanie | January 22, 2009 at 01:30 AM
For those who haven't been following the bouncing Kennedy.. she was out at 6, in at 9, out at 10:30, in at 11:30, and out at 12:30...
Shaking head, @@@@@eyes, and sighing deeply.
Posted by: Pal2Pal (Sara) | January 22, 2009 at 01:40 AM
No unicorns yet, but ladies take note of this...
LUN
OK Guys I know you looked, too.
Posted by: Stephanie | January 22, 2009 at 01:52 AM
Oh Sara, thanks for that link! I am in tears again today, thinking how this world could hate such a great man.
Finally, a reporter gets it right: "There was a sense , always, that Bush was a man of determination and resolve who would go it alone , regardless of the consequences!
Amen
Posted by: Ann | January 22, 2009 at 01:57 AM
bad,
In light of that story you mentioned from 2004 and recent press coverage of Jill—sorry, make that Dr. Jill Biden, I'm leaning toward calling her "Doctor No."
Posted by: Elliott | January 22, 2009 at 02:41 AM
" she was out at 6, in at 9, out at 10:30, in at 11:30, and out at 12:30..."
Busy stroll.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | January 22, 2009 at 02:42 AM
Oh Geez:
For the method in this madness, we consult Naomi Wolf, breaking down the three miracles in Barack's inaugural address: That's the ticket.Interesting -- the Washington Times (in the first link) has apparently pulled the black site article, although it appears, at least in part, at Thaindian News. The NY Times has some similar reporting with a proviso that seems rather telling:
I didn't expect the leaking to start so soon! If it weren't mixed in with the usual canards, it would easier to guess what's reliable info and what's not. Those "four individuals familiar with a draft executive order" sure seem to be getting around, don't they? Or maybe there are just a whole lot of folks who are interested in preemption.Posted by: JM Hanes | January 22, 2009 at 04:12 AM
About the Coat and tie in the Oval office.
I think we're gonna find that there's nothing sacred to Barack Hussein. Not the office, not the "office", not the constitution, not the country.
Posted by: Pofarmer | January 22, 2009 at 08:11 AM
JM Hanes-
Didn't the EU look around Europe for these so called "black sites" and didn't find any. (We'll set aside the rather unfortunate series of events in Italy).
I've got it-calling them "black", implying they are illegal and bad, is racist. From here on out they are to be called "white sites"-problem solved. And WT did pull that article pretty fast so I'm not so sure Obma wants to take a headlong rush for surrender.
Posted by: RichatUF | January 22, 2009 at 09:03 AM
I'm pretty sure the fix is in for Vicki to get Ted's seat.
It would be interesting to have our senators hail from Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket. Surely those places adequately mirror the needs of our state.
Posted by: Jane | January 22, 2009 at 09:09 AM
Wolf wrote this, "I feel that he dialled down the threat level of the US with just a few sentences".
Good grief. Bring on the Care Bears, we're in a
warcontestgame to be the most hugged country in the world.Posted by: RichatUF | January 22, 2009 at 09:16 AM
We are going back to the Clinton years. Plausible deniability. Instead of our people being in charge of the prisoners, they will once again be sent to "friendly" prisons where true torture is the norm. And the world will breathe a sigh of relief that Obama brought peace and prosperity.
Posted by: Sue | January 22, 2009 at 09:33 AM
Naomi is certifiable.
Hmm..sounds to me that he's doing the old two step from The Best little Whorehouse in Texas, doesn't it?
Moderate public pronouncements, pretend major changes and then lots of little caveats and weasel words certain to be missed by the geniuses on the left---at least for a while.
Posted by: clarice | January 22, 2009 at 09:36 AM
Sue-
Instead of our people being in charge of the prisoners, they will once again be sent to "friendly" prisons where true torture is the norm.
Until a Muslim Brotherhood sympathizer working in Egypt (or an Iranian spy working in Syria) gets a hold of one of the tapes and releases it in Europe. Sure fire way to gum up Obama's clean toga "reditions".
Posted by: RichatUF | January 22, 2009 at 09:59 AM
Thanks for the link to that GWB photo essay, Sara. At first I was turned off a bit by the remarks of the second photographer, whose shots were artsier and who was obviously not a Bush fan, at least when he got the job. (The comments about the "cult of personality" were especially irritating in light of Obamamania.) But his sincerity at the end won me over. It was actually probably more effective coming from a Bush skeptic.
Very good stuff.
Posted by: Porchlight | January 22, 2009 at 10:04 AM
Saw a blurb yesterday, probably in Chicago Tribune, that Blago's wife lost her job.
Posted by: bad | January 22, 2009 at 10:11 AM
In a drinking bout in London in 1765, the discussion between Ben Franklin, Joseph Priestly and James Boswell turned to politics. "Much was said this night against the Parliament", wrote Boswell. "I said that,
as it seemed to be agreed that all Members of Parliament became corrupted, it was better to chuse men already bad, and so save good men."
Obama's obviously already taking Boswell's advice (ie Geithner). Will Patterson follow suit?
Posted by: Daddy | January 22, 2009 at 10:25 AM
Right, Rich, one is reminded that Carter spoke out for human rights in the '76 campaign, but somewhat embraced real politik with regards to the Shah, angering
the Iranians, which ultimately toppled him,
such things are likely to happen in Egypt, possibly Jordan(read Al Aswani's Yacoubian institution, and picked up his most recently
translated Chicago). So he ultimately didn't impress anyone with these gestures.
I fear what I was concerned with during the 'lawyer's crisis' in Pakistan, and in threads, referencing Tony Lake, maybe on the horizon.
Posted by: narciso | January 22, 2009 at 10:36 AM
President Obama on Thursday will order the closure of so-called black sites, where CIA and European security services have interrogated terrorist suspects, under executive orders dismantling much of the Bush admistration's architecture for the war on terror, according to four individuals familiar with a draft executive order.
Sure, why not? He can open them again without telling anybody. It isn't like intelligence decisions are announced regularly (unless some anti-Obama blabbermouth wants gets to Dana Priest).
The problem with the secret prisons, and even Guantanamo, is the press and nutroots were able to attach- without evidence- the adjective "torture". They suddenly became bad, rather than just secret.
Posted by: MayBee | January 22, 2009 at 10:50 AM
Jane- I bet you've hit on the real reason Caroline pulled out. It would have looked awful for Caroline to be in NY and Vicki to get MA. It has to be one or the other, and Vicki trumps Caroline.
Posted by: MayBee | January 22, 2009 at 10:52 AM
Remember? It seems like only yesterday--when you could click on the name of a poster on the right and go immediately to that message? When you could scroll thru an entire thread?
Gone. I blame Obama.
Posted by: clarice | January 22, 2009 at 10:52 AM
Interesting all around.
Is it going to be Sept. 10, 2001 in the world again? I guess according to Naomi Wolf it is. How quickly they forget.
I think we should re-name the country "The A.D.D. States of America".
And Nancy Pelosi said she thought that with the departure of GWB "a ten pound anvil had been lifted from her head".
And lastly, the Democrats and our European "allies" will, of course, have a "Get Out of Jail Free" card to thrown down in case there IS a major Islamic terrorist attack. Blame Bush.
Posted by: E. Nigma | January 22, 2009 at 10:56 AM
narciso-
I fear what I was concerned with during the 'lawyer's crisis' in Pakistan, and in threads, referencing Tony Lake, maybe on the horizon.
I'm less worried about Jordan and Pakistan always seems like firefighters on a magazine. Egypt's Mubarak dictatorship will be feted by the Obama Administration (and weakened with Obama's pro-Palestanian tilt) but I'm not so sure a MB alternative is really all that popular. I'm more worried about Europe. If a terrorist attack is bad enough in Europe would NATO again invoke Article 5.
Good times, good times.
Posted by: RichatUF | January 22, 2009 at 11:38 AM
narciso-
I fear what I was concerned with during the 'lawyer's crisis' in Pakistan, and in threads, referencing Tony Lake, maybe on the horizon.
I'm less worried about Jordan and Pakistan always seems like firefighters on a magazine. Egypt's Mubarak dictatorship will be feted by the Obama Administration (and weakened with Obama's pro-Palestanian tilt) but I'm not so sure a MB alternative is really all that popular. I'm more worried about Europe. If a terrorist attack is bad enough in Europe would NATO again invoke Article 5.
Good times, good times.
Posted by: RichatUF | January 22, 2009 at 11:54 AM
SO Caroline was a big version of Tim Geitner. Is she the only Kennedy who hasn't gotten away with it? (I guess the fact that she's not in jail means she really did get away with it.)
Posted by: Jane | January 22, 2009 at 03:53 PM