Not only has he picked a duplicate of the Clinton administration, he is now proving he will lead like Clinton. Meaning which ever way the public opinion blows.
Jim Angle at Fox News writes that Obama has yet to pick any key intelligence officials:
And one of the central reasons he hasn’t come forward with a pick for one of the top jobs is because he’s running into pressure from an unexpected source — left-wing bloggers.
John Brennan, Obama’s chief intelligence adviser and anticipated CIA chief, was recently forced to withdraw his name. There was no drumbeat of opposition to Brennan from the front pages or on cable. Rather, the pick was torpedoed by the blogosphere.
“Apparently there is a lot of pressure on the Obama team from a blog saying that Brennan couldn’t be made the director of the CIA because he was involved in torture and renditions, which he wasn’t,” said Mark Lowenthal, former assistant CIA director.
The turn of events only emphasizes the influence of the Internet on the operation of a president-elect whose campaign was powered in large part by the Web.
This time its not only polls, its the blogosphere. To be exact, the lefty blogosphere. And if he is allowing that portion of the country to dictate the who, what, and how he runs the war on terror we are in some serious trouble.
But we already knew that.
The lefty blogosphere doesn’t believe there is a war on terror. They believe our intelligence officials should
sit the worst of the worst down, offer them some coffee and cookies and say “please tell us your plans to kill Americans…..pretty please!”
This is who Obama is listening to. The Glenn Greenwalds of the world:
Blogs do have significant influence,” said blogger Glenn Greenwald, one of those critical of Brennan. “I think the Obama team would be foolish if they just ignored what happened on blogs, and I know for a fact that there are people high up in the Obama campaign and now the transition team who read blogs regularly.”
As a result, say knowledgeable sources, the Obama transition team pushed Brennan to withdraw his name. “Their knees buckled,” one intelligence veteran said.
Yup, Obama is listening to the Sock Puppet.
Wonderful.
See author page
Hey O! I’m available! CALL ME
(lol!)
If any lefty blogger tries to torpedo that suggestion, just flash your registered Democrat credentials to the Big O, Scott.
He can’t even stand up to the moonbats, but people think he can stand up to tyrants? Goes to show why the enemy wanted him to win. They know he’s gutless.
How convenient! After feinting right, he will finally be able to move left. That incredible opportunity must have been quite a relief for him because I am sure he didn’t know how to manipulate his way out of it… lol
I’d just like to clarify the idea that “Lefties” (presumably anyone who thought at the time and still thinks that the Iraq War was a bad idea) do not recognize that there is a huge threat from terrorists.
I think that most of us “Lefties” (defined above) do recognize this threat. Speaking for myself, I view it as such an enormous threat that, for the rest of my life, I’ll cast my Presidential vote for the candidate most likely to minimize the possibility of a nuclear weapon being detonated in Long Beach Harbor, not far away from where I live.
The issues are these:
1. What are the greatest threats to our security?
2. How best to deal with these threats?
I view the greatest threats to be the same threats which were enumerated recently in the Bush administration’s national security assessment. (1) Biological weapons, e.g. anthrax. (2) Radiological weapons, e.g. “dirty bombs.” (3) Explosive nuclear devices, e.g. stolen Soviet nukes, black-marketed.
It is very hard to imagine how the $3 trillion dollars ultimately to be spent in Iraq will, in any way, provide any protection at all against these threats.
The intelligence agency appointments are extraordinarily important. Intelligence will do vastly more to protect us from the real security threats than will sending armies to fight Asian land wars. I’m less concerned with the process of the appointments than I am with the end result of who gets appointed. I’ll reserve judgment until I see who actually gets appointed.
And I wish that a whole lot of that $3 trillion had gone to beefing up our intelligence agencies, which collectively are funded to the tune of only about $50 billion per year.
And, yeah, I’m among those who think that the most important aspects of the “war on terror” are not the military actions, but are, instead, the actions of the intelligence and police agencies who are going to be the ones to identify and interdict the acquisition and smuggling operations.
– Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach, CA
@Larry Weisenthal:
I think when “lefties” first started touting the $3 trillion figure, I tracked it down to the source of where that figure originated. I forget now. And are you sure it’s an estimate meant for Iraq alone? Can you source it (I’m too lazy)? If I’m not mistaken, you’ve been challenged to substantiate that figure on other threads, and I’ve never seen a response. Of course, I’ve missed a lot, so maybe you have.
Did you perceive Saddam to be a threat worth removing?
Whether yea or nay, since we did remove him, do you think leaving a power vacuum in our wake, or a fledgling democracy that stood little chance of surviving, unassisted, would have been the right thing to do? The honorable thing? And how would that be good for our security, our standing in the world? How would that make us safer?
All we can see right now, at this moment, are the financial costs and the sacrifices of lives and limbs lost. But the benefits in the investment can’t be weighed by body counts in flag-draped coffins and treasure in American tax coffers alone. We see the short-term pain and suffering; but what of the long term benefits, should Iraq succeed, thanks in part to America’s investment in blood and treasure?
wordsmith/from parts semi-unknown
Larry and Wordsmith, the cost of war is always diminishing.
American Military Budget in Time of War (% PIB)
Second World War : 32,5%
Korean War: 10,0%
Vietnam War: 8,0%
Gulf War: 4,9%
Irak/Afghanistan: 3,8%
Sources: BUDGET OF THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT
You can view the graphic on this site:
http://www.antagoniste.net/?m=200711&paged=2
I’m glad to see Larry so concerned about federal spending. But apparently he’s less concerned when $trillions are wasted combatting a non existent threat like global warming or trillions thrown down a rat hole to bail out Obama’s campaign contributors.
Is there something about winning a war and killing thousands of terrorists before they could kill us that bothers Larry?