I Wasn’t Sure How I Felt About Panetta Until…
Dianne Feinstein and Jay Rockefeller – two of Bush’s most ardent enablers – came out against him. Now, just like Glenn Greenwald, I’m lovin’ the pick.
Spencer Ackerman reports that Sen. Dianne Feinstein is upset with the selection of Panetta, petulantly complaining that she wasn’t consulted in advance and that it would be best to have an “intelligence professional” in that position. CQ’s Tim Starks reports that Sen. Jay Rockefeller is making very similar noises about this selection. Few things could reflect better on Panetta’s selection than the fact that Feinstein and Rockefeller — two of the most Bush-enabling Senators — are unhappy with it.
And it’s ironic that after eight years of giving a Republican President everything he wanted, these two suddenly find their tongues. Lest we forget Feinstein voted for all of Bush’s nominees to run the CIA, including Porter Goss, and General Michael Hayden. Not to mention she loves her some Patriot Act. Amending the Constitution to outlaw flag burning is on her greatest hits playlist, as well.
Ryeland of Kos digs up this little nugget:
When it was President Bush appointing an idiot like Goss, here’s what Feinstein thought:
I believe the President should have the prerogative to appoint who he wants to be the DCI, or for any other senior position, subject only to the requirement that the person be qualified for the job.
Feinstein needs to sit down and shut up, which shouldn’t be too difficult since she’s had eight years of practice.
Comment by June on 6 January 2009 at 8:47 am:
Pandora, Ditto for me. When I heard that Dems were critcizing the selection, I thought “now, what.” When I heard why they were critical, I thought “this might be Obama’s best appointment.”
If he wants to put someone in there who was completely removed from the last 8 years of criminal activity in the CIA, I say HALLELUJAH!
Comment by Unstable Isotope on 6 January 2009 at 8:48 am:
What is her problem? Is she mad because Obama didn’t call her? Maybe she’s figured out that Obama doesn’t want her input.
Getting rid of the Bush torture machine does seem to be one thing that Obama is really intent on doing. His choices yesterday for Solicitor General and other legal advisory functions reflect this. Panetta was a surprise choice but I can’t say I’m unhappy that he’s an outsider. We need someone untainted. And if Panetta is as much as a take-charge type as we’ve heard than he can be very successful.
Comment by Truth Teller on 6 January 2009 at 8:49 am:
Isn’t that building that is known as CIA headquarters named after a non spook who once headed the agency. If I recall it is named after George H. W. Bush
Comment by Unstable Isotope on 6 January 2009 at 8:51 am:
Yes, TT. I read that two of the best CIA chiefs came from non-intelligence backgrounds. What better way to bring change than to bring someone from the outside?
Comment by jason330 on 6 January 2009 at 8:52 am:
Dianne Feinstein…what a effing loser.
Comment by El Somnambulo on 6 January 2009 at 8:59 am:
El Somnambulo thinks it was Kos who wrote something like, “It’s not enough to elect more Democrats. We must elect better Democrats.”
Feinstein and Harry Reid illustrate that point perfectly.
Comment by pandora on 6 January 2009 at 9:09 am:
Reid is a complete waste of space. The Burris fiasco is just one example. I’m so sick of Reid puffing out his chest, throwing down the gauntlet, and then slinking away. And for what? Blago won this round.
Comment by Geezer on 6 January 2009 at 9:24 am:
But…but….she’s from San Francisco!
Comment by TPN on 6 January 2009 at 9:29 am:
Well said all around. Feinstein’s problem is likely that Panetta is a Californian who knows his way around the Hill better than she does. He’s always been a cool head under pressure and would be methodical and determined if he intends (I hope) to make much-needed changes over at the Company.
Comment by Von Cracker on 6 January 2009 at 9:47 am:
Old, cold-war paradigm-livin’ hacks need to shut the fuck up!
Good pick seal of approval…
Comment by liberalgeek on 6 January 2009 at 9:50 am:
I was feeling good about the pick when Feinstein was angry. Now that I know that TPN likes the pick, I’m unsure.
Comment by TPN on 6 January 2009 at 10:08 am:
LOL…(ya bastid).
Since that’s the way it is ’round here, let me just say I Luuuuuv (yes, capital L) Luuuuuuuuuuuuv Obama now!!! Love him!!!!
Comment by liberalgeek on 6 January 2009 at 10:10 am:
AAARRRRGGGGG!
Comment by Truth Teller on 6 January 2009 at 10:11 am:
Remember folks it was Feinstein and Schumer who gave us Roberts and Alito
Comment by donviti on 6 January 2009 at 10:17 am:
the greatest thing about the internet is the ability to pull up quotes so quickly!
It is the worst thing that ever happened to politicians.
Comment by El Somnambulo on 6 January 2009 at 11:06 am:
Truth Teller wrote: “Remember folks it was Feinstein and Schumer who gave us Roberts and Alito.”
El Somnambulo recalls Joe Lieberman and Tom Carper also setting themselves up as sober heads to combat the excessive partisanship in the Senate. In that faux capacity, they paved the way for the ’straight up-and-down vote’ that led to the Alito & Roberts confirmations.
In typical weasel fashion, Carper voted against the filibuster and then voted against the candidates during the roll call.
Carper is one ‘Democrat’ not worthy of the name. Better Democrats, pipples!
Comment by Unstable Isotope on 6 January 2009 at 11:23 am:
We’re definitely in need of better Democrats. I was confused when the first tapes came out how Blagojevich was able to get and hold on to power. The guy may be a corrupt idiot but he’s a genius at playing people against each other. I’m somewhat amused (in a sad way) about how Blago has played Reid and Burris.