U.S. Senate See Full Big Line

(D) J. Hickenlooper*

(R) Somebody

80%

20%

(D) Phil Weiser (D) Joe Neguse (D) Michael Bennet
50% 50% 50%
Att. General See Full Big Line

(D) M. Dougherty

(D) Jena Griswold

(D) Brian Mason

60%↑

30%↑

20%↓

Sec. of State See Full Big Line
(D) A. Gonzalez

(D) George Stern

(R) Sheri Davis

50%↑

40%

30%

State Treasurer See Full Big Line

(D) Brianna Titone

(R) Kevin Grantham

(D) Jerry DiTullio

60%↑

30%

20%↓

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Hurd*

(D) Somebody

80%

40%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert*

(D) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank*

(D) Somebody

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(R) Gabe Evans*

(D) Manny Rutinel

(D) Yadira Caraveo

45%↓

40%↑

30%

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
February 02, 2009 02:01 AM UTC

Why aren't Obama's appointees protecting him?

  • 31 Comments
  • by: Another skeptic

Is there a reason that President Obama’s appointees aren’t protecting him from embarrassment?

Geithner insisted on becoming treasury secretary despite his tax problems.

Daschle so far hasn’t had the good grace to back out after the disclosures of his tax cheating.

Ray LaHood, one of the great pay to play Republicans of all time and a GOP turncoat, will make sure those who want to play will pay.

Eric Holder helped Clinton pardon terrorists and Rich.

Hillary and Blll Clinton embarrassed themselves with all kinds of unethical behavior before they set out to make Obama look dumb.

David Axlerod lies like a Chicago politician, which works for Obama.

Joe Biden is inartfully practicing nepotism with his former senate seat, which is being held by a staffer for Biden’s son.

At least Bill Richardson had the good manners to withdraw as the Commerce Dept. nominee, but if he really had had Obama’s interests at heart, he never would have taken the Commerce nomination in the first place.

But Sen. Judd Gregg (R-VT) reportedly is willing to betray his party, country and state for a full-time job. If he does take Commerce and gives the Dems 60 seats in the Senate, no one, including his enemies in the Obama administration, will trust him. And Republicans will hate Obama as intensely as Gorian Dems have hated Bush since 2000.

Do you see the pattern of dishonesty, self-serving appointees and gutless responses by President Obama?

Is it possible that Obama’s appointees don’t feel much loyalty to him because they don’t respect him, hardly know him and even resent his improbable election?  

Comments

31 thoughts on “Why aren’t Obama’s appointees protecting him?

          1. AS–didn’t you just have some post to the effect that you are what you post?

            Do you see the pattern of dishonesty, self-serving appointees and gutless responses by President Obama?

            Is it possible that Obama’s appointees don’t feel much loyalty to him because they don’t respect him, hardly know him and even resent his improbable election?

            From the guy who supported Bush–appointer of Rumsfeld, L. Paul Bremer, Gonzales, J. Stephen Griles, etc. etc.

            Just saying…

              1. I disagree about Obama’s picks being either incompetent or dishonest–as I posted in another thread, I have issues with Daschle and Geitner on their taxes, but I don’t think it’s necessarily enough for me to oppose their nominations.  The larger issue is if they can do the job, and I think the picks are good.

                I also don’t think they’re disloyal, but loyalty is over rated.  Their duty isn’t really to the president–at least that is not the oath they swear.  Many of Bush’ picks turned out to be criminal, putting fealty to a man over duty to country.

                You hate every thing about Obama, every thing he does looks to you 1) socialism or 2) corruption.  It will be so for the next 8 years I expect.

                  1. Bush’s guys did quite a bit that’s criminal…

                    of far more significance than ‘cheating on taxes’

                    Ans as far as being honest…well, they fail there too.  Let me paraphrase Gonzo for you in front of Congress:

                    I cannot recall if I remember having a recollection of something I do not recall remembering…

                    You call it dissembling, perhaps, I call it dishonesty.  

                    1. It is not criminal nor dishonest to make a mistake. And it’s not criminal to be intellectually dishonest, or everyone in politics would be in jail.

                      No question that Bush people made bad calls. Everyone does.  No question that there was intellectual dishonesty in the Bush administration just there is Obama’s, starting at the top.

                      Cheating on taxes is criminal. Winning wars and defending America is not.

                    2. I still thought there were over 100,000 American troops in harm’s way on foreign soil.  

                      In my mind it does a great disservice to these men and women to call the war won–it’s just a Hannitiesque talking point, a banner flying on a ship to score political points with no basis in reality. All in service of the party and their corporate masters, f&ck the American people, f%ck the soldiers–who are now killing themselves at the highest rate in forty years.  Didn’t they hear?  The ‘war’ is won!!!

                      I never have been impressed with your ‘argumentation’ skills: your points are stale burped-up talking points with no originality.  I don’t doubt you believe them, but you’re not too convincing.  

                      Other conservatives on here do a better job of trying to engage people by engaging their brains…sure they get it pretty hard because 1) conservatives are in a minority now and 2) even more so here, I admit, it’s a Democrat-leaning blog.  

                      Even Libertad of late has been trying hard to write some original thoughts and comments (along with the stray B&D photo…) beyond the EFCA bad routine.  Barron X is well respected and thinks for himself.  LB posts interesting material that provokes discussion, even though most folks tend to disagree.  There has been intersting discussion out of El Paso county by folks down there trying to understand what is happening with their (Republican) party.  Haners always (well we all get heated now and then) has worthwhile stuff to say, even though I usually disagree with it.  

                      But the stuff you spew is wholly unimpressive.

                      At least (I surmise) you’re a Steelers fan… so there you go, you won something.

                    3. How many troops do we have in Germany, Japan?

                      You blew it on this one, as on most others. 🙂

                    4. I guess we didn’t win the Revolutionary War or the War of 1812, either — how many troops do we have in Great Britain?

                      If you can’t grasp the difference between the troops we have stationed in Germany and the troops in Iraq, there’s no hope for a serious argument about anything.  

                    5. I grew up in a military family and I’m tired of right-wing chickenhawk BS.  They want so desperately to see their last president as something other than a total screw up that they have to turn truth on its head.

                      Check this out

                      Yeah, no one told them ‘we won’ yet.  They didn’t get the wingnut talking points apparently.

                      Sorry, but it really really bothers me/  All the righties and the ‘support our troops’ crap.  All they care about is tearing people down.

                    6. what was “to bring democracy to the Middle East,” the fourth or fifth justification for the Iraq war, after all the others turned out to be fraudulent, bogus or unfounded? Remember when the neocons were standing up rationales as fast as events knocked them down?

                      Revenge for 9/11! — er, wait, how about … Mushroom clouds and drones attacking Florida with bioweapons! — uh, not buying that? Then it’s to crowd out the extremists by planting a flag for democra — ah hell, it’s reason enough to stay there to finish the job, OK?  

                    7. creative destruction and all that.

                      I am glad to see civilian causalities down.  At a five year low, that’s good.  I am glad that Sunni turn out was up considerably in this last election.

                      But it doesn’t remove the reality that the war was waged under false pretenses; that it was terribly mis-managed; that we never should have been there; that we have wated much blood and treasure; that the The ever-shifting rationale has dwindled to just making it good enough to save some face.

                      And some people say ‘we won!’

                      Did it pay for itself like we were told?  Did it last longer than 6 months (Rummy’s ‘worst-case’ scenario)?  Did it stabilize the Middle East?  Did it cause Democracy to bloom across the region?  Oh, and where are those weapons we went in for in the first place?  

                      Ha ha, remember old Dubya joking ‘not under here’ while Americans and Iraqis were getting blown to shit?

                    8. Only the moveon.org wingnuts don’t get it.

                      Everyone sees you for what you are. You’ve lost the debate. Time to move on.

                    9. have the generals ‘on the ground’ said we’ve won?  I think only the fools that think Hannity is news and reasonable buy your crap.

                      You’ve lost the debate.

                      Add delusions of grandeur to your list of mental illness.

                    10. have the generals ‘on the ground’ said we’ve won?

                      We’re focusing on Afghanistan because we have a new president how has more sense than Bush.

  1. How do you feel about Daschle’s integrity. He figured out his “mistake,” he claims, last July. He waited a month after he was nominated to tell Obama.

    Was that the right thing to do?

    From the AP:

    “President Obama wanted to have a very ethical administration starting out and so on, but I think he’s seeing how hard it is to avoid these kind of problems,” Sen. Kyl said. “And I just wonder, if President Bush had nominated these people, what folks would be saying about that.”

    1. From wsj.com this evening:

      http://online.wsj.com/article/

      Former Sen. Tom Daschle, already facing questions over his failure to pay some taxes in a timely fashion, will likely face another question when the Senate Finance Committee meets Monday to consider his nomination as health and human services secretary: whether he improperly took gifts of value from charities with which he was involved.

      A Finance Committee memo given to members Friday night alluded to the issue as “outstanding,” stating, “Committee staff still is reviewing whether travel and entertainment services provided to the Daschles by EduCap, Inc., Catherine B. Reynolds Foundation, Academy Achievement, and Loan to Learn should be reported as income.”

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Gabe Evans
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

115 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!

Colorado Pols