Like most things in life, with politics, details matter. So I’m watching the subtleties of the Obama transition when a NOT-so-subtle disruption in the force popped up.
President-elect Obama has selected Leon Panetta to head the CIA. I have my own opinions about this choice, but, given my current circumstance, I won’t comment. However, Senator Diane Feinstein (D-Ca), the new Chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee has commented.
Ms. Feinstein, who would oversee any confirmation hearing for Mr. Panetta, issued a statement that signaled clear disapproval and said she had not been notified about the choice. [emphasis added]
Some Senators, like Majority Leader Harry Reid, think Panetta is a good choice while others like Feinstein and outgoing Committee Chairman John Rockefeller question his qualification.
Where’s the love? This disruption would be expected if the dissenting Senators were not of the same party as the President-elect. The traditional “honeymoon” for an incoming President seems to be waylaid even before the nuptials are held.
The undercurrent here is that President Barack Obama, a wet-behind-the-ears populist electee may have a hard time getting respect from the more established Democrat Party politicians in Congress.
I have no doubts that Obama will be manipulated – controlled – by the Party. He owes the Party much more than it owes him. So these outbursts by Senators should be watched closely.
Pingback: The Political Inquirer
Here’s a different take from a different political perspective. Thoughts?
http://narcosphere.narconews.com/thefield/broom-cia
Respect? Yes — Feinstein seems misguided on this.
Panetta? This is disturbing to say the least.
Though a life-long Republican, until John McCain finally made my stomach lurch to and fro doing flips of nausea, I sincerely believe that Barack Obama is availing himself of the best and the brightest, the most trusted counsel we have in this country.
That said, I think he has earned the nuclear button. Where is it?
And now that she has been notified, she supports the decision. What say you now?
Is this the best you can come up with? You should watch less cable news.
Snead: At the time of my original post, Feinstein was adamant that Panetta was not qualified. Yesterday, SFGate had this article http://tinyurl.com/7z3jdk
which still does not say she supports the decision. Feinstein says she “looks foward” to talking to Panetta, but I’ve yet to see where she “supports the decision.”
S’up? Can’t YOU come up with something better?
I guess I’m reading “news” and you’re reading… something else?
“I had a good discussion with him. I’m confident that he understands. I am supportive,” Feinstein said. “I’ve known him for 20 years. I know him to be a man of credibility and a man of conscience and a man of talent, and I believe he will surround himself with top-notch staff from the intelligence community.”
So whenever you can catch up with current events, I’d love to hear your reaction.
Snead: Well.. there ya go:
http://www.ajc.com/services/content/printedition/2009/01/08/polbriefs.html
Point remains, Sen Feinstein initially reacted very negatively (as did Rockefeller) and gave her Pres-elect no quarter. Why? Her own ego? Sure, but if she respected Obama, she would have checked said ego and given him a bit more love before going off on a public rant.
BTW… cite your sources, don’t just quote them.
Thanks for the update!
Sorry, didn’t realize a blogger would need help following news: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5j9VKSxg3vlTYL9fO-cAILwUZbM-gD95IIHH82
Fair enough, but note that the article cited was posted on Thursday (yesterday), two days after my original post.
Actually the original AP article was one day after your original post. Not sure why that matters, especially since you still have the original post up with no update. Like I said, try for less cable news.