Axelrod & Emanuel to staff: Find ways to blame Bush for bomber

[ericire12]

http://spectator.org/archives/2009/12/31/the-politics-of-incompetence

The Politics of Incompetence

By The Prowler on 12.31.09 @ 6:10AM

On December 26, two days after Nigerian Omar Abdulmutallab allegedly attempted to use underwear packed with plastic explosives to blow up the Amsterdam-to-Detroit flight he was on, and as it became clear internally that the Administration had suffered perhaps its most embarrassing failure in the area of national security, senior Obama White House aides, including chief of staff Rahm Emanuel, David Axelrod and new White House counsel Robert Bauer, ordered staff to begin researching similar breakdowns -- if any -- from the Bush Administration.

"The idea was that we'd show that the Bush Administration had had far worse missteps than we ever could," says a staffer in the counsel's office. "We were told that classified material involving anything related to al Qaeda operating in Yemen or Nigeria was fair game and that we'd declassify it if necessary."

The White House, according to the source, is in full defensive spin mode. Other administration sources also say a flurry of memos were generated on December 26th, 27th, and 28th, which developed talking points about how Obama's decision to effectively shut down the Homeland Security Council (it was merged earlier this year into the National Security Council, run by National Security Adviser James Jones) had nothing to do with what Obama called a "catastrophic" failure on Christmas Day.

"This White House doesn't view the Northwest [Airlines] failure as one of national security, it's a political issue," says the White House source. "That's why Axelrod and Emanuel are driving the issue."

Axelrod, who has no foreign policy or national security experience beyond occasionally consulting with liberal or progressive candidates running for political office in foreign countries, has been actively participating in national security briefings from the beginning of the administration. He has also sat in on Obama's "war council" meetings, providing Obama with suggestions in both venues based on what he knows about polling and public opinion data, say several White House sources.

"[Axelrod] isn't sitting in the meetings telling the President, 'Do this because the polling shows that,'" says one source. "But we know that in less public settings, or on paper, David does provide guidance to the President that gives him added context to the recommendations and information our foreign policy and national security teams give him."

Axelrod's presence in the meetings has raised some eyebrows, as previous political advisers in the White House have typically not participated in such meetings. Bush Administration sources, for example, say that political adviser Karl Rove was not present at national security meetings.

[tombogan03884]

 BLAME BUSH !
I guess old habits really ARE hard to break.

[WatchManUSA]

They have a pattern when there is something unexpected and bad.  I heard this on Rush's program this week.  Here is my paraphrased version.

First, Obama hides out some place and sends out his "people" who try to downplay the problem - "Problem, what problem?"  However, this never plays well.

Second, when the first try doesn't work finally Obama makes a statement.  After the statement, the American people react by saying - "What did he say and what does he mean?"

Third, Obama comes out again and finally gets serious.  However, instead of doing anything substantive, he holds meetings.

Finally, when the meetings are over a bit of white-wash is spread around and they figure out a way to blame Bush.

In this case you need to remember that Maximum Berry does not recognize that we have a war on terror going on.

[ratcatcher55]

Dave Barry column nails it.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/12/18/AR2009121802219.html

[tombogan03884]

They have a pattern when there is something unexpected and bad.  I heard this on Rush's program this week.  Here is my paraphrased version.

First, Obama hides out some place and sends out his "people" who try to downplay the problem - "Problem, what problem?"   However, this never plays well.

Second, when the first try doesn't work finally Obama makes a statement.  After the statement, the American people react by saying - "What did he say and what does he mean?"

Third, Obama comes out again and finally gets serious.  However, instead of doing anything substantive, he holds meetings.

Finally, when the meetings are over a bit of white-wash is spread around and they figure out a way to blame Bush.

In this case you need to remember that Maximum Berry does not recognize that we have a war on terror going on.

I have to disagree, He is very much aware of our war on terror but since his sympathies lie with the other side he and the rest of the Dems goes out of Their way to hamstring efforts to actually make Americans safer. They have opposed every single attempt, effective or not, to actually AVERT further attacks, just for 2 quick examples, Armed Pilots and Profiling Muslims.

[Sponsor]

[fightingquaker13]

I am all in favor of blaming W for everything. It doesn't change the fact that he isn't President. One of the things that pissed me off most about W was the tendency to blame Clinton for everything. This went on into 2003. I pissed off some GOP friends by asking "Just when does W actually become President anyway? When can I start blaming him?" Personally, I think any President gets a six month pass. Policy takes time take effect. In BOs case, I'll extend it to 9 months because of the severity of multiple crises (I'd have done the same for MCain). However, at 1 year in, its BOs crisis, BOs mess and BOS fault. At this point I will conceed that W may to to blame for some of it. So What? The question is whether you can fix it? If so how? And oh yeah, when? Gerry Ford was the last guy who got drafted into the job. Everyone else wanted it. Fine, you've got it. Lets see some results.
FQ13

[WatchManUSA]

I have to disagree, He is very much aware of our war on terror but since his sympathies lie with the other side he and the rest of the Dems goes out of Their way to hamstring efforts to actually make Americans safer. They have opposed every single attempt, effective or not, to actually AVERT further attacks, just for 2 quick examples, Armed Pilots and Profiling Muslims.

Just a point.  I think if you look at the White House statements they do not mention "war on terror" any more.  They refer to the war is Afghanistan as a war against the "Tally-ban" (Obama's pronunciation) and al-Qaeda.

I don't disagree with your view of Obama's actions.

[tombogan03884]

I am all in favor of blaming W for everything. It doesn't change the fact that he isn't President. One of the things that pissed me off most about W was the tendency to blame Clinton for everything. This went on into 2003. I pissed off some GOP friends by asking "Just when does W actually become President anyway? When can I start blaming him?" Personally, I think any President gets a six month pass. Policy takes time take effect. In BOs case, I'll extend it to 9 months because of the severity of multiple crises (I'd have done the same for MCain). However, at 1 year in, its BOs crisis, BOs mess and BOS fault. At this point I will conceed that W may to to blame for some of it. So What? The question is whether you can fix it? If so how? And oh yeah, when? Gerry Ford was the last guy who got drafted into the job. Everyone else wanted it. Fine, you've got it. Lets see some results.
FQ13

A reality that we are ALL guilty of overlooking is that the guy in the Oval office doesn't MAKE the law, He may try to set policy but MAKING laws is the job of the Congress. So in truth, we can't even accurately blame BO for things like Obamacare or the Porkulus spending, none of it would have been possible with out an equally dysfunctional Congress, it is more accurate to say "the X administration" which takes in the President and cabinet that set policy AND the Congress that either passes or opposes the laws needed to enforce those policies.
The historical record (Congressional Record to be exact ) will prove that the problems faced by both GW Bush AND Obama, stem primarily from 3 decisions made by the Clinton administration
1) Loosening home loan verification. (Maxine Waters and Barney Frank, "Verifying income is racist")
2) Not following through on Clinton's Presidential finding to kill Bin Laden (CIA Lawyers fearing even minimal collateral damage)
3) Granting Social Security etc. to Illegal aliens (Deciding vote was cast by Al Gore )
These 3 actions lead directly to
1) Collapse of the housing market when unverified borrowers couldn't pay back loans they never should have gotten in the first place
2) If Bin Laden had died in 96- 2000 9-11 would not have happened
3) all the freebies lead to a rush of illegals that overburdened an already tight job market.
 

[Pathfinder]

I am all in favor of blaming W for everything. It doesn't change the fact that he isn't President. One of the things that pissed me off most about W was the tendency to blame Clinton for everything. This went on into 2003. I pissed off some GOP friends by asking "Just when does W actually become President anyway? When can I start blaming him?" Personally, I think any President gets a six month pass. Policy takes time take effect. In BOs case, I'll extend it to 9 months because of the severity of multiple crises (I'd have done the same for MCain). However, at 1 year in, its BOs crisis, BOs mess and BOS fault. At this point I will conceed that W may to to blame for some of it. So What? The question is whether you can fix it? If so how? And oh yeah, when? Gerry Ford was the last guy who got drafted into the job. Everyone else wanted it. Fine, you've got it. Lets see some results.
FQ13

Wrong yet again. And no, you would not have given McCain a pass for any months, your hatred of him before and after the election and his running mate are legend around here.

Others, including me, still blame klintoon for his absolutely derelict manner of handling the international terrorist problems throughout the 90's, setting the stage for 9/11/2001. W's people may have blamed klintoon in 2003, but W did not. He took responsibility for resolving what happened less than 8 months into his presidency, and he took shit-loads of crap from people like you for his "with us or against us" speech.

bho gets no pass, and the reason is as stated - bho and his minions turn everything into a political issue - how can any event hurt bho and how can bho turn it to his advantage.

Axelrod is a power behind the throne from way back in Chicago, and has earned a reputation of being one of the more vicious and "win at all costs by destroying the enemy" people in Chicago politics. And he is now on a national stage and his actions affect billions of people. I find this to be one of the scariest parts of bho's admin, that people like Axelrod and Emanuel are so close to this level of power. They are the real dangers - bho is a sock puppet, a dangerous sock puppet, but a sock puppet nonetheless. Nothing more. It is people like Axelrod and Emanuel - and the people behind the curtains they report to - who are destroying everything that has ever been great about this country.

This story is just an indication of how these men operate.

[Rastus]

Tom brings, as usual, us back earth referring to the fact that blaming a president for anything other than a-d-m-i-n-i-s-t-r-a-t-i-o-n is a perilous path that tends to protect the guilty...like Barney faggot Frank and Maxine bigot Waters.  Had we not been stupid about loans...which I saw as a certain demise in the 90's.....we would still be "enjoying" an illegal rush (which has hushed a bit due to the failed economy).  Then again, there are a lot of laws all of the last 3 presidents could have used to imprison the rich people who were paid off in this economic failure.

As an example Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are going to lose 400 billion dollars and we in the middle are paying for it.  Here is how, government money from the peoples taxes get's channeled back into the rich guy's pockets and on the other end props up the loans and in some instances pays or forgives the loans for the irresponsible masses who's votes are being purchased by the lib Dem's and RINO's.  This kills the "middle class"...you and me.  It removes our lifestyle and pushes us still closer to the very bottom forcing us to work harder, if we can find a job, and stressing us greater which impacts our true wealth...our relationships with our families and friends, our ability to provide for our families, to pursue happiness.

The rich people who were stupid and lost the money are kept whole and remain rich.  The irresponsible bottom feeders are rewarded for selling their votes ushering in communism and it's ugly sister socialism.  The guy in the middle works harder and get's less because he is supporting the deadbeats in front of and behind him.

And if we haven't all noticed ...we're returning to a time when all we work for are taxes and necessities...if you happen to have a check coming in from a job at all.  

A reality that we are ALL guilty of overlooking is that the guy in the Oval office doesn't MAKE the law, He may try to set policy but MAKING laws is the job of the Congress. So in truth, we can't even accurately blame BO for things like Obamacare or the Porkulus spending, none of it would have been possible with out an equally dysfunctional Congress, it is more accurate to say "the X administration" which takes in the President and cabinet that set policy AND the Congress that either passes or opposes the laws needed to enforce those policies.
The historical record (Congressional Record to be exact ) will prove that the problems faced by both GW Bush AND Obama, stem primarily from 3 decisions made by the Clinton administration
1) Loosening home loan verification. (Maxine Waters and Barney Frank, "Verifying income is racist")
2) Not following through on Clinton's Presidential finding to kill Bin Laden (CIA Lawyers fearing even minimal collateral damage)
3) Granting Social Security etc. to Illegal aliens (Deciding vote was cast by Al Gore )
These 3 actions lead directly to
1) Collapse of the housing market when unverified borrowers couldn't pay back loans they never should have gotten in the first place
2) If Bin Laden had died in 96- 2000 9-11 would not have happened
3) all the freebies lead to a rush of illegals that overburdened an already tight job market.