|
|
May 18, 2013
|
|
|
|
 Is Axelrod Walking in Rove’s Footsteps?Posted on Nov 25, 2008
David Axelrod is not Karl Rove, so what’s he doing in his office? Barack Obama was elected to bring change to Washington, but like his predecessor, he’s bringing his top political strategist into the White House. The Boston Globe questions whether that’s the best idea.
Advertisement TAGS:
|
Arctic Tundra ‘Will Turn to Forest’
 . '/' . substr('9780446572828',-6,3) . '/' . '9780446572828' . '.jpg'; ?>)
Email 
Print
Share
Email to a friend
Newsletter 
Like Us
Follow Us
Get Our Feed
Tags|Bazaar|Podcast|About Us|Contact Us|User Agreement|Privacy Policy|FAQ: Comments and Moderation | Google+
© 2013 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.
By Folktruther, November 27, 2008 at 10:38 pm Link to this comment
I don’t understand your position, Howard. Pro-war, neoliberalism, and an American police state is strongly supported by American Zionists. They have dominated the Obama’s appointments so far. They contribute money, media and organization to both parties to support their policies. They supported Obama in the election, 80& of his money coming from contributes of over a thousand dollars.
You think Obama is coopting this movement, and is not the inssturment of it? That he is not uniting the Dems and Gops to support Bushite policies against the interests of the progressive population?
He has gone to the right ever since he got the nomination and didn’t need progressives anymore.
Report thisBy Maani, November 26, 2008 at 3:44 pm Link to this comment
Howard:
The best thing you can do with Folkliar is ignore him. He thinks anyone who disagrees with him is a right-wing Zionist. He has accused me of same despite the fact that he has no idea who I am or what I have done re progressive causes, and that I have NEVER supported Israel’s aggressive tendencies or policies.
If you engage him, he will simply continue to make his paranoid and baiting assertions.
Peace.
Report thisBy Howard Mandel, November 26, 2008 at 12:08 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
Folktruther: (please avoid personal attacks in the future)
“Howard Mandal- your assertion that it is ‘ not arguable’ that the Bushite regime was dominated by Zionists or neocons is simply not true. Of course it is arguable, at least by anyone not intimidated by Zionists or neoliberals. And Obama is dominated by precisely the same forces.”
I did not say that say that zionist interests did not dominate the Bush administration. I agree with that. I also agree that they will have a seat at the table in the Obama administration. The argument that I do not accept was that that was the problem.
“That you are relishing how the present power situation is playing out, I have no doubt, is because you are a Zionist or neolib, and identify with their policies.”
You are lashing out. Let’s talk about the issues Folktruther. Not that it is germaine to the argument, but I am an anti-zionist. I do not believe Israel should ever have been established as a Jewish state. Also, as an atheist I think its insane that as a secular state we should even be pro-Israel. I equate the treatment of the Palestinians to aparteid and worse. (To all those who disagree, I have no interest in debating those positions in this thread.)
So can we talk now about the differenece between Bush and Obama? Grover Norquist said of the Bush transition that “people are policy”. They believed that if you appointed radically ideological people, then you can let them run wild and you can be sure that they will execute your ideological agenda. Ultimately there agenda was to gut government, and they were very successful. Obama is talking about “a team of rivals” following Lincoln’s example. His goal is to bring everyone together so he can get a hard look at issues from every angle. This is a fundamental difference of philosophy. Shouldn’t we give him the benefit of the doubt (as if we have a choice)?
Report thisBy Folktruther, November 26, 2008 at 11:22 am Link to this comment
Howard Mandal- your assertion that it is ’ not arguable’ that the Bushite regime was dominated by Zionists or neocons is simply not true. Of course it is arguable, at least by anyone not intimidated by Zionists or neoliberals. And Obama is dominated by precisely the same forces.
That you are relishing how the present power situation is playing out, I have no doubt, is because you are a Zionist or neolib, and identify with their policies. They, and their military allies, control both political parties. The Dem-Gop leaders will continue the policies of the Bushite counterrevolution: war, racism, neoliberalism, and a police state. Which you will support under the guise of opposing them.
Report thisBy Louise, November 26, 2008 at 11:04 am Link to this comment
The article is interesting, but in my view way off base. Not whether or not Axlerod will excersice undo influence, [he wont] but the authors perception of an all powerful Rove.
“There was, for instance, the federal investigation into whether Rove helped expose the identity of a CIA agent in an attempt to discredit her husband. Rove was never charged, but he did return to the grand jury repeatedly to correct his testimony.”
~~~
Was Rove the architect behind the outing? We now KNOW that it was Bush who directed and authorized it.
George W. Bush Outed CIA Agent Valerie Plame
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3kSMvVRnk0
~~~
“Rove pushed for an early vote to authorize war in Iraq to take advantage of the 2002 midterm elections ...”
“Rove reportedly urged Bush to start the war as soon as possible to get it over before the 2004 reelection campaign.”
~~~
Everything Rove is credited with doing during Bush’s time in the White House, reaffirms the reality that Bush is corrupt, detached, indifferent and lazy, [If not down-right stupid] and he used Rove to give validity to his self-perceived right to rule rather than lead.
We could all list a multitude of bad stuff Rove has done, going all the way back to his early influence on the RNC. All of which proves, not that Bush allowed Rove undo influence, but that Rove filled the gap for corrupt and corruptible, greedy, dishonest and lazy people looking for someone to design the perfect deception! That is the legacy of Carl Rove. A man who would be king, but found it much easier to shape and control the amoral king-makers.
Besides, the notion that Obama is anything like Bush, and is incapable of making a decision without a guide pulling his strings, is ridiculous! Bush needed Rove to prop up, propel and validate him. Obama has no problem standing on his own two feet! Or walking, talking and thinking at the same time! Or accepting responsibility! Having Axelrad close at hand is probably more about having a close associate he can talk to, without fear of seeing what he said all over the news a few hours later.
Certainly not so he can lean on someone else to tell him what to do. I doubt Obama has that kind of hole in his character.
So perhaps this story is really a non-story intended to ruffle the easily ruffled.
Report thisBy Howard Mandel, November 26, 2008 at 6:47 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
“You have very wide and interesting thought processes…
I am enjoying your range…
Strive on..”
I humbly thank you (blushing).
Report thisBy felicity, November 26, 2008 at 6:40 am Link to this comment
Could be that Obama realizes that he needs an astute political operator by his side and Axelrod proved himself just that if it was he who ran Obama’s campaign.
Let’s face it. DC is a political maelstrom. Without political savvy, a president’s policies, hopes, dreams for the country will never make it out of the Oval Office.
Report thisBy alterid, November 25, 2008 at 7:49 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
...and then there’s Kenneth O’Donnell…...
(great depictions of all principals in the movie “13 Days”...)
Report thisBy Maani, November 25, 2008 at 5:29 pm Link to this comment
Re this issue, the following might interest you:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/21/opinion/21rollins.html?_r=1&sq=white office of political&st=cse&scp=2&pagewanted=print
Peace.
Report thisBy GrammaConcept, November 25, 2008 at 3:51 pm Link to this comment
Howard Mandel:
You have very wide and interesting thought processes…
I am enjoying your range…
Strive on..
Report thisBy leilah, November 25, 2008 at 2:30 pm Link to this comment
I have a sneaky suspicion that Rove was behind the Schiavo fiasco just for political gain. Who else could get Bush back to DC from a vacation to sign a ridiculous law? Rove is a depraved criminal.
Report thisI don’t think Axelrod could be anywhere nearly as atrocious as Rove was in that position.
By Howard Mandel, November 25, 2008 at 1:37 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
As per Allan Gurfinkle: “Arguably the problem with the previous administration is that it was dominated by Zionists, or neo-cons, if you prefer.”
That is not arguable. The problem was that no dissent was permitted. And, the decider and chief wanted everything served up to him on a neocon platter.
Whether we like it or not these people exist and have entrenched positions on the world stage. Obama is co-opting them. Does anyone believes he’s going to take the Bush approach and have all his options boiled down to suit his ideological preconceptions? By the time an Obama policy is rolled out it will have been vetted inside in a way we have never seen before.
Report thisBy Howard Mandel, November 25, 2008 at 12:48 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
Think of it as rebooting the country back to the 2000 operating system. Y’know the last time had a semifunctional government. Then go from there. Barack is in the process of reassuring the world that his campaign rhetoric (which Arius appears not to have been listening to) was about being cool, centrist, and bipartisan. But, above all about leaving behind ideology. I may or may not agree with all of that, but characterizing it as a “bait and switch” is disingenuous.
Four years from now, if Obama is reelected he may move more to the left, if the winds are blowing that way. But I think what he doing now is taking away any effective opposition. I, for one, am relishing how this is playing. The repugs are so at a loss about how to respond, they have to resort to casting him as too far to the right for his own party. That’s hysterical.
Report thisBy Arius, November 25, 2008 at 12:25 pm Link to this comment
“Bring change” LOL! I love the ignorance of those who fell for the rhetoric and bullshit-
Axelrod scares the shit out of me. I quiver at the thought of this devious prick walking the halls of my White House.
Rove was the creme de’ la creme and Axelrod will live in his shoes.
Report thisBy Allan Gurfinkle, November 25, 2008 at 12:17 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
Arguably the problem with the previous administration is that it was dominated by Zionists, or neo-cons, if you prefer. And Obama is appointing one neo-con after another to the key positions in his administration almost WITHOUT EXCEPTION, and this is ‘change we can believe in’? Nope, it is ‘the charade continues’.
Report thisBy alterid, November 25, 2008 at 12:12 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
Apropos the most complained about assortment of Mr. Obama’s choices so far for various slots and positions in his administration, I submit the following:
Over several decades, I have seen many truly excellent teachers genuinely assist in the maturing process of numerous troubled, undisciplined, willful, and often, troublingly powerful, students
by choosing them to fill positions of leadership, tutoring, guidance, responsibility, or some other form of service to the class as a whole, as well as by casting them in carefully chosen parts in class plays…..
A good teacher is more valuable by far than gold ever was or will be….
they are, in truth, human gold….Real Treasure…
and,... all are human beings deserving of our help…
especially those who say “Help me”...
just some ‘hopeful’ thoughts and considerations…
Report thisBy Alejandro, November 25, 2008 at 11:53 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
Howard is right, to a point. A Blind Deafmute could do no worse then the Bush Administration and probably better, so yea, I’ll take a wait and see attitude for now.
But I am very concerned that there seems to be only a few hundred people in this 300 million plus nation that have the expertise and keen astutness to run the critical agencys that move and defend our great Country.
My guess is that AIPAC, the DNC and the RNC are so in bed with each other that it dosen’t matter who’s in the White House. The players change and the quest for world domination continues by what ever means can be sold to the dumb massess.
I heard some where that you can put lipstick on a pig, but it’s still a pig. [True’re words were never said].
Report thisBy Howard Mandel, November 25, 2008 at 7:56 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
The problem with the machine wasn’t that it didn’t work, it was just that it was run by ideologically driven criminals. Despite our enthusiasm and hope for an Obama administration we didn’t have a revolution…just a “change” in parties. I know the bulk of Truthdig contributors are Clinton haters, and I do see their point on many levels, but you can’t right the course of a ship by jettisoning the engine. The Clinton administration was not facing the crises Obama’s facing. Besides, Clinton had a tiger of a republican party to contend with at every turn. That tiger is essentially toothless now. Give Obama a chance to show that he can lead the pragmatists in a new direction, before we undermine those choices.
Report this