Richardson, with Hillary in the wings.  Now Holder?

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/07/us/politics/07holder.html?sq=specter&st=cse&scp=1&pagewanted=print

Peace.

By Russian Paul, January 4 at 5:51 pm #

Is this really the whole story? Wouldn’t this come up during these famously exhaustive vetting processes we keep hearing about?

~~~~

BINGO Russian Paul.

I don’t believe for even heartbeat’s worth of a second that this is the ‘whole story’. My gut reaction is that this was just the beginning, (and probably only one of many ‘irons in the fire’) of the neocons on-going efforts to keep their operation afloat, despite the drastic turn in the political environment (at least at the grass roots level) over these past several years.

I’ve been ‘proselytizing’ for months now on this failure of the masses to interpret and recognize all the prongs of Obama’s campaign platform. Maybe it’s been TOO OBVIOUS to an electorate used to being lied to for so long.

So the attacks on Obama’s selections were to be expected, because they’ve long been in the plans. This is not a NEW movement…this neocon bunch and their allies fashioned from the original days of Regan and BushI. No, they’ve taken decades to finally reap the anticipated rewards from the global power control strategy, and they aren’t gonna go down easily.

So no. This is not only not the ‘whole’ story, but it’s shaping up like a fish story.

Meantime, this is all the desperate actions of a frantic dying movement, (which includes some blue dog and neocon Democrats as well) to try to maintain their influence in the changing apparatus.

People like Barbara Feinstein here in California, (who should have been replaced at least the last time around) are vehemently protesting Obama’s selection of Leon Panetta for the Chief Spy job. I see that as a clear indication of where Obama plans to take the US position in terms of cooperating with International Law and the associated Global Institutions. Panetta is very clearly on record and in the same ‘note’ as Obama in terms of the torture.

I would have expected him to make a similar selection, and it’s all the more brilliant for Panetta having had no association with the CIA that put these horrible violations of Universal Human Rights and the Geneva Conversions in motion.

The ideological history of the relationship between the CIA and the Executive Branch, (whomever is in it) is that the CIA answers ONLY to the President -  DIRECTLY, and carries out whatever agenda that executive dictates, in terms of intelligence ‘duties’ and ‘policies’.

That makes it a ‘given’ that Barack Obama would choose his OWN person and one ideologically committed in the same vein as is the president-elect.

That’s why these neocons in blue fur are in such an uproar. I heard they were trying a similar ploy on Eric Holder, whose ALSO promised to prosecute the occupants of various and sundry ‘boardrooms’ with the appropriate glee.

They’re worried, and they should be. For anyone who’s been paying attention, this is exactly what Obama has been saying all along.

It would suit me, but, if Obama supportesr force Hillary out, the Dems will lose about 1/3 of their party right off the bat…but, who else??

I dont know enough about Richardson, but, if he is “dirty”—he is certainly not the only one!

The conections are there, and leopards find it hard to change their spots.

Big Bill and Blagojevich are cut from the same cloth! I’m surprised this is the only issue they’re investigating him for in NM. They could pick from several. And where was Obama’s great transition team for the last 3 months when this issue came out in the Alb Journal in August? They could have Googled it and seen the red flags! And Bill doesn’t just invoke “Pay to Play”... he also is a master at “Pay to Work”. If you want to work in state govt in NM, you have to contribute to his campaign, which all of the nearly 500 “gov exempts” he has put into jobs at which they are, for the most part,incompetent and at very high salaries. The saddest part is that most New Mexicans are welcoming him back with open arms to continue his malfeasance. But maybe he’ll do less damage here.

Is Hillary next?:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/04/washington/04clinton.html?_r=1&sq=clinton&st=cse&scp=2&pagewanted=print

Peace.

Who knows..but, Richardson seemed somewhat of a “liberal” , compared to other Obama appointees, to be…

They are so many sold out politicians, I will never understanad why they risk jobs that pay so much more for little amounts of campaign cash. Most never get caught—I suppose that that is why….

Is this really the whole story? Wouldn’t this come up during these famously exhaustive vetting processes we keep hearing about?