Comments on: Sunday Show Review

By: Kowalski

Kowalski — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 23:28:34 +0000

Great job, my man, and I’m really proud of you. I want to help.

By: Scope

Scope — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 12:19:15 +0000

After his interviews yesterday, when he debated with the panel about the census, he said- “The White House will play a role (in the census) but it will be a quiet role which is how it should have been from the beginning.” I took that to mean, just quietly usurp the power and just don’t let anyone know you’re doing it. Apparently Mr. Wallace doesn’t believe in the powers enumerated in the Constitution either, or he wouldn’t be promoting an Obama power grab.

By: Scope

Scope — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 12:05:16 +0000

Gregg knew all about the Stimulus as he was being nominated, but I believe the grumblings about politicizing the census came afterward. Can it be possible that Gregg may have thought that by taking the position he could have some control over the very important issue of the redistrubution of electoral votes that will come with the census, and would have worked for accuracy rather than estimating? Once he knew that he would be nothing more than a lackey to Rham Emanuel who would have control he decided there was no point in taking the job. Just a thought.

I will look forward to your thoughts on the dangers of the Republicans becoming a party of “mavericks.” I don’t consider Snowe Collins and Specter to be mavericks as they seem mostly to be reliable votes with the dems on all that are important votes. I do see McCain as a maverick because he reaches across the isle on certain issues but, you can count on him to be with the Republicans with fiscal issues. The problem with maverickiness is you never know what they will vote for or against, and therefore, anything they say while campaigning is suspect. They are unreliable and must be discarded. I hope Steele will follow Blackwell’s ideas that candidates must be true and honest in their beliefs with the Republican platform, or they will have no support or will be held accountable once in office and/or will be punished for their deviance.

By: reggie1

reggie1 — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 06:50:51 +0000

“OR, 2. Sen. Gregg is a maverick as Axelrod claims and is not a good fit in this, or any, administration”

FYI- This is from Axelrod mischaracterizing Gregg’s statement that he couldn’t in good conscience represent this or any administration ON MATTERS THE HE DISAGREES SO STRONGLY (or words to that effect, google it). I’m sure Axelrod just dozed off before Gregg had finished his sentence.

By: JadedByPolitics

JadedByPolitics — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 02:59:01 +0000

…

By: janis

janis — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 00:55:07 +0000

You have a very good voice of your own, however. As the others said, Mark would be proud. And the rest of us are grateful that you have, as your name says, stepped up to the plate and lead us to read what we absolutely hate to have to watch!

By: mbecker908

mbecker908 — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 00:30:48 +0000

and I echo the pats from above, you’ve got real stones.

I would guess more than a handful of us gave at least passing thought to picking up the ball where Mark put it down and just flat – in at least my case – chickened out.

By: timetolead

timetolead — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 00:22:25 +0000

There’s no greater compliment.

By: timetolead

timetolead — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 00:21:24 +0000

Gregg did take the blame in his withdrawal speech, but I can’t help but wonder what caused the change. Reasonable people like Sen. Gregg don’t make life-changing decisions — like taking the post as Commerce Secretary — lightly. Gregg had to have seen something he didn’t like and decide he couldn’t live with himself in that position. Now the administration is saying that its not their fault because they can’t control the whims of a maverick such as Senator Gregg.

Still, this is a lose-lose for Obama and I’m waiting for someone to call him out on it. There are two possible scenarios:

1. Once nominated, Sen. Gregg saw the way his post was going to operate in the Obama administration and the views he was going to be forced to hold as a member of Obama’s cabinet and decided that he couldn’t in good conscience serve. Fine. But what would he have seen? There is some speculation that the White House plans to over-politicize the Census in 2010 and that this may have been a major reason behind Gregg’s withdrawal.

OR,

2. Sen. Gregg is a maverick as Axelrod claims and is not a good fit in this, or any, administration.

If Scenario 1 is true, then we can finally drive a stake into Obama’s claim of bipartisanship and change in Washington. If Scenario 2 is true, its further proof that Obama lacks the judgment to pick honest and capable leaders to fill his cabinet. Either way, it reflects poorly on our Commander in Chief.

I also think there’s a broader danger of allowing Republicans to become viewed as the party of “mavericks,” but more on that another time.

By: redneck_hippie

redneck_hippie — Sun, 15 Feb 2009 23:41:53 +0000

Maxine's history with the word "nationalize". That she had to tell us that the word nationalize scares the hell out of people is the funniest thing I heard today.