Nick Gillespie | November 19, 2008
Over at Reason.org, the website of the nonprofit Reason Foundation that publishes reason online, policy analyst Shikha Dalmia has been laying the cases for good, bad, and ugly picks of the President Obama cabinet.
In a piece written earlier this week, here's what she had to say about Eric Holder, who unfortunately has been nominated to be attorney general:
Among the bottom-of-the-barrel would be Eric Holder and Jamie Gorelick, both of whom were deputy attorney generals under Janet Reno.... Though Holder has a good resume, his positions and record suggest that he does not understand the constitutional limitations within which this office is supposed to operate. He is a drug warrior and even proposed to stiffen penalties for the possession of marijuana. He was also involved in the federal government's decision to seize Elian Gonzalez from his aunt's home and return him to Cuba without obtaining a court order, a terrible lapse of judgment. Nor is he a pillar of rectitude: There have been questions about whether he was completely upfront about the Justice Department's conduct in the Branch Davidians-Waco fiasco. And some suspect that he might have with-held information about billionaire fugitive and tax evader, Marc Rich, to facilitate Rich's pardon by President Clinton.
Equally bad would be Gorelick, who pushed, unsuccessfully, for the execution of Randy Weaver for killing federal agents in the botched raid in the Ruby Ridge case—rather than holding FBI agents accountable for killing Weaver's unarmed wife.
Appointing either of them will substitute one set of excesses with another and would not offer any fundamental rethinking of Justice's conduct or its powers.
Read who Dalmia wanted to become attorney general (and much more) by going here and here and here.
Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!
Try Reason's award-winning print edition today! Your first issue is FREE if you are not completely satisfied.
So it looks like the "change" brought by Obama may be a change
from Bush II back to Clinton. Super.
So far, what do we have? Rahm Emmanuel, possible Holder as AG, and
mention of Hillary as possible SoS.
That's quite an initial lineup. Somebody pinch me when he floats
someone non-disastrous for something.
Gorelick is probably the most incompetant American of the last half century. No kidding. As deputy AG, she is the one who insisted that the wall between and intel and law enforcement be higher than necessary, which went a long way in preventing from the FBI from piecing together the 9-11 plot before it happened. She was a big wig at Freddie and Fannie after leaving DOJ and benefited from shaddy accounting that hide the full extent of the housing mess. Then she later went on to advise Duke University during the Lacross mess. How many other people were involved with 9-11, Freddie and Fannie, and Duke Lacross? That is a rare tripple. I hadn't even heard that she was involved in the Randy Weaver deal. That woman is truely a menace and will probably end up somewhere else high in the Obama administration although probably not a cabinet level post.
Episiarch, don't you understand? Obama has to pick
Clinton retreads to staff his administration. They're the only ones
with experience.
Really, expecting Mr. Hope and Change to bring new blood to
Washington is clearly asking too much.
Obama's record is a go-along-to-get-along machine Dem who has never
bucked the party line. This is all perfectly consistent with
that.
Well look at it this way, perhaps he'll just be a rehash of the
bullshit we've already had and no worse.
Yeah, and maybe I'll wake up back in 1991 to Susanna Hoffs bringing
me a plate of ribs and some Sweet Tea wearing white babydoll
t-shirt and a collar asking me "What do you have planned today,
Master?" Maybe...
EPI RC,
I work at the HQ of a large federal agency. The transition team is
here. They are all recycled Clinton people. Remember how KOS used
to talk back 04 about how they were going to start a movement that
was going to take back the Democratic Party from the connected
operatives and put it back into the hands of the people? Back in
the day old Kos, for as big of a douchbag as he is, actually talked
a good game about changing politics and doing something about the
K-street bandits running things. Well now he got his boy running
thigs. His moment of triumph and the same group of K-street bandits
are moving back in. I guess I am cynical but I can't help but laugh
my ass off over it.
Better watch it with the "his boy" lines John. That's
racist.
(I'm typing this because a "friend" of mine just read your response
and that was her first reaction. She's your average Obama
supporter.)
Kyle,
I picked that phrase up from the black people I served with in the
military. It really isn't racist.
Watch PTI sometime. There a black man Mike Wilbon and an old white
guy Tony Kornheiser, constantly give each other crap. When someone
the other guy likes does something stupid, they will say "your boy
Rick Patino just did .." We really do live in a post racial society
in many ways. Your friend needs to get over herself.
"I'm typing this because a "friend" of mine just read your
response and that was her first reaction. She's your average Obama
supporter."
Just a guess, but I bet your friend doesn't know many real live
black people.
I just noticed after reading all 3 of the stories that he's already nominated the worst possible pick for AG (Holder), is about to nominate the worst possible pick for Secretary of State (Hillary), and will likely nominate the worst possible pick for Health & Human Services (Daschle).
I know man. I've used it several times myself, In reference to
all types of people. Black included.
And you hit the nail on the head with the last thing. To the best
of my knowledge she doesn't know many live black people. VERY
sheltered in general.
Actually John, I'd like to apologize to you. I should have put quotation marks around racist in my post. Sorry for any misunderstanding I may have caused.
That's quite an initial lineup. Somebody pinch me when he
floats someone non-disastrous for something.
Whether it's Obama or Clinton, either way it would be a Pritzker
making the suggestions.
What is the over/under on the number of troops in Iraq in June
2010? (That would Inauguration + 18 months)
Place yer bets, ladies and gentlement!
"What is the over/under on the number of troops in Iraq in June
2010? (That would Inauguration + 18 months) "
June 2010? I would say between 50 and 75 thousand. Down a few
brigades and working towards being out by the end of 2011, but
still significant. What is going to be funny is watching Obama run
in 2012 claiming Iraq as one of his successes.
Though Holder has a good resume, his positions and record
suggest that he does not understand the constitutional limitations
within which this office is supposed to operate.
Is there any federal office holder to which this statement doesn't
apply?
Well, besides those who don't have good resumes.
What is going to be funny is watching Obama run in 2012
claiming Iraq as one of his successes.
If he does that, I'm sure most of the folks round these parts will
be standing right beside you jeering him.
June 2010? I would say between 50 and 75
thousand.
I was going to say 70K, + or - 10K.
Tulpa,
I won't jeer him. I will just laugh my ass off watching all of the
"No Blood for Oil" types try to explain it. It is them I will jeer
not Obama. If he doesn't fuck up Iraq between now and then, let him
take credit for it.
Y'know, a few tens of millions of NON No-Blood-For-Oil types voted for Obama too. They might consider any sizable troop reduction to be something of a success, given what McCain was likely to (not) accomplish.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245