Breaking (From Yesterday!): Reason Foundation's Proactive No Vote on Eric Holder as Attorney General
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.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
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.
Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. Not like I'm surprised mind you.
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...
Kyle, it's just another manic Monday. Wednesday. Whatever.
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.
No problem Kyle,
I didn't think you were accusing me of being a racist.
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.
Does this mean Monica might be coming back?
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.