On Deck : Government Universal Health Care

[aquaadverse]

no, you're wrong. the staff is full of people who have worked in washington for yuears. rice, summers, nicolson,moran, orszag, craig, podesta, messina....

None of them are close advisers. Whoever is advising him is doing a poor job.

??? presidential pardons? uh, come back to earth will ya?

Holder was the one carrying that to Clinton. It speaks to your "simply a case of right and wrong", presumably without being tainted by politics. He was the deputy AG. Apparently climbing a ring higher is purifying.

you have a fascination of comparing obama to carter. time will tell, but so far there's really not an accurate analogy.

It's apt. Except Carter took longer to have people back off because they were worried about being reelected. From a direct comparison standpoint it would be closer to Clinton's term. Health Care, passing spending bills with no Republican votes.

The big difference and the reason I use Carter is Clinton would make a mistake and learn from it. All of them have superior intellects but Carter and Obama are more ideologically driven and have a problem predicting the results of their actions accurately. Clinton would never ask for his entire cabinet to tender their resignations and he wouldn't have been dismissive and tried to marginalize protesters. I haven't heard a President directly spend so much verbage about the media like Obama has since Nixon.

[Mavdog]

Originally Posted by aquaadverse

None of them are close advisers. Whoever is advising him is doing a poor job.

you're certainly entitled to your opinion of the advisor's job performance, but tell me, are you there in the white house to be capable of saying who "are close advisors"?

yeah, didn't think so...

Holder was the one carrying that to Clinton. It speaks to your "simply a case of right and wrong", presumably without being tainted by politics. He was the deputy AG. Apparently climbing a ring higher is purifying.

no, you've got it backwards, clinton carries the pardon request to justice to get their input, which of course is not needed as it is the sole right of the president, without any other's consent, to grant a pardon.

if you have a problem with the rich pardon, it is bill clinton that you should have a beef with, not holder.

and, to state the obvious, the rich pardon has nothing to do with an investigation into illegal cia actions during interrogations.

It's apt. Except Carter took longer to have people back off because they were worried about being reelected. From a direct comparison standpoint it would be closer to Clinton's term. Health Care, passing spending bills with no Republican votes.

The big difference and the reason I use Carter is Clinton would make a mistake and learn from it. All of them have superior intellects but Carter and Obama are more ideologically driven and have a problem predicting the results of their actions accurately. Clinton would never ask for his entire cabinet to tender their resignations and he wouldn't have been dismissive and tried to marginalize protesters. I haven't heard a President directly spend so much verbage about the media like Obama has since Nixon.

oh, ronald reagan spent a great deal of time talking about the media.

carter never served a day in washington, obama has. carter brought a bunch of washington outsiders to washington for his staff, obama has brought back a bunch of washington insiders for his staff.

the results may end up similar, but it is just too early to say.

there is probably more comparison to clinton, but again it's too early to say.