Up for Debate: Obama's nominations

Wednesday, January 9, 2013 at 1:52am

What are your thoughts on President Obama's recent nominations of John Kerry (State Department), Chuck Hagel (Defense Department) and John Brennan (CIA) to executive roles? Break down the pros and cons of each.

Filed under: City Voices
Tagged: Up for Debate

78 Comments on this post:

By: brrrrk on 1/9/13 at 1:00

Once again Darge, I'm eatin' lunch here!!!! :-)

By: dargent7 on 1/9/13 at 1:03

The Naked Gun outtakes...
"Is this some kind of bust?"
"Yes, mam, they're very nice, but we're here on official business".

By: BenDover on 1/9/13 at 2:13

The 'shrinking' doesn't account for the TARP loan that inflated '09 and the repayments that were dumped into the general fund in fy '10 and '11 blanket.

By: bfra on 1/9/13 at 2:20

Ben - Show some backup for your claims on where the TARP TARP TARP repayments went. Also show that ALL TARP TARP TARP loans haven't been repaid yet. Offer some proof rather than just yelling TARP TARP TARP, over & over. Worse repeater than yogi!

By: bfra on 1/9/13 at 2:22

Wherever Raspy is running around with a naked "wang" & yogi is running around looking for a naked "wang" to play with, bet there are some dumbfounded & laughing people.

By: dargent7 on 1/9/13 at 2:36

I remember when Wang computer, as well as Digital and IBM, OWNED the computer business.
Now, you sould see the computers at the San Jose' Libraries.
All Apple or Dell with 25" flat screen plasma screens.
Free to use the Internet up to 3 hours.
So, people like "yogi" can only have an erection 1 hour less than Cialas or Viagra.

By: BenDover on 1/9/13 at 2:51

http://rationalenvironmentalist.com/cbo2009outlookVsActuals.jpg

By: BenDover on 1/9/13 at 2:51

http://rationalenvironmentalist.com/tarp6.jpg

By: BenDover on 1/9/13 at 2:57

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/05/27/obama-thrifty-spending-claim-uses-some-creative-accounting/

By: BenDover on 1/9/13 at 3:04

I've posted all of these before.

http://tinyurl.com/tarpTaranto

By: BenDover on 1/9/13 at 3:05

The whole Obama as President Thrifty is a carefully crafted myth.

By: yogiman on 1/9/13 at 3:09

If he's "thrifty", why are we deeper in debt than all presidents before him combined? And why is he so willing to spend millions on "vacations"?

By: bfra on 1/9/13 at 3:18

Yes Ben you & yogi have posted ALL of your myths before. Junk sites, Fox news, Ben & yogi junk. It has ALL been posted before & is nothing more than junk.

By: Captain Nemo on 1/9/13 at 3:26

Did I get wang number?

By: Captain Nemo on 1/9/13 at 3:29

Ben he is paying for two Bush Wars.

By: slacker on 1/9/13 at 3:36

''The Searchers'' was my favorite John Wang movie.

By: Captain Nemo on 1/9/13 at 3:40

I like that too. He played such an ass in it . Also he play an ass in Red River, which is a favorite of mine too.

By: BenDover on 1/9/13 at 4:20

Facts... all sourced to the actual government sites. Ignore them if you like.

When Bush left office he had a roughly $400 Billion dollar receivable to offset his TARP spending. The projection was for that to go as high a $700B. It, in fact, was mostly repaid and respent in FY 2009 with a net of $158B outstanding which contributed to the fy 2009 numbers. This then was mostly repaid and respent over the next two years.

Here's the CBO document, for heaven's sake. (page 2 column 1 "Total Outlays")

http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/2011_Nov_MBR.pdf

By: BenDover on 1/9/13 at 4:38

CBO Budget and Economic outlook '09 - '19 (prepared Jan '09)

http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/ftpdocs/99xx/doc9957/01-07-outlook.pdf

Page 27 Table 6 TARP projected at $461B for fy '09 As I noted it was really $158B net at the end of FY '09 and the Obama administration spent every dollar of repayment and then spent on top of it to drive the deficit back up to the earlier projection... then they used this spending level as a new baseline, blowing the repayments of the subsequent years in just the same way and adding extraordinary spending on top of it.

By: BenDover on 1/9/13 at 4:51

And this isn't even counting the extraordinary one time bail-out costs for Fannie and Freddie that disrupts the appearance by inflating FY 2009 by $96B when the comparable cost in '10 was $40B and in '11 was none.

All of these, what should have been, natural savings were replaced with new spending to keep the spending levels year over year after fy '09 roughly flat.

It's just pure deception and if the SEC would were to run across a private company doing this without an ample explanation to the investors they would throw the officers of the company under the jail.

By: bfra on 1/9/13 at 5:37

Golly Ben, you should just get yourself a badge & go arrest Obama, for all the laws he has broken. That is, if you could prove anything! Maybe you & yogi can get the combover thump to back you and get all this corrected. It would be amusing to keep up with as you get laughed at daily.

By: pswindle on 1/9/13 at 5:40

Yogi you sound like an old uncle of mine. He would stay on the same subject until we were ready to strangle him. Then we would walk out on him one by one, but he would still talk his crazy talk. There is no proof out there that would prove to you where our President was born.

By: budlight on 1/9/13 at 6:03

Ben, Obama just got fined $350,000 for the campaign funds debacle! largest in history. Al Sharpton got $200,000 fine and one other got $100,000. A woman said to me: "so does that mean they are just speculating that his campaign did that". I laughed. Told her to compare it to a cop who gives you a ticket for 90 mph in a 45 zone. When you go to court, the judge asks for proof. If the cop has proof that you were doing 90 mph and you can't prove otherwise, it's ticket time and fine time for you. So Obama got the ticket and couldn't prove that he wasn't going 90 mph (or collecting illegal campaign funds that went unreported as to WHO gave them - 1200 instances).

Oh well. It's just a Barry thing. I'm sure I have it wrong. So one of ya'll correct me if you will.

By: yogiman on 1/9/13 at 8:03

Sorry, pswindle, but there is proof out there that proves where Obama was born. It's called a birth certificate... in Kenya.

Can you explain why he said he couldn't show his birth certificate because the government of Hawaii wouldn't allow it until he was challenged? Then all of a sudden there it was. Can you explain why the governor of Hawaii who was a friend of Obama's grandparents can't order the state to exhibit it? Can you explain why he hasn't been able to find it in their records? Can you explain why the hospital where he claims to be born won't acknowledge being his birthplace? Can you explain why the hospital he claims as his birthplace didn't exist in 1961 by the name he showed in his fake certificate?

If the Senate was correct in determining to be a natural born citizen both of your parents much be citizens of the nation in which you are born, how can Obama be a natural born citizen being born a British subject because his father was a British subject? When was it determined a natural born citizen was in fact possessed dual-citizenship?

Hang in there, pswindle. You're going to learn the hard way pretty damn soon.

By: yogiman on 1/9/13 at 8:13

Maybe you should read Barry's autobiography, bfra. Maybe you could understand your ignorance on the matter better.

You know, it's funny, I keep repeating Barry's autobiographical points but you don't seem to believe him. Why not?

You and your fellow posters keep repeating you've offered my proof you're correct in claiming I'm wrong but you can't seem to repeat you're "proof". If I was you and your peers, I would throw that fact at me every time I insulted you in my claim for your ignorance.

By: Loner on 1/9/13 at 9:33

End of the day wrap-up:

But first, the discussion questions for today....What are your thoughts on President Obama's recent nominations of John Kerry (State Department), Chuck Hagel (Defense Department) and John Brennan (CIA) to executive roles? Break down the pros and cons of each.

John Kerry (State Department) - Mister Hair-Spray...Life-long Professional Politician... Presidential Loser....Kennedy-wannabe. Perfect choice for a job that is mostly jet-setting and feigned fretting. Trouble is, Barney Frank, recently retired as a US Rep, has asked the MA Gov. to appoint him, to fill Kerry's seat.

Chuck Hagel (Defense Department) - one of the few remaining secular Republicans with a distinguished war record. The GLBTs hate Hagel because of a remark he made 14 years ago and apologised for. The Israel Lobby hates Hagel, because he had the balls to say that he was an American Senator, not an Israeli Senator....I don't think that Chuck apologized for the remark, which, IMO, should have received a standing ovation in the US Senate. I like Hagel....I hope that he has not changed his views about the "special relationship".

John Brennan (CIA) - The NCP used the term, "executive role", to describe Brennan's role in the CIA...a more accurate term might be, "executioner's role"....he is the mastermind behind the new US tactic of assassination by way of armed drone...Obama has signed off on hundreds of extra-judicial killings of suspected "terrorists" over the past 4 years...his Nobel Peace Prize should be rescinded?

Brennan has rationalized his "work", I'm sure...so has BHO.....the ends justify the means etc.

Sadly, the USA is now imitating the Israeli government; the Israelis have been used state-sponsored assassination, as a tool of statecraft, since Sept. 1948....that's when they killed the first UN Peace Envoy, Count Bernadotte.....and they never apologized.

By: Loner on 1/9/13 at 9:38

Typo: s/h/b: "... the Israelis have been using state-sponsored assassination..."

By: Loner on 1/9/13 at 10:00

I spent the day in Albany, NY...the state capital.... went with a bus load of anti-frackers....got on TV....we made lots of noise....Pete Seeger was there and we sang "This Land"...over two thousand anti-frackers were there...less than 100 pro-frackers and they looked quite pathetic in their arrogance born of ignorance....no doubt, some were probably already leasing their lands to frackers, or hoping to do so soon.

We want a total statewide ban on hydro-fracking....and after what I saw today, if the frackers have not already bought out the Gov and the politicians, we ordinary New Yorkers may get what we want.

We want more grapes, to make fine wines...we want to uncork New York, not frack it up....we reject the idea of short term profit for the multinational energy companies, if the cost is permanent degradation of the Empire State's aquifer.

Pumping what would be classified as a "toxic waste" down into the belly of Mother Nature, to flush a little more gas out of the old girl, is dirty business....and we want no part of it....we want a total statewide ban on fracking.