In Defense of the Panetta Pick

HughHewitt ^ | January 06, 2009 | Hugh Hewitt

[PurpleMan]

Panetta's a patriot, an experienced Washington hand, and close to the president-elect. As with many of the other early appointments on the incoming national security team, conservatives should be asking themselves if they ought not to be thanking their stars that the new team appears very realistic about the world they are being called on to lead and the enemies they will be facing.

[Squat]

Leon, isn’t this the guy that ran the cover-up for the clintonistas? He had no clue about Monica, as the chief of staff he should have known and did know everything. Should we expect him to do any different with “0”? He will only be there to cover up for “0”.

[weegee]

I suspect that Panetta will also be covering for the Clintons. Sandy Berger destroyed some documents pertinent to the 9-11 investigation. I suspect that Panetta will be on a similar search and destroy mission.

Add to that a shadow government that operates within the CIA (Valerie Plame et al) who will use their positions to thwart the elected administration if they disagree with the party that happens to win.

I see nothing positive or credible in this nomination.

Reminds me of Louis Freeh and Jamie Gorelick winding up inside of Fannie Mae after botching national security with regards to 9-11.

[frogjerk]

This might be the case, but I am hopeful and not quite as pessimistic as most here I guess

Absolutely nothing wrong with that.

[Bean Counter]

[TommyDale]

"Besides that this is the guy who was the White House COS and he didn’t even know that Bill was getting Bj’s from Monica Lewinsky in the Oval Office...."

He was aware of what was going on. He was smart enough to leave the White House before that scandal made the news.

[PurpleMan]

Ah, Vancouver. Just a short trip to “The Cadillac Cafe.”

[stainlessbanner]

Good comment. At that level, leadership is required. Panetta's good management skills may be better suited for an operations-type role, but not the director position.

Then again, consider who appointed him: a man who has never held a leadership or management position in his life.

[tomnbeverly]

Now you carry his water...?? If he knew (was aware) then he is a crook who lied to the GJ that was investigating it... because he told them he knew nothing....

I suspect as CIA director he will be very good at that Sergeant Schultz impression.... “ I know Nothing, Nothing”...

Just what we need..... (rolls eyes).....

[Doc Savage]

Let me try to answer this as succinctly as possible. ALL liberal picks and decisions are BAD for America. Hewitt is an idiot defending anything these bastards do!

[freekitty]

There is no defense so shut up.

[PurpleMan]

Keeping Gates as SecDef was a bad decision?

[ANGGAPO]

I would be a lot more comfortable if “O” had selected someone with experience in the world of “spytronics” rather than an office manager. Or didn't we go through this drill before?

[PurpleMan]

That wasn’t so successful with Goss. I think that is part of Hewitt’s point.

[x1stcav]

Yeah, he was another mild lefty who ‘grew’ in office.

[Welcome2thejungle]

To be honest, I really don’t think it matters much who BHO selects to be the next CIA Director. The CIA was taken over long about by DemocRAT and liberal/left activists.

The book I am currently reading, “Shadow Warriors: The Untold Story of Traitors, Saboteurs, and the Party of Surrender”, by Kennneth R. Timmerman published in 2007, makes this fact abundandtly clear.

[dools007]

It’s called insulating oneself from the so-called Fairness Doctrine. The Marxist Onada’s administration will do what all totalitarian regimes do—intimidate.

[TommyDale]

I’m not carrying anyone’s water. Those of us who worked in Washington then (including me) certainly knew about Monica Lewinski before Matt Drudge ever broke the story. All I have said is that I wish Leon Panetta well. If he doesn’t do well, we are all toast.

Perhaps Republicans should have given this more thought when they nominated a loser.

[PurpleMan]

“The CIA was taken over long about by DemocRAT and liberal/left activists.”

That’s odd. My friends who work there would deny it.

Then again maybe I and my freinds are really just a bunch of DemocRAT and liberal/left activist losers who want to take this country down the road to socialism...nay...Communism...nay...Shariah law Islamo-fascism!!!

Yea, that’s it.

[mission9]

Panetta was the Clintonista who was supposed to track down the Roswell captured alien technology stuff. If he can crack the Government within a government on his second go around, I am all for it. The truth is out there.

[Welcome2thejungle]

Suggest you read the book I mentioned, it is quite eye opening about the ways of Washington and the way the game is played. One of Timmerman’s main points is that partisan interests all too often trump national security interests in the capital. Let Valery Plame be exhibit A. Another main point of the author is that people ARE policy in Washington. And, too often, the wrong people are in the wrong jobs.

I don’t deny for a minute that there are a lot well meaning, patriotic Americans serving the CIA in the field. It is the people running the place along with jokers running the State Department that worry me.