Comments on: Who Owns the Holdup on Hilda? http://firedoglake.com/2009/01/25/who-owns-the-holdup-on-hilda/ Firedoglake weblog Fri, 17 Feb 2012 05:07:10 -0600 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.2 By: bobschacht http://firedoglake.com/2009/01/25/who-owns-the-holdup-on-hilda/#comment-1807524 bobschacht Mon, 26 Jan 2009 07:18:43 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2009/01/25/who-owns-the-holdup-on-hilda/#comment-1807524 <p>That’s really good news. But I didn’t know Napolitano had DLC ties.</p> <p>Bob in HI<br /> Formerly of AZ</p> That’s really good news. But I didn’t know Napolitano had DLC ties.

Bob in HI
Formerly of AZ

]]> By: Suzanne http://firedoglake.com/2009/01/25/who-owns-the-holdup-on-hilda/#comment-1807462 Suzanne Mon, 26 Jan 2009 06:00:48 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2009/01/25/who-owns-the-holdup-on-hilda/#comment-1807462 <p><a href="http://firedoglake.com/2009/01/25/late-late-nite-fdl-the-changeling/" rel="nofollow">late late nite upstairs</a></p> late late nite upstairs

]]> By: Fern http://firedoglake.com/2009/01/25/who-owns-the-holdup-on-hilda/#comment-1807460 Fern Mon, 26 Jan 2009 05:53:14 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2009/01/25/who-owns-the-holdup-on-hilda/#comment-1807460 <p>Indeed. Forgot about her.</p> Indeed. Forgot about her.

]]> By: Hmmm http://firedoglake.com/2009/01/25/who-owns-the-holdup-on-hilda/#comment-1807457 Hmmm Mon, 26 Jan 2009 05:48:02 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2009/01/25/who-owns-the-holdup-on-hilda/#comment-1807457 <p>OT — <a href="http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/1/25/174625/429/635/688901" rel="nofollow">Cuddly Rumsfeld</a>, shudder!!!</p> OT — Cuddly Rumsfeld, shudder!!!

]]> By: ChristineEdmonson http://firedoglake.com/2009/01/25/who-owns-the-holdup-on-hilda/#comment-1807454 ChristineEdmonson Mon, 26 Jan 2009 05:41:21 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2009/01/25/who-owns-the-holdup-on-hilda/#comment-1807454 <p>Oh, Rubber Soul, nice!</p> Oh, Rubber Soul, nice!

]]> By: ChristineEdmonson http://firedoglake.com/2009/01/25/who-owns-the-holdup-on-hilda/#comment-1807453 ChristineEdmonson Mon, 26 Jan 2009 05:39:27 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2009/01/25/who-owns-the-holdup-on-hilda/#comment-1807453 <p>So, Teddy,<br /> Perhaps a book deal might be in the works — boy I’d love that day.</p> So, Teddy,
Perhaps a book deal might be in the works — boy I’d love that day.

]]> By: newtonusr http://firedoglake.com/2009/01/25/who-owns-the-holdup-on-hilda/#comment-1807452 newtonusr Mon, 26 Jan 2009 05:38:23 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2009/01/25/who-owns-the-holdup-on-hilda/#comment-1807452 <p>It didn’t take, sure. And we always knew that was possible, damned likely in fact. But still… That was the last time I drank tequila.<br /> So if Shooter gets snagged, it’s Revolver, Rubber Soul, Abbey Road and Herradura.</p> It didn’t take, sure. And we always knew that was possible, damned likely in fact. But still… That was the last time I drank tequila.
So if Shooter gets snagged, it’s Revolver, Rubber Soul, Abbey Road and Herradura.

]]> By: mercury http://firedoglake.com/2009/01/25/who-owns-the-holdup-on-hilda/#comment-1807451 mercury Mon, 26 Jan 2009 05:38:16 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2009/01/25/who-owns-the-holdup-on-hilda/#comment-1807451 <p>Still don’t get the “naive post-partisan” meme re Obama. To me it feels more like a very canny strategy: EVERYONE would love post partisanship if it actually could happen, and most Americans who aren’t as savvy as FDL regulars, for example, think that it’s an ideal worth striving for. If Obama could achieve it, if Repubs actually cooperated, great! Not gonna happen? Okay. Then some moderates peel off and weaken the GOP? Great! </p> <p>Not gonna happen? Well give them enough rope, let their idiotic obstructionist policies get plenty of air, then label them as such using the unprecedented bully pulpit he has and pass the legislation without them, if possible. Great! </p> <p>At this point, no one can say he hasn’t made a good faith effort to include them in the process, giving him plenty of cover and by the way — fulfilling his campaign promises of bipartisanship. Everyone thought he was a mealy-mouthed kumbaya singer up against Hillary and McCain, and what happened? He didn’t even NEED to hit back. They literally punched themselves out because he didn’t flinch from his stated principle and people saw it. His words actually matched his deeds.</p> <p> His first actions in office have been in the right direction thus far — why would he fatally compromise on something as big as the economic package when he’s demonstrating smarts on EFCA, on emissions, on Guantanamo — JUST to ‘appease’ Repubs? He’s got a 71 percent approval rating. He’s got the wind at his back.</p> <p>I can’t imagine that he and his team haven’t been gaming out mulitple scenarios here. There’s no reason, with the hand he’s got, that his first thoughts would be abject capitulation before he’s even been in office a week. </p> <p>I know many of you think this is yet another ‘HE’S SMARTER THAN US!!’ post, but really, do you have to be that smart to work this out? Anybody who read a few books on strategy could do it, and I’m pretty sure that both Obama and Axelrod have.</p> Still don’t get the “naive post-partisan” meme re Obama. To me it feels more like a very canny strategy: EVERYONE would love post partisanship if it actually could happen, and most Americans who aren’t as savvy as FDL regulars, for example, think that it’s an ideal worth striving for. If Obama could achieve it, if Repubs actually cooperated, great! Not gonna happen? Okay. Then some moderates peel off and weaken the GOP? Great!

Not gonna happen? Well give them enough rope, let their idiotic obstructionist policies get plenty of air, then label them as such using the unprecedented bully pulpit he has and pass the legislation without them, if possible. Great!

At this point, no one can say he hasn’t made a good faith effort to include them in the process, giving him plenty of cover and by the way — fulfilling his campaign promises of bipartisanship. Everyone thought he was a mealy-mouthed kumbaya singer up against Hillary and McCain, and what happened? He didn’t even NEED to hit back. They literally punched themselves out because he didn’t flinch from his stated principle and people saw it. His words actually matched his deeds.

His first actions in office have been in the right direction thus far — why would he fatally compromise on something as big as the economic package when he’s demonstrating smarts on EFCA, on emissions, on Guantanamo — JUST to ‘appease’ Repubs? He’s got a 71 percent approval rating. He’s got the wind at his back.

I can’t imagine that he and his team haven’t been gaming out mulitple scenarios here. There’s no reason, with the hand he’s got, that his first thoughts would be abject capitulation before he’s even been in office a week.

I know many of you think this is yet another ‘HE’S SMARTER THAN US!!’ post, but really, do you have to be that smart to work this out? Anybody who read a few books on strategy could do it, and I’m pretty sure that both Obama and Axelrod have.

]]> By: Teddy Partridge http://firedoglake.com/2009/01/25/who-owns-the-holdup-on-hilda/#comment-1807450 Teddy Partridge Mon, 26 Jan 2009 05:37:20 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2009/01/25/who-owns-the-holdup-on-hilda/#comment-1807450 <p>I bet Harriet Grant (Mrs Scooter) has been chewing on some scenery since Inauguration Day came and went without a pardon.</p> I bet Harriet Grant (Mrs Scooter) has been chewing on some scenery since Inauguration Day came and went without a pardon.

]]> By: ChristineEdmonson http://firedoglake.com/2009/01/25/who-owns-the-holdup-on-hilda/#comment-1807449 ChristineEdmonson Mon, 26 Jan 2009 05:34:07 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2009/01/25/who-owns-the-holdup-on-hilda/#comment-1807449 <p>Heh,heh, “like when Scooter got convicted” — that, newt, is indeed a very special occasion.</p> Heh,heh, “like when Scooter got convicted” — that, newt, is indeed a very special occasion.

]]>