12 thoughts on “Hagel’s Performance”

  1. There’s an old saying: B’s hire C’s and C’s hire D’s. Interpolating backwards from the Kerry and Hagel nominations is left as an exercise for the reader.

  2. That’s actually the reason for the composition of his entire cabinet, and vice president. Also, good managers hire people who are better than them for the position. Of course, in the president’s case, he could do that just by tossing a dart at a phone book. He has to work to find people worse than him. It seems to be one of the few talents he has.

    1. Answer me this. The President’s performance in Debate 1 was supposed to be so bad that even Chuck Todd was proclaiming it to be a major setback, but from the clips I saw afterward, it was the same President declaiming the same shibboleths and platitudes as he always does, but whatever, the President was said to have done poorly.

      So what happened in Debates 2 and 3, which arguably were a draw? Why didn’t/couldn’t/wouldn’t Mr. Romney “close the sale”? The story was that Mr. Romney invested a tremendous effort in debate preparation to counter the summertime ads that he did not effectively counter before for whatever technical/strategic/tactical reason. Where was the follow through?

      Did, like, the President decide to get a night’s sleep those other two times? Did his team “get” to the moderators? Did he do a minimum of perfunctory debate prep, and Mr. Obama is a smart enough man that even a once-over of the briefing books and position papers was enough? So, what really happened?

      And finally, this existential question. Would we have been better off with Mr. Romney, even if he were as “severely Conservative” as claimed, or would the media oppose him as vigorously as they have helped Mr. Obama? With a different President but the same media, in those famous words, what difference would it make?

      1. My bet? Mittens’ campaign staff (many of whom had built their rep helping President McCain win his election in ’08… oh wait) told him to back off, that he was “alienating independant voters”, and that he should concentrate on ‘looking presidential’)… and the silly git believed them.
        So the question for me is, did these guys give Mittens bad advice because they were just that lame- or was it another Steve Schmidt Special?

      1. How could they be better? First off, from a managerial standpoint no dog on the team can be faster than the lead dog even if they have the capability. The President sets the pace and the policy for his Cabinet and bureau heads; they dance to his tune and he can yank their leash when they step out of line.
        Second is Obama-specific. Don’t forget thatt this is the guy who, out of all the Democrat governors and congressmen available (not to mention lesser lights like state and federal AG’s) to choose as his veep, picked… Joe Biden. There’s no way he’s gonna pick any subordinate who he thinks is brighter or more ambitious than himself; there’s only room for one star in this show.

        1. Joe Biden was picked to be impeachment and assassination insurance. The words “President Joe Biden” should strike fear into any rational person’s heart.

          1. That’s what the Obamarrhoids want us to think, that Biden — that anybody — could possibly be worse than the little god-king.

            I don’t buy it, and never have.

        2. Yes, but . . .

          Hard to believe, but in some respects, no, in many respects, Joe Biden is more ambitious than the President. Seriously.

          Has the President ever been successful negotiating with anyone, ranging from the Iranians through to the House Republicans, although the President seems to think the House Republicans are the Iranians? Who, in the end, represented the White House on the “Fiscal Cliff” deal?

          There are some bottom-barrel bargain-basement folks who make the President look good. Secretary Sibelius comes to kind. But even Secretary Panetta, Secretary Clinton, and Secretary Geithner are stars, in relative terms.

  3. We could have a better government by simply firing everyone from the President on down and choosing our officials by means of a quadrennial random drawing of Social Security numbers.

    Which would, of course, have ruled out President Obama in the first place LOL I KID BECAUSE I LOVE

Comments are closed.