The truth about Rahm boy? ...

Both versions cannot be accurate. What is probably the dismal truth about his stewardship of the Obama vessel can be found toward the end of last August’s Times story, which showed the chief of staff steering without any rudder of principle, and playing captain in policy and political waters too deep for him. He is largely responsible for the fiasco of financial reform, the soured deal with the pharmaceutical and insurance interests on health reform, and the botched retreat from the president’s promise to close Gitmo.

Whether and how to change the White House staff is a problem that Obama will have to face eventually. Even sooner, however, the president must decide whether to accept Emanuel’s insistence that he had nothing to do with the Post articles, which have inflicted real damage by depicting Obama as a weak and hapless foil to his brilliant deputy. If he cannot disprove that portrait, his presidency will continue to drift.

Obama, Reid, Lieberman. So are they evil or just plain stupid? ...

Who knows for sure? The only thing that is apparent to me is that Obama is no more fit to be President of the United States of America than was Bush the Lesser.

From TBogg at firedoglake.com:

So all I really wanted for Christmas was a Karl Rove of our own who would make all of our Obama wishes come true, even if he had to kick Evan Bayh’s mushy skull in to accomplish them. Someone who, I had hoped, would make Joe Lieberman’s life something akin to a hemorrhoidectomy gone horribly terribly wrong.

Such is not the case:

The White House wants Reid to hand Joe Lieberman the farm.

An aide briefed on discussions with the White House says that there would be no story if Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel hadn’t interceded. The aide confirmed an account, reported by Huffington Post, that Emanuel visited Reid personally, telling him to cut a deal with Lieberman.

Then the aide provided more detail.

Emanuel didn’t just leave it to Reid to find a solution. Emanuel specifically suggested Reid give Lieberman the concessions he seeks on issues like the Medicare buy-in and triggers.

“It was all about ‘do what you’ve got to do to get it done. Drop whatever you’ve got to drop to get it done,” the aide said. All of Emanuel’s prescriptions, the source said, were aimed at appeasing Lieberman–not twisting his arm.

If Rahm Emmanuel is all he was supposed to be, we can safely assume that the Obama White House either never gave a shit about health care reform, or they managed health care reform so horrifically and incompetently that they are now willing to settle for a “win”, no matter how meager.

I hope they enjoy their Pyrrhic victory because they just burned the base.

Senate and WH bozos really working hard ...

... to figure out how to nix or emasculate the public option without getting killed (politically speaking).

White House, Senate Principals Discuss Public Option, But Reach No Decisions--Talks Continue Tomorrow

What a dilemma! Poor babies. Do they do their jobs as representatives of the voters or do they do the bidding of their corporate masters. The script just isn't so easy to write as usual. Which will they choose? It's obvious what they want to do ... but what will they do?

It's all Rahm's fault ...

emptywheel writes:

...

Back when Obama picked Rahm, I grudgingly accepted it. If, as seemed to be the plan, Obama picked Rahm because of his perceived ability to get things done legislatively, it at least signaled an intent to avoid the legislative problems Clinton had. Turns out, though (and I guess this was predictable), Rahm brought a legislative strategy that might be appropriate for 2004, but is a disaster given the majorities we have in 2009. And then Rahm failed to even effectively implement that outdated legislative strategy (someone at the surreal midget bar experience--someone who has a lot of respect for Rahm--called it "political malpractice").

And in exchange for this political malpractice, a tight, professional campaign turned literally overnight into a leaky sieve.

Within short order after his selection, Rahm was working hard to jerry-rig his replacement to make it easy for him to swoop back into the House in two years to take away Pelosi's gavel. As a result, Greg Craig was forced to jump through some ill-advised hoops to distract the press from Rahm's conversations with Rod Blagojevich; you can be sure Rahm's conversations with Blago will continue to be a liability as that case gets closer to trial.

But, we were promised, Rahm would get us health care. What that really meant though is that we had to clear the political landscape to give Rahm his opportunity to get us health care. And instead of doing the legislative work to get that done, Rahm and the loathsome Jim Messina have been trying to cut deals with big health care corporations to turn this into a welfare program for them. As even that effort is beginning to go south, Rahm has (predictably) already switched into scapegoat mode, trying to blame his utter failure on health care on someone else.

Against that background, consider again the parallel scapegoating directed at Greg Craig and Eric Holder for their efforts to come clean on torture.

I have no doubt about Rahm Emanuel's culpability. But Rahm isn't President and just what has the President been doing all this time about one of his MAJOR campaign promises? Apparently either 1) agreeing with Rahm or 2) ignoring what Rahm was doing or 3) refusing to believe his 'lying' eyes. Irrespective of what his motivations were to allow Rahm to destroy all progress, Barack Obama has done just that. To concentrate on Emanuel alone is to relegate Obama to the status of George W. Bush, an immature, ignorant, arrogant bully. Even with Obama's apparent determination to undermine everything he was elected to do, Obama does not deserve to be relegated to the status of Bush. Give credit where credit is due. The outcomes which we deem as failures, many of which have been stage managed by Emanuel, must be attributed to Obama. Obama has done nothing to change Emanuels behavior. Either Obama wanted the outcome or he didn't. Either way it's Obama's doing and he should get the credit. As should Emanuel, but of course we know Emanuel never had a good outcome, that is good for the citizens of this country, in mind. What Obama thinks is less clear. But what Obama does is very clear. US President Barack Obama let Emanuel do his worst.

Really, how could we have imagined that Obama cared about anything ...

... to do with the good of the populace once he installed Rahm Emanuel as his personal enforcer?

Rahm: White House Open To Dropping Public Option

In a few short months, Obama's words and his actions have become diametrically opposed.

Pretty picture ...

Larisa Alexandrovna at at-Largely writes:

"The role of government in the modern era has become rather clear to me: it acts as a broker for the transfer of public money to private hands. There is no actual governing."

Certainly, Obama-baby is proving her point. So far Obama has lied about most things he professed that he would do or that he believed in and for the rest he has Rahm Emanuel to ensure that his fake proposals to Congress get sabotaged. Being personally less offensive than Torturer Bush doesn't make Obama a good-guy by default, no matter how much one may wish it so. Obama may not have taken up the torture-banner completely yet but he is in the process, or at least very close, to doing so. Since open-government Obama appears to relish secrecy almost as much as Bush did, it's possible that Obama has already done so.

Not much hope so far ...

What kind of President will Obama choose to be ...

... now that bi-partisanship has killed any meaningful stimulus.

Thanks Dems: Obama, Reid, Pelosi, Hoyer, Rahm Emanuel. It was obvious that the Thugs and the Media Braindead intended to drive the country over a cliff and you all just waffled around failing to communicate or get a handle on your own arrogant assumption that you don't need to talk to the people you are Constitutionally supposed to serve.

ADDED: Presidents Nelson, Collins Upbeat After Saving Bipartisanship

ADDED II: "... why do Democratic Senator Ben Nelson and Republican Senator Susan Collins hate American children, American firefighters, American poor, American women, American scientists and other such undesirables? Oh, they love banks and giving OUR money to financial fraudsters. But money for something like Violence Against Women programs, and suddenly everyone cries the Socialists are coming."

---

---

Today's QUOTES:

... The last thing that is disqualifying in Washington is an eagerness to profit off of one's political connections. ... --Bob Dole's perfect description of how Washington works by Glenn Greenwald, salon.com Obama may be able to get a few Republican Senators to go along with his plan; or he can get a lot of Republican votes by, in effect, becoming a Republican. There is no middle ground. --Bipartisan bromides by Paul Krugman, NY Times The people who vote for cuts on the poor after they voted to enrich the already obscenely rich should be tossed into the seventh pit of hell. Would that they could experience the hell they've created for others. --Open Thread by Mary, The Left Coaster Conservatism - the real kind, the kind we've endured at least since Nixon - isn't an intellectual movement in need of reform. It is extreme right thuggery epitomized by the bloated face of a fat, cigar-chomping, drug addict who makes fun of Parkinson victims and proudly boasts that he wants the president of the United States to fail. --What Is The Appeal Of Conservatism? by tristero, Hullabaloo

---

---

Bad cop, good cop? ...

I think in the long run a manager/administrator/president that utilizes an amoral enforcer in order that the manager/administrator/president can work at being perceived as such a nice guy/gal is detrimental to the workings of the office/company/country.

Rahm Throws Pelosi Under The Bus To Save Stimulus Bill

Kick 'em while they're down ...

Kick 'em while they're down ...

This post at TPM Cafe gives me the impression that the above is Rahm Emanuel's philosophy of life.

How very Republican of him ...

Rahm Emanuel?

I posted Rahm Emanuel needs to go ... in March of last year.

I realize that someone who is lousy in one job can be outstanding in another. Sometimes it works out that way if one doesn't use Bush the Destroyer's administration as a model.

Instead of blocking and fouling legislation as a Congress Critter, ethically challenged Rahm Emanuel will be Obama's Chief of Staff.

There must be some irony in there somewhere ...

Rahm Emanuel needs to go ...

Read this: Emanuel Blocks Dem Debate on Trade Deal As White House Signals Real Agenda

Who's paying Rahm Emanuel off and why in Hell does he have any 'leadership role' in the Democratic Party at all. Isn't he also one of those Congresscritters who is resisting tightening up the ethics rules so they can personally cash in at the taxpayers expense as they sell legislation to the highest bidder?