Equally ridiculous...

Just because newspapers are going out of business and magazines are laying off reporters left and right, doesn't mean that they aren't continuing to produce material that's 100% USDA Grade horse--

--never mind.

Obama may be stuck with anti-pot crusading GOP US Attorney.

Buchanan's indication that she's not leaving -- as all US Attorneys customarily do following a change in administration -- does not mean her continued employment with the federal government is assured. Obama, like every president, has the authority to hire and fire federal prosecutors for virtually any reason; however, he may face some criticism if he moves quickly to oust Buchanan.

After all, Democrats have spent the last two years criticizing President Bush's politicization of the Justice Department and routinely firing US Attorneys with whom he disagreed. While the two situations -- assuming Obama gets rid of Buchanan -- would not be directly comparable, it's not hard to imagine the cries of "hypocrisy" one would hear from the same right wing pundits whose defense of executive power to this point has been nearly boundless.

This is a stupid story. One, this Prosecutor serves at the pleasure of the President, so Obama can, and probably will fire her. Two, if someone wants to compare this to the U.S. Attorney's Scandal, let 'em. It'll tell more about the critic than the criticism. Three, you never, ever dictate terms to the President of the United States if you're not a world leader of equal stature...


Obama's Afghanistan Dilemma: "Growing Dissent" On More Troops.

Afghanistan, the so-called 'good war,' was and remains a dangerous theater. During the closing months of the presidential campaign it was taken as gospel that America needed to send more troops there. Even John McCain, initially skittish on the notion, came to argue that a greater U.S. military buildup was needed.

And yet, over the last few weeks, the progressive community that once pleaded for greater resources and attention to Afghanistan has begun to raise concerns about the idea that additional forces could change that country's increasingly dire situation.

Sen. Russ Feingold launched a major salvo just weeks before the election, when he penned an op-ed in the Christian Science Monitor, questioning the wisdom of sending more troops to Afghanistan. He was pre-dated by former National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski, who warned about the United States repeating the Soviet Union's ill-thought-out efforts in that region, during an interview with the Huffington Post. On Monday, the scales tipped even further, when the chief of the United Nations mission in Afghanistan warned that a re-intervention into the country would be pointless if not done with deep cultural sensitivities.

And...

"There is a growing dissent," Caroline Wadhams, a Senior National Security Policy Analyst for the left-leaning Center for American Progress. "I think around town there is new thinking: 'Well, what do we actually want to achieve?' The fact that they are doing all those strategic reviews reveals we are suffering the symptom of the same [foreign policy] problems [of the past]: no one is sure what our objectives are and what we should do now."

Okay. The objectives? Really, you're asking this? It's on the transition website.

Obama and Biden will refocus American resources on the greatest threat to our security -- the resurgence of al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan and Pakistan. They will increase our troop levels in Afghanistan, press our allies in NATO to do the same, and dedicate more resources to revitalize Afghanistan’s economic development. Obama and Biden will demand the Afghan government do more, including cracking down on corruption and the illicit opium trade.

Last I checked going back into Afghanistan was all about getting Usama Bin Laden. Last I checked, this was a good thing.


Selecting Hilary Clinton as Secretary of State and Obama's Premise of Change

Given the Clinton's connections in Washington and it seems almost impossible for Hillary to just be a messenger and not an architect of US foreign policy.

Not as moronic an article as was sold by the headline, but I'm starting to wonder...am I the only one who heard the man say "the change comes from me??"


Obama little help to Dems post-election

President-elect Barack Obama has kept quiet on the three Congressional races that have been decided since he was elected.

There is the impending Global Economic Meltdown, picking a Cabinet and moving his family; coupled with the fact that Bill Clinton actually did hit the campaign trail in 1992 for runoff candidates, much to his everlasting regret. If you're trying to change the tone in Washington, change the tone, don't start off by continuing the campaign.

Also, where the hell does Politico get off offering Republicans space for "ideas" pieces? Are they a News organization or a Advocacy Group?