E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers, R-Mich., did little to tamp down speculation that he's under consideration to become the next CIA director, saying he could neither confirm nor deny conversations with the Obama administration about the vacant position.
Speaking Tuesday on WJR radio in Detroit, Rogers, a former FBI agent who's helmed the intelligence panel for the past two years, acknowledged that his name has been among those in public discussion to replace David Petraeus as leader of the CIA. But he said he hd "every expectation" he would continue to serve as Intelligence Committee chairman.
A New York Times report following Petraeus's resignation in an adultery scandal named Rogers — along with deputy CIA Director Michael Morrell, Obama counterterrorism adviser John O. Brennan and former National Counterterrorism Center Director Michael Leiter — as potential picks to helm the CIA.
Recommended:Obama calls Egyptian president third time in 24 hours
Obama has shown a willingness during his first term to name Republicans to top security roles. For instance, he continued to involve Petraeus — a GOP favorite whose tenure begun under President George W. Bush — in security efforts, and kept Robert Gates as his defense secretary until mid-2011.
What follows is a lightly edited transcript of relevant portions of Rogers's conversation Tuesday with WJR host Paul W. Smith:
Paul W. Smith: If you don't want the job, you can say so here and now, but it seems like you'd be a perfect fit for that kind of position, with your background.
Rep. Mike Rogers (R): Certainly, that name has been bandied about. They're going through a process now for that position. I have every expectation I will be the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, which is a great job, it's where I want to be, and it's the kind of worth that I think is important for the country.
[…]
Smith: Have you had any conversation that you can share with us, without getting into the details, regarding the position of director of the CIA with people who could be involved in that kind of decision-making process?
Rogers: I would not be able to confirm nor deny any discussions on the process they may be going through on the CIA director. I can tell you I have every expectation that I will be the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee in January.
[…]
Smith: Anything else, Mr. Director — I mean, congressman — that we need to talk about?
Rogers (laughing): It's going to be chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, a role that I'm honored and proud to serve in. And there's just a ton of work we're going to have to do in the next year.
Smith: That doesn't mean you wouldn't accept the position, should it be offered.
Rogers: A) I doubt that's likely to happen, and B) I think it's important to have somebody that can walk in the office and sit down and have a level of trust.
Leave a Comment:
I think it's important to have somebody that can walk in the office and sit down and have a level of trust.
I don't get what this means. Does he mean the President wouldn't be able to trust him as CIA head, because he's a member of the infamous Republican Party? Yeah, I wouldn't trust him either.
I disagree, I think Obama trusts many Republicans as well as Democrats. It's experience that counts in this position. We don't need a newbie. Also, we need someone that can discern and balance privacy as well as information sharing. That's a sophisticated candidate.
I'm not saying this guy is "the bomb" as a candidate, only that it's very okay to consider anyone from either party with the experience needed.
I was wondering about that too, Ames. Is he saying the President wouldn't trust him, or he wouldn't trust the President? Or the rest of the CIA wouldn't trust him? Or nobody in their right minds would trust a member of Congress? Or nobody in Washington trusts anyone any more?
Then again, if Congressman Rogers was a former FBI agent, maybe he hung out with Scully and Mulder.
So in other words, "Trust no one".....
That's the ticket. Put a partisan Republican mole in a prestegious position. Might as well put McCain or Graham there. Put McCain at CIA and Graham as Ambassador to Libya. You can bet Republican's would massively increase the budget for Consulate security. At least in Libya.
Sorry about this but I want to get it out.
Off topic, I would urge everyone that will to support the labor movement by Wall Mart employees this weekend and shop black Fri some place else and boycott Wally world.
Just Sunday this azzclown was dropping suggestions on Meet the Press that "maybe Obama knew about the Petraeus investigation" well before it was released to the public, even after repeated explanations as to why that WOULD NOT be the case, how for investigative integrity the White House is not privy to what the Justice Dept is investigating when it comes to people in govt positions being investigated. I wouldn't trust this guy to be non partisan whatsoever.
And since Mr. Obama will end up throwing the next person under the bus, it makes sense that he would name someone who would cost him no political capital!
So in other words, "Trust no one"....
yup, who says spending one's youth watching TV had no practical purpose!
(LOL, I love you JoAnne!)
Never happen.....the appointment will be a Progressive~Liberal~Democrat or a campaign supporter.
If I had a vote in this, I'd pick the current Deputy and Acting Director, Michael Morrell.
Ido, was Petraeus a "progressive-liberal-democrat or a campaign supporter?" Thought not.
Hey, Amy B. Portland, ME
Mr. Rogers always has our trust ... if all kids trust him..was he the main character of a PBS show - 'Mr. Rogers.'
You have a point, Jimmy Carter proved you couldn't trust the neo cons in the CIA. They actually orchestrated a gun deal when Reagan Bush were running in 1980.
It's difficult to understand putting a conservative in charge of anything. For the last 12 years look at what they've contributed. Failure, stagnation, socialism, decline, obstructionism, divisiveness, high unemployment, denial, nonacceptance of others, all culminating in the last election with even more failure.
Actually Amy this guy Rogers is a hawk with a tin foil hat. A terrorist danger behind every rock. He is Congressman in the district adjacent to mine. He was trying to blow the horn years ago about the danger of Iran getting a nuclear weapon.
I wrote in the newspaper editorials that although I was not keen on another country trying to go nuclear, I didn't think Iran was a threat because they lacked a delivery system (ICBM) to get the nuke to Detroit. I didn't think it a relevant threat then, and I don't now. I wrote that I didn't think Ahmadinejad had an arm strong enough to throw a nuke here. I'm sure Rogers giggled about that one......
Palin would be a good fit, one thing for sure - see could see Russia from the Middle East !!!
Pres. Obama is willing to cross the aisle and appoint a GOP for the CIA post? WOW...Mr. President...you are so nice to the defeated and wounded elephant.
In actuality, Petraeus wasn't liked as director by the CIA, since he wasn't one of them to begin with. The CIA prefers to have one of their own as director than anyone from outside the agency. For this reason, I suspect Morrell will be the next director. Since Rogers worked for the FBI, the agency would dislike him for being an outsider. This is the norm in the CIA.
There are many reasons why the CIA is the worst place to go across the aisle. Remember the movie "The Good Shepherd"... and that was only back story. The real story is Carter and the Iran Contras that kept American hostages (another Embassy story) in Iran LONGER so that Reagan could beat Carter in 1980; another reason we don't really trust the C.I.A. When the C.I.A. does something good, the Republicans "out" them (such as Valerie Plame who had a network that proved there were no "weapons of mass destruction" in Iraq, but her network couldn't gather data after the cover was blown... by Cheney's friend Rove). But if there is information that somebody else "outs," those people will go to jail for life.
Then there is this particular candidate: as said above, one of the tin-foil tea-party Republicans, certainly not somebody that I would want holding a knife aiming at my back; that's not what "got your back" should mean.
The word "compromise" is supposed to mean something; not go right of center, and give away even more than that, so that they end up with people who are sure to sabotage every effort to govern. That is the reason there is gridlock: people sabotaging each other just for political points, and all caused by this fake lovey "going across the aisle." Pres. Obama tried this in his first four years; it just doesn't work.
Mr. Obama with all due respect sir. You can make your entire cabinet out of Republicans and they still wouldn't work with you.
What? Now Obama is offering 30 pieces of CYA Silver to pay off the Republicons for having his own Secret CIA Prisons in Benghazi-Gate?
Hmm here's a Reality Check on what I was posting about Benghazi-Gate almost two weeks ago.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=izYMklKUcpk&feature=player_embedded
Folks the truth is out there you just have to stop listening to the Corporate Media and Wall Street Banksters and their Corrupt Political Minions and their Self Serving Spoon Fed Spin on the Truth!
Most Americans no long believe or trust the Corporate Media anyway....http://www.gallup.com/poll/157589/distrust-media-hits-new-high.aspx
Impeach Obama 2012 for Covering Up Murder and send him to the Hague in 2013 for "Not War" Crimes!
"Political language is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind. " ~George Orwell
I bet you spit when you talk.
1. The man is former FBI. That means to me he has some level of integrity when beyond the shadow of Grover Norquist. I don't know how partisan he is. Normally folks in the intel community tend to shy away from partisan politics.
2. The last high profile Republican the President hired and sent to China did just fine (not withstanding his campaign in the last primaries).
The one nice thing about being President, if he doesn't work out he can fire him.
Isn't the term "GOP Intelligence Chairman" an oxymoron?
I don't trust any of the political establishment. Libertarians, Republicans, Democrats, Independents. None of them.
The government must be pissed at me for my strong views on so many subjects regarding fixing the wrongs that are occurring in this country and posting them online....
Currently if I utilize GOOGLE to go to the Newsvine website it will not allow for me to go, no matter what.
In the same instance, I am able to go to any other website on the web accept for this site using GOOGLE.
Apparently because my opinions are usually pretty strong, they seek to keep me quite by not allowing me to go onto the Newsvine site.
If this is occurring to anyone else please place a post to record the instance so that it can later be used as a reference for others who encounter this illegal action!!!!
You can't keep me quite even if you kill me....
LOL....
PLAYA.....
As far as this article is concerned.
We spent well over 5 years utilizing blogs to show the true colors of the REPUBLICAN party.
Just like they demonized blacks and others for many years we were able to turn the tables on them and show there true intent as well as demonize them in front of the WORLD.
Now I always said that I loved everyone including the GOP'ers. Who I believed lacked the compassion to call themselves human beings. But, although I love them I will not allow for them to continue to disrespect others and think that they won't be held responsible.
I am a strong believer of what goes around comes around. And we the people of the world are coming around to make a mockery of those who think that they can do wrong to others and know that they are doing wrong yet continue to do it.
If you don't know you are doing wrong, you get a pass from me the first time but once i INFORM YOU IT IS YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO CHANGE WHAT YOU ARE DOING and began doing things right!!!!!
I don't care what entity you are and or how big you are.
You will be confronted!!!!
Myself and those like me fighting for Right are like Bay Bay's Kids,
"WE DON'T DIE, WE MULTIPLY!!!!!!"""""""
Shouts out to Julian Assange....
shouts out to Anonymous....
Shouts out to all of you who do something everyday to make the world a better place for us and those who come after us.
Oh yeah, we still don't trust Republicans or this congressman so, "No" you can not be head of the CIA in this country.
PLAYA.....
A nation's culture resides in the hearts and in the soul of its people. ~Mahatma Gandhi
Pssst Peel-Layer....It's Obamney and the Democrats that are attacking Julian Assange....http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/aug/21/why-us-is-out-to-get-assange
And it is Obamney and the Democrats that are attacking US using Anonymous as their "Excuse"....http://www.secure128.com/report--republicans--democrats-both-view-cybersecurity-in-similar-light.aspx
And it is Obamney and the Democrats that violated the Constitution be attacking peaceful protesters in Occupy Wall Street Movements across America....http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jul/25/nypd-occupy-protests-report
And it was Obamney and the Democrats who has Secret CIA Prisons in Benghazi-Gate....http://www.infowars.com/why-did-cia-director-petraeus-suddenly-resign-and-why-was-the-u-s-ambassador-to-libya-murdered/
And it was Obamney that passed the NDAA2012 with Indefinite Detention of Americans in America....http://www.allgov.com/news/top-stories/obama-signs-into-law-indefinite-detention-of-americans-without-trial?news=843828
And it was Obamney and the Democrats who Authorized the "New" Patriot Act....http://townhall.com/tipsheet/kevinglass/2011/05/27/patriot_act_reauthorization_passes
And it is Obamney that is responsible for the endless "Drone Wars" that kill 5 times more civilians than it kills "Terrorists" whatever that means.....
http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/25/world/asia/pakistan-us-drone-strikes/index.html
And it was Obamney and the Democrats who started their very own "Not War" in Libya using Al Qaeda.....
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8391632/Libya-the-West-and-al-Qaeda-on-the-same-side.html
And it was Obamney and the Democrats who keep trying to start their very own "Not War" in Syria using Al Qaeda.....
http://www.cfr.org/syria/al-qaedas-specter-syria/p28782
Yet all you can do Spray the same ole Wall Street Political Game of "Divide To Conquer" Democrats are "For The People"? Hahahahaha........
In 2012 a person would have be a "Intentionally Naive or Clueless" Poster to continue spouting just Corporate Supporting dribble!
It is said that if you know your enemies and know yourself, you will not be imperiled in a hundred battles; if you do not know your enemies but do know yourself, you will win one and lose one; if you do not know your enemies nor yourself, you will be imperiled in every single battle.~Sun Tzu
I think I agree with you, Amy. We don't seem to be having much luck with Republicans lately. If this guy is chosen I sure do hope he remembers to keep "it" in his pants and not be moved by some twit who bats her eyelashes his way.
While it is incumbent on the next candidate to "keep it in his pants", if it were a female candidate (I believe there are probably women that are qualified) the same rules would apply.
Yes, Eric, I agree with that. But, it is actually a rarity for a woman in such a position to behave in such a way that men in leadership roles, on both sides, have conducted themselves. I think Rachel Maddow did a segment on this very topic about a week ago.
All you have to do is google the subject and you will see that the precentage of cheating women in positions of authority is way above the current Male percentage. The percentage of men cheating is going down and the percentage of women cheating is going up. Women are more ruthless when it comes to this. This is why men, always hire a female divorce attorney.
Eric-913730...."While it is incumbent on the next candidate to "keep it in his pants", if it were a female candidate (I believe there are probably women that are qualified) the same rules would apply."
Yep, those women should "keep it in
hisher pants".Another Progressive living on another planet.
Sorry, but progressives are residents of Earth. You are the ones living in the reverse parallel time continuum. You just haven't realized it yet. Nov. 6th should have provided a clue!
Paul Ryan would be a good choice for Ambassador to Libya ( "With Out Security" ) remember the GOP saying how brave Ryan was ??????
Shesafatone: Sources?
"If" this guy is chosen... God Forbid. Put somebody in charge of intelligence with some intelligence: that means not a Republican.
Are you trying to imply only Republicans cheat on their spouses? Really?
You have to be grateful that the administration is far less party-centric and biased against the opposition than many of it's supporters.
President Clinton famously selected qualified, moderate, Republicans for National security posts too.
Vilifying and demonizing the opposition in every post while decrying the lack of bipartisanship in our government belies a blind spot of immense size. Again, kudos to the President for his inclusive approach to redesigning his cabinet, and may it be a lesson to both sides...
Romney is not a candidate for this position. :-)
Yeah, I understand that Obama had to say certain things to rally the base, but at the end of the day he's an intelligent guy who knows that the leftism promoted by the average person on the street would run this country into the ground in a matter of hours.
He'll give the mob their trivial little victories (Same Sex Marriage), but 4 years from now the rabble that put him into office will still be in the gutter...
...which is exactly where they belong :)
So, Travis, you think we members of the gay community are nothing more than a mob??? That doesn't speak very highly of your own personage as far as I'm concerned. It was hardly a gutter mob that re-elected Obama. Most likely a lot of the votes were also anti-Romney votes (especially those voters in MA and the rest of New England), hehe. And that is coming from a GDI, not a lefty or liberal or any other stupid name you want to call us.
Not at all, but I think Same Sex Marriage is a trivial issue no matter what side you're on. On all matters of substance though, Obama is pretty open to compromise.
Our basic rights are a trivial matter? Whoa! Over 50% of the American population would now disagree with you on that.
Hey Eric #3.1, Romney would be in the hiding room !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
"Say a few things to rally his base???" Like, "URGENT," we need your $$$$ support in the campaign??? They ask for our money, they should LISTEN to that base.
Speaking of party-centric: Since when are corporations that contribute all their money to only one political Party in any way not "biased?" Those corporations are what the Pres. might be reaching out to. The rest of us can respond to him: I think we paid for your political ads, and this time our voices should not be silenced.
...and Republicans will no longer exist as a viable party.
I don't know, Dangerfield. Sure, if there's some inherent reward involved in doing so... like my tendency to appoint across party lines was actually noticed by the opposing party every once in awhile. But if I'd gone out of the way to nominate across party lines during my initial round of nominations and STILL got labeled 'the most divisive blah blah blah' by the enemy?
I doubt I'd be so quick to do it again.
Hopefully the era of "obstruct Obama at all costs" is over since their goal of making him a "one term President" failed.
"...by the enemy?"
--------------------------------------------------
perfectly illustrates my point. Thank you.
and who is the enemy?
Walt Kelly...
LOL, or Dennis Quaid
Ah...loving the alien...
So what exactly would you call yourself at this point, Caesar? Have you done anything in the last four years that would classify yourself as anything other than an enemy to the president? I mean, there comes a time when people just have to be realistic. Rush Limbaugh is the president's enemy. Sean Hannity is the president's enemy. So is Ann Coulter. Michelle Malkin too.
There comes a time when holding your hand out and expecting not to get bitten again is just sort of dumb. The people who signed petitions saying they'd rather not be U.S. citizens anymore than continue to have the man as their president are enemies. That is just reality.
Rush Limbaugh is the president's enemy. Sean Hannity is the president's enemy. So is Ann Coulter. Michelle Malkin too.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Someone is preparing a list it would seem...apropos to the holiday season.
But this isn't like Santa's list, it's more like
NIXON'S (who was certain that HE was being "realistic" too.)
See the two teams have a lot more in common than they think...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nixon%27s_Enemies_List#People_listed
How many times have you heard Limbaugh and Hannity call Liberals their "enemy" and that we "must be defeated at all costs"?
Ceasar and Dangerfield need to admit that the division between parties and the culture war is real.
Watching PBS, I don't get much chance to know what the partisan entertainers are up to.
I suggest that those with their hair aflame, who see "enemies" in the press, the way that NIXON did, read a little more history (By your ill informed lights, Jefferson and Adams were ENEMIES, and they said things about each other through surrogates that would make Coulter blush!) , stop watching whatever it is you are watching, and learn the difference between opponents, rivals and enemies.
(Also the difference between journalists and ENTERTAINERS. )
I admit that you buy into the Red Team vs. Blue Team meme that pays the bills for the two partisan networks, and hinders the efforts of reasonable people everywhere.
Nixon hated the media and the whole watergate thing was just bad mmmkay
yes the forgotten war, the war of importance, the war of divide et impera. I dont see enemies per se. I lost all respect for war after the failed Teutoburger Wald debacle. Quintili Varus, legiones redde!
I have Republican friends... locally, but I do not feel that any of the national representatives that are Republicans are friends to any American, including their supporters. Their laissez-faire attitudes destroyed the banks in 2008. Wouldn't you call the destruction of the American economy something that an enemy would do? As for the list of people who spout off against the President as "enemies"... these people are not so much hated BY the President, as hateful OF the President, and they have stated so. I had to listen to a sermon in my church about how Obama was going to destroy this country, and all I could think was... WHAT??? He is trying to reach across to people and also help the poor, keep corporations such as auto manufacturers in business, and that is somehow not good? The only hate I heard was coming out of the pastor, and that was the last day I went to that church. They are not my enemies either, but they obviously don't want my financial support, or anything else I have contributed.
Please, Republicans, get over the election. But every President up until the year 2008 appointed only people from their own political Party to Cabinet positions; please stop the whining about this President, who has done way too much to reach out to you. We just want him to stop it, and nominate some people from his own side.
I disagree. We have almost nothing in common any more beyond disdain for the other side and the very human desire for revenge.
Kind of a shame, it didn't use to be this way...but it is what it is.
obama hasnt made a decision, but his pick will be someone he fells will be truthful to him.
by the way, have you seen the lincoln movie? very inspiring.
kr, I haven't seen it yet, but I have heard it is exceptionally done. I do hope we get it here at some point. We don't always get new films right away(or ever), except if it's a Twilight movie!
Haven't seen the movie but I read the book "Team of Rivals" on which it is based.
Jody, don't spoil me the book... I am reading it.
justice, Lincoln dies in the end. Sorry.
PS he was assassinated
I am not at all sure that Mike Rogers is the answer, he has worked with democrats on some bills but still fights against taxing the super rich and wants to deregulate everything. I am not sure he can be trusted by Obama to watch his back. I also am not sure that two years of setting on an intelligence committee would pass the test of qualified.
"GOP Intelligence" Now there is an oxymoron.
There are Democrats in Congress im sure that can handle the job as well and I not sure about putting another Republican in the cabinet which if I was President Obama would be very careful of doing because the GOP all sticks together and at the end, the loyalty is with the party and not the country as we are learning with this Benghazi thing
Isn't it ironic that they whine about Benghazi, when they had everything to do with the American Embassy in Iran hostage crisis being prolonged just to make sure that Reagan was elected in 1980.
While Republicans whine about one piece of news, there is so much that could be done about hurricane Sandy (but they don't want that in the news because it indicates climate change). Just wait until our allies are literally under water; that will certainly affect world politics.
There are other issues they want buried too: such as the death of the dentist Savita in Ireland because the Irish wouldn't treat her raging infection caused by an incomplete miscarriage; treatment would have included an immediate D&C, but that would be "abortion," even though the fetus had no chance of survival, and there was no way that the fetus would have survived with the damage that there was to the placenta, but the "heartbeat" law in Ireland caused the death... where is McCain's outrage at this? Or Ryan's? Or Romney's? Or Rogers? How the world treats women should be an important part of foreign policy.
There are so many reasons that a vocal Republican should not be the head of the C.I.A.
Amy--
My read, certainly not the only one possible, is that Rogers' 'trust' comment is a reference to the CIA and its staff and top level people. They have to trust whoever comes in. I don't believe Rogers can earn their trust.
Thanks Fancy, I wasn't sure what was meant in that last comment of Rogers.
If the Obama administration is truly considering a republican as the CIA director, I applaud the administration. Because of the stalemate our government is experiencing, Obama should consider placing more republicans in key roles. If a republican were president, democrats should be placed in some key roles. Government needs to begin working together....not against each other. Cross pollination is one way of accomplishing that.
Harry as I recall Gov. Huntsman did a creditable job in China, and Historically Wendell Willkie did likewise fro FDR.
I for one am willing trust President Obama's judgement.
Good thought with good intentions. But doomed for failure in this kind of political climate. The House of Representatives and Senate are designed to do what you suggest. How good is that working out? Speaker Boehner is supposed to be the Speaker of the entire House. Instead he consciously subordinates his own power by choosing to operate only as Speaker of the Republican caucus in the House. Democrats do the same thing these days when they gain power. The President should have learned his lessons in his first term. This time around only select people who are 100% behind his "Forward America" agenda. And ram it down his opposition's throat if he must. He has the power, authority and mandate to force the change over 50% of the electorate voted for. As Nike says; JUST DO IT!
The only event that will create the kind of harmonious symmetry you seek is the Mayan Prediction coming true on 12.21.2012! Then people would be forced to cooperate with one another or perish.
JohnnyB, here's why at least to this point I'm going to give this guy a pass. Rogers was elected to Michigan's 8Th district previous representative was...Debbie Stebenow! The Mi 8Th is not exactly a hotbed of irrational right wing insurgents. And if somebody can verify it, I believe in the presidential election it went for Obama(Obama took the district in 2008) Lastly he's been there since 2001 long before the Teanuts got started.
@Ycaintuseait5-3858621:
I simply don't trust him or the GOP. They continue to behave as if they have learned nothing from their past failures of governance and divisive ideology/priorities. I consider them extremely hostile and dangerous to America's future. But I understand where you are coming from.
In the past, the C.I.A. has been involved in covert actions that most people didn't realize. Please look up the history of the "Iran-Contra Affair." We have lived with the gridlock G.O.P., who won't talk to Democrats even though Pres. Obama went out of his way in his first term to nominate G.O.P. or centrist Cabinet members; rewarding them again for their stubbornness is not the way forward.
But let it come down to dollars and sense (and I mean sense): A few crooked billionaires paid for the Republican campaigns, while many grassroots supporters paid for the Democrat campaigns. It only makes sense that all those people, who were told it was so "URGENT" to dig deep into their pockets to give the President "4 more years," should have at least some say in whom the President nominates.
Let's put it this way, and maybe the Democrats in Washington D.C. might get it: If he nominates Republicans to high positions, there is no way that the "grassroots" is going to contribute to anybody's campaign anymore, because we will say, "4 more years of what?"
Message to President Obama. Stop flirting with people who hate you; want to kill you politically; and did everything in their power to stop your agenda and re-election! Here is a novel idea Mr. President. Appoint people who actually supported you; voted for you; and want you to succeed! Enough of this feckless bi-partisan crap. That's what alienated you from Democratic rank & file the last four years. You got a mandate to lead your party and the country out of the wilderness. The Republican Party want to stay in that wilderness. They are already ferociously working to create an early failure by you with the unprincipled racist and sexist hack attacks on Dr. Susan Rice.
You start doing this goofy GOP outreach stuff stuff again Mr President and you will anger and disconnect yourself from your supporters once again. And what for? Just to chase a fake GOP rabbit down a hole to their Wonderland? Democrats don't want to go there. The GOP will once again knife you in the back and gloat in your supporters face. Except this time around your supporters won't be there to rescue you from yourself. Please don't dissipate your mandate and revived goodwill with Democratic Party & Progressive rank & file supporters by chasing foolish and divisive strategies like this. Whoever in your administration is advising you to do this. Fire them! If it is you, I have serious concerns about your sincerity to your supporters.
Get Focused in your second term! Stop with the pie in the sky stuff. Reward your supporters who have worked soooo hard for you! GOP participation in your administration should be your very last priority. Especially in a role as important as CIA. Find a Democratic Spook from foggy bottom and put him there. And if you just must put a Republican in that role; Convince someone like Colin Powell to take it. At least your base will accept him.
I agree Johnny, We need Mr. Obama to get moving on his agenda. Full speed ahead, the sooner he gets going the sooner the failure will be obvious. If he moves quickly we can see enough results for the 2014 mid terms. Please Please...... Mr. Obama push that agenda!
Obama's priority should be to get the BEST candidates possible, regardless of party. Any successful manager knows that if your subordinates look good, you look good, too.
@shesafatone:
It's your agenda that failed America. Reaganism was a joke on the middle class. Bush 43 was a disaster for the entire world. Romneyism would have been the END! Just like the Twinkie he was. I wish we actually had a place to send folks who thirst to live in a place of chaos and hate. Just to get them away from the rest of us. But I guess Hell will have to suffice in the afterlife. I can only surmise that you will not personally accept any of the benefits of President Obama's success or agenda.
But hey! Thanks for the agreement. Maybe you are not hopeless.
@Barry-NJ;
In theory I agree with you. But in practical terms, that kind of idealism doesn't work in most places. Not even very many of the places where we all work. Most hire people who look, act, think and behave like themselves. Republican Administrations sure didn't bolt many or any Democrats to their wagon. Why should President Obama? There are just as many, if not more attractive candidates available within his own pool of supporters. I doubt President Obama will find very many people in the GOP who fits his profile of leadership. I concede that they exist. But they do so to serve their own agenda. Hence I say, stop wasting his time and ours chasing Fool's gold. As said earlier, General Colin Powell sure fits the suit if he's interested. And he supports President Obama. But he is the rare exception, who puts country first over partisan interests. Perfect for the CIA post.
No Johnny, I served for 10 years gave enough but I had no desire for a military pension. I have no need for SS and I have insurance so..... probably not. I know you would never admit failure in any area, but thats fine I deal in results so..... lets get going. Lets see what shes got, full speed ahead!
But I will still use your roads/police and fire dept. Thats what taxes are for!
Please tell me why any American who paid campaign dollars should be slapped in the face by appointing opposing people for high positions? When big corporations (like Verizon, ATT&T, hedge funds, etc. etc.) poured money into Republican campaigns and are constantly given pork in return; when lobbyists get to see your Senator and Congressional Representative just because they have bigger checkbooks, and the ONE opportunity that the American voter has to talk to their candidate is the election and financial grassroots support for the election, and that is thwarted; what then? Nor is it about the "best person" for a job: every job is both about ideology and function; the Republicans do not have the ideology to stop banks from taking every penny out of our country and giving it to crooks, and they do not have the function to be able to put brakes on corporate welfare.
How about Dennis Kucinich as head of the C.I.A.? He gets the job done in supporting business (yes, the steel industry), and also in ideology, but who will nominate him to a high position?
"GOP Intel chairman "
Isn't that an oxymoron..
I was just thinking the same thing. LOL
I read with more than just passing interest Michael Goodwin's column today; the next round of hearings on Benghazi will take this investigation even closer to the White House. Susan Rice will NOT be named Secretary of State, according to Goodwin, and I tend to agree with him.
So, that evil socialist has appointed several Republicans to key positions over the last four years. Sounds almost like President Obama has been willing to work across the aisle. Could it be that he was not the problem causing such partisanship??? Could it have possibly been the teaparty Republicans??
He sure sounds like a willing compromiser and team player to me.
I wish he would find a position for Olympia Snowe, since she is leaving the Senate. There is a talent that should not be wasted! Perhaps to replace Geithner. And I hope Hillary Clinton also has a role. DOJ perhaps?
reaching across the aisle ?......wrong.....but nice try
Trouble, trouble.
Stuck in his Fox non-reality bubble.....
Rep. Michele Marie Bachmann
Michele Bachmann ......REPUBLICAN....Member of The United States House of Representative
" " ......... " ......Member of The House Intelligence Committee
" " ......... " .......Representing Minnesota's 6th Congressional district since 2007
How some " Republicans" get on these committees?....... is beyond my comprehension
.................trust me, on this.......little wonder!.....I almost, started to believe in magic!.............
Obama will pick the best person to do the job regardless of party. The Senate may want to play games but the President will be serious.
The creation of the Department of Homeland Security was supposed to bring the CIA and FBI together instead of what had been an animosity toward each other. They are supposed to communicate which obviously they haven't been doing very well. What we need is a person who can head up the CIA and who is also willing to work WITH the FBI and other security organizations to do the work of the people for the security of our nation and her people.
Once Rogers is Tapped for such a position ...watch Bengazie go away.
Why should WE trust the guy who would spy on us? The guy introduced CISPA and now they (private corporations) need him to implement it.
this is an example of why the republicans are out of touch with America. this idiot rogers actually believes he is in the running for the CIA director post. he needs to get his head out of his backside lower extremity
This is the same Mike Rogers who, about a week ago, called the President a liar when talking about the Benghazi incident. I don't think so!
With the likes of McCain and Graham in the news, can you actually use "Republican" and "Intelligence" in the same sentence?
Well, yes. Republicans have no intelligence. There, I knew I could.
“I’m not sure the president was not told before election day,” said Rogers in an interview on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”
“The attorney general knew months before this. There was no formal notice to either Congress or the intelligence community,” he added. “We just need to ask the question, I hope they come up and talk to us.”
Certainly a man the President can trust......not!
I can see why Obama is looking towards the Republicans......it would be extremely difficult to find a CIA director, never mind any intelligence, among the Democrats.........
Obama trusted Betrayus and look where that got him. I doubt he will do it again.
I didnt think the General was Republican or Democrat....just Military
Actually, General Petraeus is a Republican, and his name was strongly supported to be the GOP chosen candidate for either a senatorial or presidential run in 2016. The Republican view is that this storm will blow over and Petraeus will make a comeback, since American voters have such a short memory.
Terry ... I really dont think this storm will blow over for him... I also am not sure if Hilary will be able to weather Bengazie.
Hope, as usual with your vitriol and ignorance. Obama is no Romney or Ryan and he is willing to reach accross party lines in order to get the best person for a position. Or are you GOP/TP lunatics against crossing party lines in order to serve the country? Of course you are, that's all you are!
Clinton named named a Republican, Coehn, to be his Defense Secretary, which is something that no Republican has done in my memory, proving once again that the GOP is against anything that goes against their demented agenda of "christian sharia law" and Republican "values." And if this guy is the best man for the job, so be it. It shows that Obama is no Bush/Cheney criminal enterprise when it comes to let the other party share in the responsibilities of governing the country.
But please keep your stupidity coming, I enjoy seen another Repugnican spewing crap.
Rasputin.....Really? that angry...That was a very weird and odd post. Does your mom know you are on the computer ?
Hard to believe Obama would install a Republican in such an important position. The Republicans are the anti evidence party. They don't believe in science. They don't believe in data. They don't believe in facts. Anything that doesn't agree with their warped world view is disregarded as a liberal satanist conspiracy to wipe out the human race. Their very inability to accept the election results is a fine and timely example. The data clearly indicated a small but enduring lead for Obama. But they chose not to believe the data and were "shell shocked" when they lost. Putting someone with such an infirm grasp in reality in such an important position would be reckless.
Then there is the trust problem the Republicans have. The last Republican administration lied the country into a damn war for God's sake! How on earth can they be trusted? Look at how Romney and Ryan comported themselves on the campaign trail. Couldn't even keep their stories straight. Romney in particular would say one thing one day and the exact opposite the next. And he didn't skip a beat in the process. Lying doesn't keep these guys awake at night. They feel no remorse what-so-ever.
The simple minded GOP ,
Please die already,and take the tea. Baggers with you
You first, here's a case of Tylenol and Horse Puckey..................