What is it with these guys that they feel they have to come up with stuff like this?
"The higher a monkey climbs on the pole the more you can see his butt."
Good thing no one has said something like this about our black president. However, Axlerod should know that his man is waaaay up that pole and his posterior has been hanging out there for all to see for years. And it is not a pretty sight, politically speaking.
Good news or bad news? What do my favorite political junkies think?
President Obama’s inner circle will likely be losing some key players. CBS News senior White House correspondent Bill Plante reports that sources say David Axelrod, the president’s closest advisor, will move to Chicago next spring.
Axelrod is expected to reassume his role as campaign manager in Mr. Obama’s 2012 reelection bid. A potential, if not likely, replacement for Axelrod is current White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs.
The dominoes don’t stop there. Rahm Emanuel, the president’s Chief of Staff, may leave the White House as soon as next month.
Part of the problems of this administration –other than the inept leadership provided by the President – can be found in those which Obama has surrounded himself. That’s most true of any administration, but for this one in particular, it’s been particularly evident that many of them haven’t a clue, and they could only buy one with your money.
All kidding aside, while Axelrod may have been a great campaign manager, I’d have to say he’s been a bust as an adviser and spin doctor. He’s out of his depth. He belongs exactly from whence he came, running a campaign. There he has the experience and the knowledge to be successful. But politics and the daily grind of governing aren’t his cup of tea.
As for Emanuel, as much as I don’t care for the man, to me he’s the “reality” anchor there. He knows intimately how the system works and who within the system must be used to accomplish whatever the agenda is. He’s also, based on what I’ve read, been the guy who has tried to keep them more toward the center – not at all very successfully – because he has a good idea of what can and can’t be foisted upon the American people without losing political viability. ObamaCare, again as I understand it, was a battle he lost.
So whether this is good news or bad news depends largely on who will replace each of these people (same with his fleeing economic team). Will a political operative take Axelrod’s place who knows the in’s and out’s of governing and is better able to present the administration’s views? Will the person who replaces Emanuel be more radical and less pragmatic than the present Chief of Staff?
Frankly I don’t care particularly for either of the men filling the posts they have, but the story isn’t in the fact they’re leaving – it will be found in those who replace them and what they will bring to the job and how that will effect the direction of the administration in the future.
I‘m still wondering what the upside is for the White House in this fight it is picking with Fox News.
We’ve seen Anita Dunn, White House communication’s director take them on, obviously at the behest of and at least with the tacit agreement, one assumes, of the President. After all, he’s been known to complain about Fox and theirs was the only Sunday show on which he refused to appear recently. Now we have David Axelrod throwing out the same nonsense:
White House senior adviser David Axelrod said Sunday that the Fox News Channel is “not really a news station” and that much of the programming is “not really news.”
“I’m not concerned,” Axelrod said on ABC’s “This Week” when George Stephanopoulos asked about the back-and-forth between the White House and Fox News.
“Mr. [Rupert] Murdoch has a talent for making money, and I understand that their programming is geared toward making money. The only argument [White House communications director] Anita [Dunn] was making is that they’re not really a news station if you watch even — it’s not just their commentators, but a lot of their news programming.
Of course what that network covers are things that the other networks would prefer not to cover – the ACORN scandal being the most recent story they attempted to avoid. And Fox has presented the other side on the “health care reform” story – giving Republicans a voice in telling the story that they’re not afforded on the other news networks.
I’m sure this does indeed rankle the White House because Fox, unlike the rest of the media isn’t a compliant lap dog for the administration. It makes waves when it reports the other side.
And I love how Axlerod denigrates “making money” as if CNN and MSNBC are in the charity business – although compared to Fox, they may as well be.
The White House apparently feels it must marginalize Fox for a reason. And the only reason I can come up with is the White House feels it is hurting it’s agenda. To me the most telling remark about Fox came when Dunn said that when President Obama goes on Fox he believes he’s debating the opposition.
I thought that’s what all real journalists considered themselves – the opposition. Now, apparently, journalistic worth is measured by the White House as how compliant you are and how willing you are to carry water for them.
It isn’t Fox that should be ashamed. It is CNN and MSNBC who, when referring to themselves, should find it more and more difficult to use the terms “news” and “journalism” with a straight face and without turning beet red with embarrassment.