Posted on 10/10/2014 12:24:58 PM PDT by Signalman
Joe Biden has a point.
“I’m finding that former administration officials, as soon as they leave, write books, which I think is inappropriate,” Biden said this week. He went on to add, “At least give the guy a chance to get out of office.” I’m with Joe here, and I say this as a man who believes you’d be hard-pressed to find a single national-security or foreign-policy issue where Biden has been right. The vice president’s snark was aimed at Leon Panetta, the most recent of his former administration colleagues to publish memoirs that highlight the faculty-lounge fecklessness of the president he served first as CIA director and then as defense secretary.
Even worse for the Obama administration, Panetta’s characterizations all ring true, and they comport with what we’ve gleaned from other ex-insiders. Still, old Joe has a point. Those who answer a president’s call to serve in a position of trust incur some duties with their offices, which must include discretion. For one thing, if a president is sitting in an Oval Office filled with appointees he believes likely to publish the juicy bits while he’s still in office, he — and the rest of those in the room — will never be as frank as they have a right to expect they can be.
This is not an argument for blind loyalty. Plainly, an appointee who cannot in good conscience carry out a presidential policy ought to leave. And if the disagreement goes beyond a simple policy difference — if it speaks to something so profoundly dishonest or reckless or wicked that it is illegal or in some way threatens our nation — duty itself might easily compel an official not only to resign but to make public the reason.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
I’d have no problem if they just slip away at night, leave the key under the doormat.
Biden couldn’t read a book let alone write one.
So you guys are defensive linemen???
What were Biden’s chances of his being “completely normal” (direct quote from him) after his brain aneurysm surgery?
Somewhere along the way he sold his soul, or something very uncomfortable in his past was uncovered by the Clinton investigators. He changed his party affiliation and went to work walking point for the Clintons. He gave up any reputation of honesty he may have retained while serving as a "D" in congress.
Some say he is using this book to show he can stand for what is right by openly opposing Obama.
DON'T BUY IT! This is an opener for Hillary's campaign. Panetta will make some money off the book that the Clintons allowed him to write; but he is bought and sold by them and will not move a finger unless they pull the string.
“..“At least give the guy a chance to get out of office.”..”
Why, so he can do more damage to us before he leaves, just out of pure spite?
Uh uh.
I’m not a big fan of Panetta, but at least he came out and let the country know what an incompetent clod half of them elected, instead of playing “Circle the Democrat Wagon and take one for Dear Leader”.
Panetta should be commended for having a modicum of testicular fortitude in this.
Yeah, they should have turned on him BEFORE the left when they could have done something reduce the damage.
Plainly, an appointee who cannot in good conscience carry out a presidential policy ought to leave....Maybe the a-hole DIDN’T have a policy, period. Maybe he just ignored all advice and figured on blaming someone else once the SHTF.
I believe that both Gates and Panetta should have resigned in protest and, further, they are still underplaying the scope and depth of the problem. None the less, what they are saying now is more a service to the American people than a betrayal of the President.
I agree with Joe, too. Make odinga's resignation retroactively effective January 22, 2009. Roll back all the illegal pronouncements, enactments, pretentions, etc., created since that date at the whims of the usurper.
Thanks, Joe.
I’ll bet you that that David Stockman book is on Biden’s bookshelf someplace. It’s ok to back stab a Republican.
Obama has never really been MY president. Obama presides or serves as leader only to his constituents, acolytes and dummy drones. Anyone in the least little bit skeptical of his decisions is declared an ‘enemy of the state’, just like in Red China! Me, and certain other Tea Partiers, have been without a real President since Bush left.
This is not necessarily party specific. I did not feel as adrift, or shut out during the Clinton years, even though I held a very low opinion of him, and still do in some areas. This is different, unvarnished animosity toward anyone who disagrees or questions.
I guess dissent isn’t “the highest form of patriotism” when Democrats are in office.
No. Panetta is slime. He’s just torching Nobama in an effort to suck up to Hildebeest.
As SecDef, Panetta should have raised his concerns strongly to the CIC. If CIC gave him orders contrary to his concerns, Panetta should have resigned on the spot and gone public with the reasons why. Maybe this whole SNAFU could have been averted months and years ago.
“Dissent is Patriotic”
In the old days anyway
Agreed, true that.
But still... every bit of negative light shown on this group is a good thing.
It’s a hell of a lot more than this country’s had for the last six years...
!!! Cue Shrillery ...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.