Why Obama Won't Listen to Leon Panetta

National Journal ^ | 10/08/2014 | Ron Fournier

[SeekAndFind]

A senator. A House member. A former presidential campaign manager. An adviser to President Obama. All Democrats, these officials have made it a habit to call or email me almost every week of Obama's second term to share their concerns about the course of his presidency.

They ask only that I don't identify them. Some fear retribution; others don't want to compromise their financial or political standing inside their party. These Democrats speak admirably about the president's intellect, integrity, and intentions, but they question his leadership—an admittedly squishy term that can be unfairly deployed against people with the guts to lead. But their critiques are specific, consistent and credible—and they comport with what many other Democrats are telling other journalists, almost always, privately.

Leon Panetta speaks for them now. It's uncanny how the former CIA/Pentagon chief's memoir and book-tour interviews channel frustrations of Democrats who want the president to succeed but consider him a near-failure, who raised their concerns directly with the president or with his team, and were told to stop their worrying.

Actually, the White House calls it "bed-wetting." Team Obama is dismissive of anybody who dares to say the emperor may need some clothes. Mocked and/or ignored by the White House, these Democrats send messages through journalists.

Not Panetta. He wrote a book.

Obama is disengaged. While describing how little Obama fought to stop deep automatic budget cuts that rattled the Pentagon, Panetta wrote: "That episode highlighted what I regard as his most conspicuous weakness, frustrating reticence to engage his opponents and rally support for his cause."

"That is not a failing of ideas or of intellect," Panetta added. "He does, however, sometimes lack fire. Too often, in my view, the president relies on the logic of a law professor rather than the passion of a leader."

[Oldeconomybuyer]

These Democrats speak admirably about the president's intellect, integrity, and intentions

Spit.

[EagleUSA]

A truly sick and twisted ego. Perverted politics over the population.

[NoLibZone]

Obama has but one function.

Get the bomb to Iran.

[tet68]

Too often, in my view, the president relies on the logic of a law professor rather than the passion of a leader.”

Even that might not have been too bad, if he had
ever BEEN a law PROFESSOR!

[SeekAndFind]

I thought he had a tenure track position at the University of Chicago Law school....

And wasn’t he the editor of the Harvard Law Review when he was studying law there?

[VTenigma]

Walkin’ it back, he’s bad but not really.

[Zuben Elgenubi]

All Democrats, these officials have made it a habit to call or email me almost every week of Obama's second term to share their concerns about the course of his presidency.

And that has always been the problem of the writer Ron Fournier. He's a Democrat hack.

[griswold3]

It is the policies that Obama fiercely holds onto that are failing.
This is more of the same old tune that the wrong person is leading us toward their progressive utopia.

[rockinqsranch]

Panetta is about the only one of the top tier Democrats the party allows to orchestrate designs to fool the people into believing Democrats are actually human beings.

[tet68]

No tenure as far as I remember, and it seems he never
wrote ANYTHING for the law review.

Just my memory mind you.

[EagleUSA]

“I thought he had a tenure track position at the University of Chicago Law school....”

::::::::::::::

Yeah, right. That is why all of his school (and other) records are locked up from public inspection.

[Joe Boucher]

Well obammy,
Folks finally figured it out that it was only ALL about U all along ya putz.

[Capt. Tom]

While describing how little Obama fought to stop deep automatic budget cuts that rattled the Pentagon, Panetta wrote: "Indeed, that episode highlighted what I regard as his most conspicuous weakness, a frustrating reticence to engage his opponents and rally support for his cause."

I don't for a minute believe that avoiding budget cuts that rattled the Pentagon was an Obama cause.-Tom

[smoothsailing]

Seeing him on Fox News pundit panels, there’s something very greasy and putrid about Ron Fournier.

[capydick]

They ask only that I don't identify them. Some fear retribution; others don't want to compromise their financial or political standing inside their party

Party and personal gain before country, real nice Americans we got there.

[DainBramage]

He’s just F’ing lazy.

[BuckeyeTexan]

Oh, no you don’t, Liberals! You don’t get to disown your Messiah now that he is the complete, total, abject failure that we told you he wold be!!

You wanted him. You elected him. You supported him. You pushed his agenda as if it were your very own salvation. Everything you pushed as “transforming,” “progressive,” “forward-thinking,” and oh-so-fair-for-all policies has been a failure. Nothing that you said was good for America actually ended up being beneficial for the vast majority of America. We are not better off under your policies.

Now it’s our turn to implement our policies and put them to the test. I bet every single one of you pukes is better off under conservative policies.

So, y’all just forget about disowning him and pretending that he acted on his own without your boot-licking approval. He acted on your behalf. He did what you wanted. You own it. Your ideology is a failure.

[minnesota_bound]

obama did listen to Leon Panetta. They were all involved in the transfer of weapons to the terrorists and the killing of Americans.

[Will88]

Too often, in my view, the president relies on the logic of a law professor rather than the passion of a leader."

Possibly the old Choom Ganger is relying on the brain addled indifference of one who spent too much of his youth inhaling pot. What sort of 'leader' would practically end face-to-face intelligence briefings, one of the most important aspects of his responsibilities.