Comments on: Defending the Panetta Pick http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2009/01/07/defending-the-panetta-pick/ Tue, 22 Dec 2009 04:00:12 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 By: JoAnna Toth http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2009/01/07/defending-the-panetta-pick/comment-page-2/#comment-515089 JoAnna Toth Thu, 08 Jan 2009 01:17:22 +0000 http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/?p=21698#comment-515089 Leon Panetta is a excellent choice to head the "CIA" . He has morals, values, excellent character traits and leadership qualities, a high level of education and intelligence, and impressive business credentials. Anyone with an ounce of brains can see he is the perfect choice. Having years of experience in a position does "NOT" make one good at a job. There are many in this world who are horrible at their job, yet they have managed to hang onto it for many years by backstabbing and setting others up to fall who might take their place who are more qualified in everyway. Being good at any job and at leadership is more a matter of inborn character traits and moral upbringing, which creates those who are raised to be ethical, moral, rightous, honest, full of integrity, these traits are rare in people today. which is why most who are currently in trouble with the law or government for fraud...if you will note...have been in their positions with their companies for many years, quite experienced and seasoned employees, yet quite unethical. I admire this man and I admire President Obama and his choice. Leon Panetta is a "GOOD" person and that is the best qualification anyone could ask for in a employee, and exactly what this country needs, a good example of a true "Leader", especially in a position of public service. Leon Panetta is a excellent choice to head the "CIA" . He has morals, values, excellent character traits and leadership qualities, a high level of education and intelligence, and impressive business credentials. Anyone with an ounce of brains can see he is the perfect choice. Having years of experience in a position does "NOT" make one good at a job. There are many in this world who are horrible at their job, yet they have managed to hang onto it for many years by backstabbing and setting others up to fall who might take their place who are more qualified in everyway.

Being good at any job and at leadership is more a matter of inborn character traits and moral upbringing, which creates those who are raised to be ethical, moral, rightous, honest, full of integrity, these traits are rare in people today. which is why most who are currently in trouble with the law or government for fraud...if you will note...have been in their positions with their companies for many years, quite experienced and seasoned employees, yet quite unethical. I admire this man and I admire President Obama and his choice. Leon Panetta is a "GOOD" person and that is the best qualification anyone could ask for in a employee, and exactly what this country needs, a good example of a true "Leader", especially in a position of public service.

]]> By: Bert http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2009/01/07/defending-the-panetta-pick/comment-page-2/#comment-515053 Bert Thu, 08 Jan 2009 01:01:01 +0000 http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/?p=21698#comment-515053 Panetta's it because no one else wants the job under an Obama administration that is going to weaken the US military and intel services. Change we can believe in? Man, that's a joke. Welcome to amateur hour at the US! Panetta's it because no one else wants the job under an Obama administration that is going to weaken the US military and intel services.

Change we can believe in? Man, that's a joke. Welcome to amateur hour at the US!

]]> By: RoseSpook http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2009/01/07/defending-the-panetta-pick/comment-page-2/#comment-515047 RoseSpook Thu, 08 Jan 2009 00:58:48 +0000 http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/?p=21698#comment-515047 The appointment of Panetta to DCI will force the Agency to implode. You could argue that he will bring about fundamental change in their way of business or he will be ostracized by his own people. Either way the future of the Agency looks bleak. The appointment of Panetta to DCI will force the Agency to implode. You could argue that he will bring about fundamental change in their way of business or he will be ostracized by his own people. Either way the future of the Agency looks bleak.

]]> By: Bill http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2009/01/07/defending-the-panetta-pick/comment-page-2/#comment-515038 Bill Thu, 08 Jan 2009 00:55:37 +0000 http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/?p=21698#comment-515038 QUOTE "If Panetta was good enough for California and Bill Clinton the one of the Best Presidents America ever had - He’s good enough for me." Good married presidents don't go around getting blow jobs from young girls. QUOTE "If Panetta was good enough for California and Bill Clinton the one of the Best Presidents America ever had – He’s good enough for me."

Good married presidents don't go around getting blow jobs from young girls.

]]> By: Dave http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2009/01/07/defending-the-panetta-pick/comment-page-2/#comment-515024 Dave Thu, 08 Jan 2009 00:50:38 +0000 http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/?p=21698#comment-515024 So let me see if I get this straight. If you have solid intelligence experience, but you were somewhat supportive of Bush's policies then you get questioned by netroots activists and have to withdraw from consideration? However, if you have ZERO intelligence experience but carried water for one of the most morally reprehensible Presidents in the past 30 years, then you are good to go? And I hate to break it to you, but it wasn't the failure of the CIA in falling to predict the attacks of 9/11. It was the actions of people like Jamie Gorelick in establishing the wall between the FBI and the CIA that largely caused that to happen. It is purely ignorant to say that the DCI is a manager and doesn't require intel experience. Let's see what the next few years bring. Of course, I am sure it will still be blamed on the Bush Administration. So let me see if I get this straight. If you have solid intelligence experience, but you were somewhat supportive of Bush's policies then you get questioned by netroots activists and have to withdraw from consideration? However, if you have ZERO intelligence experience but carried water for one of the most morally reprehensible Presidents in the past 30 years, then you are good to go?

And I hate to break it to you, but it wasn't the failure of the CIA in falling to predict the attacks of 9/11. It was the actions of people like Jamie Gorelick in establishing the wall between the FBI and the CIA that largely caused that to happen.

It is purely ignorant to say that the DCI is a manager and doesn't require intel experience.

Let's see what the next few years bring. Of course, I am sure it will still be blamed on the Bush Administration.

]]> By: Jude http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2009/01/07/defending-the-panetta-pick/comment-page-2/#comment-515023 Jude Thu, 08 Jan 2009 00:49:49 +0000 http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/?p=21698#comment-515023 What is the problem. He is credited with being a very good manager in the positions of responsibility he held under Clinton. The top man is not actually going to be a spy. He will be overseeing and managing from the executive level, setting policy and providing accountability. So he might be exactly what is needed to get the agency in better shape. The agency is loaded with operational experience and the day to day field operations will be implemented by the experienced directors and managers currenlty within the agency. Give this guy a chance and see how it unfolds. What is the problem. He is credited with being a very good manager in the positions of responsibility he held under Clinton. The top man is not actually going to be a spy. He will be overseeing and managing from the executive level, setting policy and providing accountability.
So he might be exactly what is needed to get the agency in better shape. The agency is loaded with operational experience and the day to day field operations will be implemented by the experienced directors and managers currenlty within the agency. Give this guy a chance and see how it unfolds.

]]> By: Marquand Bobby http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2009/01/07/defending-the-panetta-pick/comment-page-2/#comment-515013 Marquand Bobby Thu, 08 Jan 2009 00:46:13 +0000 http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/?p=21698#comment-515013 So, I guess this means that as a U.S. citizen -- I need to expect an eventual bailout of the CIA Director later on when the sh*! hits the fan because we got attacked under his watch. Oh wait, he lacks the experience to begin with so we all need to give him a break. So, I guess this means that as a U.S. citizen - I need to expect an eventual bailout of the CIA Director later on when the sh*! hits the fan because we got attacked under his watch. Oh wait, he lacks the experience to begin with so we all need to give him a break.

]]> By: MM http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2009/01/07/defending-the-panetta-pick/comment-page-2/#comment-515007 MM Thu, 08 Jan 2009 00:42:42 +0000 http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/?p=21698#comment-515007 Restore Confidence? The professional intelligence officials that were put in place after 9/11 have kept this country safe when their counterparts in other countries, like Great Britain have not. Thank you to all those who serve, have served, and their leaders in the silent services, who have kept us safe these last 7 years. Not supporting Panetta is not a democrat or republican issue, it is a safey issue. He is a good man and public servant. He is not though the best person for the job. Restore Confidence? The professional intelligence officials that were put in place after 9/11 have kept this country safe when their counterparts in other countries, like Great Britain have not.

Thank you to all those who serve, have served, and their leaders in the silent services, who have kept us safe these last 7 years.

Not supporting Panetta is not a democrat or republican issue, it is a safey issue. He is a good man and public servant. He is not though the best person for the job.

]]> By: Marie http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2009/01/07/defending-the-panetta-pick/comment-page-2/#comment-515004 Marie Thu, 08 Jan 2009 00:41:12 +0000 http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/?p=21698#comment-515004 The American People have had it with the illegal torture & warmongering already. The People have spoken. I am very happy with the Panetta appointment. There must be a different "tone" in this Country, to gain respect in the rest of the world again. Yes, that is important, or why even have the word diplomacy in the English language? We are supposed to be Civilized. Enter the 21st Century....Finally! The American People have had it with the illegal torture & warmongering already. The People have spoken. I am very happy with the Panetta appointment. There must be a different "tone" in this Country, to gain respect in the rest of the world again. Yes, that is important, or why even have the word diplomacy in the English language? We are supposed to be Civilized. Enter the 21st Century....Finally!

]]> By: Joey Marquez http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2009/01/07/defending-the-panetta-pick/comment-page-2/#comment-515002 Joey Marquez Thu, 08 Jan 2009 00:40:34 +0000 http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/?p=21698#comment-515002 Barack Obama repeatedly stated that he is hell bent on making sure that he has the best qualified personnel to be part of his advisory groups, leadership teams, etc. From the looks of it thus far -- cronyism, Clinton Part Deux is all that he'll be able to muster. I seriously hope he succeeds, even with all the Clintonites in his cabinet. But with a 'Clinton' as part of his cabinet -- all he's really going to end up being is a placeholder for the ascendancy of the 'Clintons' in 2012. The 'hope' - whatever there was - is fading and fleeting; it is not as audacious as he advertised. Barack Obama repeatedly stated that he is hell bent on making sure that he has the best qualified personnel to be part of his advisory groups, leadership teams, etc. From the looks of it thus far - cronyism, Clinton Part Deux is all that he'll be able to muster.

I seriously hope he succeeds, even with all the Clintonites in his cabinet. But with a 'Clinton' as part of his cabinet - all he's really going to end up being is a placeholder for the ascendancy of the 'Clintons' in 2012. The 'hope' – whatever there was – is fading and fleeting; it is not as audacious as he advertised.

]]> By: Jason http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2009/01/07/defending-the-panetta-pick/comment-page-2/#comment-514994 Jason Thu, 08 Jan 2009 00:36:53 +0000 http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/?p=21698#comment-514994 The deputy director of the CIA is way more important than the director. The director is basically the Chairman of the Board. No hands on experience just deals directly with the President. The Deputy Director makes all of the real Tactical decisions, such as where to put spys and what missions will be carried out. The Director basically is the President's man to make the Strategic decisions. The deputy director of the CIA is way more important than the director. The director is basically the Chairman of the Board. No hands on experience just deals directly with the President. The Deputy Director makes all of the real Tactical decisions, such as where to put spys and what missions will be carried out. The Director basically is the President's man to make the Strategic decisions.

]]> By: Robert http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2009/01/07/defending-the-panetta-pick/comment-page-2/#comment-514984 Robert Thu, 08 Jan 2009 00:33:36 +0000 http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/?p=21698#comment-514984 When the premise is the the CIA is broken and needs to be over hauled then choosing Mr, Panetta is arguable to some. In a time of war, and we are at war, whether some agree or not. Why do we take this risk of over hauling our inteligence agency? By what measure has the CIA failed us? Mr Obama takes a huge risk as he appoints another person with little experience to a position which is center to our fight against these terroist. If in fact we are attacked again, Mr Obama and Mr Panetta will have to explain why. When the premise is the the CIA is broken and needs to be over hauled then choosing Mr, Panetta is arguable to some. In a time of war, and we are at war, whether some agree or not. Why do we take this risk of over hauling our inteligence agency?
By what measure has the CIA failed us?
Mr Obama takes a huge risk as he appoints another person with little experience to a position which is center to our fight against these terroist.
If in fact we are attacked again, Mr Obama and Mr Panetta will have to explain why.

]]> By: Dave in Illinois http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2009/01/07/defending-the-panetta-pick/comment-page-2/#comment-514983 Dave in Illinois Thu, 08 Jan 2009 00:33:22 +0000 http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/?p=21698#comment-514983 I can't wait to hear the excuses when the next 9/11 happens on Panetta's watch. "We had some of the key players in custody but they called their lawyers and refused to talk to us on 5th amendment grounds. Sorry about those US citizens who died in the attack but they can rest easy in peace knowing that the rights of the terrorists were respected." I can't wait to hear the excuses when the next 9/11 happens on Panetta's watch.

"We had some of the key players in custody but they called their lawyers and refused to talk to us on 5th amendment grounds. Sorry about those US citizens who died in the attack but they can rest easy in peace knowing that the rights of the terrorists were respected."

]]> By: cf http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2009/01/07/defending-the-panetta-pick/comment-page-2/#comment-514982 cf Thu, 08 Jan 2009 00:33:07 +0000 http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/?p=21698#comment-514982 Honestly, can anyone commenting here say, with confidence, that the CIA has served our country...ever? Indeed, the CIA is quite possibly a massive mistake, inspiring people around the world to hate the United States and have lasting suspicions about our national ethics. Some people commenting here express concern about Panetta's ability to head the CIA, worrying about the "peril" that a lack of "intelligence experience" might invite. But the assumption that the CIA has been protecting America should be questioned. In fact, the CIA might have privately pushed fake intelligence to friendly foreign agencies, and then very publicly cited that fake intelligence (seemingly coming *from* those foreign agencies) to support our president's case for starting the war in Iraq. In any case, the CIA allegedly HAD NO CLUE that Saddam had no WMDs. ZERO. So much for information gathering. However, I have a more cynical theory: the CIA was complicit in deceiving the American public... So, I would be all for dissolving the CIA. They have done worse than fail the American people; they have greatly increased the violence and terror in the world and against America. They trained Osama Bin Laden. I think in a very real way, the CIA set in motion the events that led to 9/11. Honestly, can anyone commenting here say, with confidence, that the CIA has served our country...ever?

Indeed, the CIA is quite possibly a massive mistake, inspiring people around the world to hate the United States and have lasting suspicions about our national ethics.

Some people commenting here express concern about Panetta's ability to head the CIA, worrying about the "peril" that a lack of "intelligence experience" might invite. But the assumption that the CIA has been protecting America should be questioned.

In fact, the CIA might have privately pushed fake intelligence to friendly foreign agencies, and then very publicly cited that fake intelligence (seemingly coming *from* those foreign agencies) to support our president's case for starting the war in Iraq. In any case, the CIA allegedly HAD NO CLUE that Saddam had no WMDs. ZERO. So much for information gathering. However, I have a more cynical theory: the CIA was complicit in deceiving the American public...

So, I would be all for dissolving the CIA. They have done worse than fail the American people; they have greatly increased the violence and terror in the world and against America. They trained Osama Bin Laden. I think in a very real way, the CIA set in motion the events that led to 9/11.

]]> By: Mobius http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2009/01/07/defending-the-panetta-pick/comment-page-2/#comment-514969 Mobius Thu, 08 Jan 2009 00:28:04 +0000 http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/?p=21698#comment-514969 Just another political hack by an administration already overrun with political hacks. Welcome to The Socialist Police State of Omerica. Now, where are your papers?!? Just another political hack by an administration already overrun with political hacks. Welcome to The Socialist Police State of Omerica.

Now, where are your papers?!?

]]> By: Bob http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2009/01/07/defending-the-panetta-pick/comment-page-2/#comment-514968 Bob Thu, 08 Jan 2009 00:28:02 +0000 http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/?p=21698#comment-514968 The problem with Mr. Panetta as I see it is that he may be inclined to see his new job as basically investigating and changing the CIA in an attempt to change Bush era policies and tactics and not as gathering critical intelligence to combat our emenies. If he believes that the CIA is the problem rather than a solution then we will be far less safe with him in charge. The problem with Mr. Panetta as I see it is that he may be inclined to see his new job as basically investigating and changing the CIA in an attempt to change Bush era policies and tactics and not as gathering critical intelligence to combat our emenies. If he believes that the CIA is the problem rather than a solution then we will be far less safe with him in charge.

]]> By: Deena http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2009/01/07/defending-the-panetta-pick/comment-page-2/#comment-514961 Deena Thu, 08 Jan 2009 00:26:23 +0000 http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/?p=21698#comment-514961 I'm happy with Obama's decisions, let's see how he does. dg I'm happy with Obama's decisions, let's see how he does. dg

]]> By: Shannon http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2009/01/07/defending-the-panetta-pick/comment-page-2/#comment-514960 Shannon Thu, 08 Jan 2009 00:26:14 +0000 http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/?p=21698#comment-514960 When I heard that Panetta was going to be head of the CIA I said to myself, "what??" and I was trying to figure out the reasons that Obama and Biden gave Feinstein as to why they thought Panetta would be good to head the CIA and why after hearing them that Feinstein agreed with them. I don't know if these are the reasons, but Anderson you laid it out pretty well and put it in perspective for me and made me see that maybe ... just maybe Panetta is a good choice after all. When I heard that Panetta was going to be head of the CIA I said to myself, "what??" and I was trying to figure out the reasons that Obama and Biden gave Feinstein as to why they thought Panetta would be good to head the CIA and why after hearing them that Feinstein agreed with them. I don't know if these are the reasons, but Anderson you laid it out pretty well and put it in perspective for me and made me see that maybe ... just maybe Panetta is a good choice after all.

]]> By: JM Lonero http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2009/01/07/defending-the-panetta-pick/comment-page-2/#comment-514957 JM Lonero Thu, 08 Jan 2009 00:25:04 +0000 http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/?p=21698#comment-514957 I agree Mr Panetta is not qualified for the any position in the intelligence agencies. There MUST be other qualified candidates. What happened the CHANGE we were promised by Mr Obama? This reeks of Clintonesque. I am a lifelong Democrat who lives in Monterey County, California and have, in the past, voted for Mr. Panetta. For CONGRESS! I agree Mr Panetta is not qualified for the any position in the intelligence agencies. There MUST be other qualified candidates.

What happened the CHANGE we were promised by Mr Obama?
This reeks of Clintonesque.

I am a lifelong Democrat who lives in Monterey County, California and have, in the past, voted for Mr. Panetta. For CONGRESS!

]]> By: Brian http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2009/01/07/defending-the-panetta-pick/comment-page-2/#comment-514950 Brian Thu, 08 Jan 2009 00:24:05 +0000 http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/?p=21698#comment-514950 I have no personal axe to grind with Panetta or Obama for that matter. Did not vote for Obama but he is my president and I am open to seeing what he will do. What I think is crazy is everyone who is monday morning quarterbacking the CIA. If all of you think being an analyst, case officer, or any other intel related position at the CIA is so easy, sign up and go do the job yourselves. I have known many of them in my life and they are the most dedicated, patriotic people you will ever meet doing the absolute best job they can. When you can start reading minds and intentions of terrorists get on with it and help keep us all safe. Otherwise, shut up and be thankful for the job they do each and everyday. I have no personal axe to grind with Panetta or Obama for that matter. Did not vote for Obama but he is my president and I am open to seeing what he will do.

What I think is crazy is everyone who is monday morning quarterbacking the CIA. If all of you think being an analyst, case officer, or any other intel related position at the CIA is so easy, sign up and go do the job yourselves. I have known many of them in my life and they are the most dedicated, patriotic people you will ever meet doing the absolute best job they can. When you can start reading minds and intentions of terrorists get on with it and help keep us all safe. Otherwise, shut up and be thankful for the job they do each and everyday.

]]>