Obama picks Panetta to head CIA

[Reba]

In choosing Leon E. Panetta to be the next CIA director, President-elect Barack Obama appears to have concluded that a spy chief who understands politics may be better equipped to carry out the incoming administration's national security agenda than one who understands espionage.

The surprise selection of Panetta, a former California congressman and chief of staff to President Clinton, would give Obama a CIA director with loyalty to the White House and an experienced managerial hand to steer the administration away from potential intelligence scandals.

But it runs the risk of putting an outsider at the helm of the CIA just as it seems to be regaining its footing after years of criticism over intelligence failures leading up to the Sept. 11 attacks and the Iraq war, and for aggressive interrogation tactics used in their aftermath.

If confirmed by the Senate, Panetta would be among the few directors in agency history with no experience at one of the nation's spy services.

Largely for that reason, Panetta's selection was met with criticism on Capitol Hill.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), who this week begins her tenure as the first female head of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said she was not consulted on the choice and indicated she might oppose it.

"I was not informed about the selection of Leon Panetta to be the CIA director," Feinstein said. "My position has consistently been that I believe the agency is best served by having an intelligence professional in charge at this time."

A senior aide to Sen. John D. Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.), the outgoing chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said the senator "would have concerns" about a Panetta nomination....

Panetta a surprise pick to run the CIA - Los Angeles Times

 

[Hear Again]

"If confirmed by the Senate, Panetta would be among the few directors in agency history with no experience at one of the nation's spy services."

similar to the way mccain picked sarah palin to be his running mate?

 

[PowerON]

I find it a failure.

 

[Hear Again]

I find it a failure.

why? because this is obama we're talking about? funny how all of the palin supporters can ignore the fact that she didn't have enough political experience to be vice-president, yet they are the same people who criticize obama for selecting panetta to head the cia.

 

[jillio]

why? because this is obama we're talking about? funny how all of the palin supporters can ignore the fact that she didn't have enough political experience to be vice-president, yet they are the same people who criticize obama for selecting panetta to head the cia.

Word!

 

[Reba]

"If confirmed by the Senate, Panetta would be among the few directors in agency history with no experience at one of the nation's spy services."

similar to the way mccain picked sarah palin to be his running mate?

So that means you don't agree with Obama's selection?

 

[Hear Again]

So that means you don't agree with Obama's selection?

since panetta hasn't served as the head of the cia yet, i can't form an opinion one way or the other.

that being said, the difference between palin and panetta is that panetta shows intelligence whereas palin clearly doesn't.

 

[BradB08]

That makes two. First Podestra and then Panetta. Both are pro-disclosure. Excellent.

 

[Liebling:-)))]

I don't have any opinion about Obama's pick because I don't know Panetta and his history.

 

[Steel X]

Yea well Obama have his reasons...I dont know Panetta and his history either but at least he does still work for the government.

 

[Reba]

since panetta hasn't served as the head of the cia yet, i can't form an opinion one way or the other.

that being said, the difference between palin and panetta is that panetta shows intelligence whereas palin clearly doesn't.

What does Palin have to do with Panetta and the CIA?

 

[Reba]

why? because this is obama we're talking about? funny how all of the palin supporters can ignore the fact that she didn't have enough political experience to be vice-president, yet they are the same people who criticize obama for selecting panetta to head the cia.

If you read the entire link, you would see that it was Democrats, such as Feinstein and Rockefeller, that criticized the choice of Panetta.

 

[Hear Again]

If you read the entire link, you would see that it was Democrats, such as Feinstein and Rockefeller, that criticized the choice of Panetta.

feinstein and rockefeller criticize anything that moves, so i could care less what they think about panetta.

 

[Hear Again]

What does Palin have to do with Panetta and the CIA?

i was making the comparison that republicans who criticize panetta for not having experience to head the cia are the same people who supported palin (who had no political experience) to be vice-president.

 

[Hear Again]

what would be funny (in a good way) would be if panetta turned out to be an excellent leader of the cia. only time will tell.

 

[Reba]

i was making the comparison that republicans who criticize panetta for not having experience to head the cia are the same people who supported palin (who had no political experience) to be vice-president.

Except it was Democrats who criticized Panetta's selection.

 

[Reba]

feinstein and rockefeller criticize anything that moves, so i could care less what they think about panetta.

The point is, they are Democrats, not Republicans, so it wasn't about the same people who supported Palin. As far as I know, Feinstein and Rockefeller didn't support Palin.

 

[Hear Again]

The point is, they are Democrats, not Republicans, so it wasn't about the same people who supported Palin. As far as I know, Feinstein and Rockefeller didn't support Palin.

i never said either of them did support palin. how did you decide to make that connection?

one thing i can say is that at least democrats speak out against each other when they see a reason to unlike republicans who support everyone in their party no matter what. (case in point: mccain/palin)

 

[Hear Again]

Except it was Democrats who criticized Panetta's selection.

so? just because the democrats criticized panetta doesn't mean he can't be an effective leader of the cia.

obama was criticized by some for being an african-american yet it didn't stop him from being elected as our next president.

criticism by a few does not represent the majority.

 

[Reba]

i never said either of them did support palin. how did you decide to make that connection?

You brought up this angle, and that's what I replied to. That's all.

"they are the same people who criticize obama for selecting panetta to head the cia."

"i was making the comparison that republicans who criticize panetta for not having experience to head the cia are the same people who supported palin"