What do you make of Leon Panetta's comments on Barack Obama's leadership?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Panetta thought that the Iraq war had something to do with 9/11. His criticizing Obama makes Obama look better.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Typical Republican spin.

HA HA HA!

Panetta is the typical Republican kind of "Democrat".

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Accurate comments. The guy has been a White House Chief of Staff, CIA Director and Sec Def.  He doesn't need to promote himself or have other motives.

To sell books, Grumps. To sell books...

Oh he'd sell plenty without, but he's such a staunch Dem, blasting Obama solely to sell books makes no sense.

I'm not sure about that. It certainly starts a conversation that I'm not sure would occur otherwise. Perhaps I'm wrong but it seems like some memoirs go unnoticed if they don't include "juicy" tidbits like these.

In all reality, Panetta is a Clintonista......so maybe a few jabs were necessary.  

We really need to take down the entire Clinton wing of the party.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Accurate comments. The guy has been a White House Chief of Staff, CIA Director and Sec Def.  He doesn't need to promote himself or have other motives.

To sell books, Grumps. To sell books...

Oh he'd sell plenty without, but he's such a staunch Dem, blasting Obama solely to sell books makes no sense.

I'm not sure about that. It certainly starts a conversation that I'm not sure would occur otherwise. Perhaps I'm wrong but it seems like some memoirs go unnoticed if they don't include "juicy" tidbits like these.

In all reality, Panetta is a Clintonista......so maybe a few jabs were necessary.  

We really need to take down the entire Clinton wing of the party.

Well considering half the party supported Hillary in 2008 and like 70% of the party supports her now, you'll be awfully lonely if that succeeds.

Most of that 70% has no idea how right-wing she is.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Accurate comments. The guy has been a White House Chief of Staff, CIA Director and Sec Def.  He doesn't need to promote himself or have other motives.

To sell books, Grumps. To sell books...

Oh he'd sell plenty without, but he's such a staunch Dem, blasting Obama solely to sell books makes no sense.

I'm not sure about that. It certainly starts a conversation that I'm not sure would occur otherwise. Perhaps I'm wrong but it seems like some memoirs go unnoticed if they don't include "juicy" tidbits like these.

In all reality, Panetta is a Clintonista......so maybe a few jabs were necessary.  

We really need to take down the entire Clinton wing of the party.

Well considering half the party supported Hillary in 2008 and like 70% of the party supports her now, you'll be awfully lonely if that succeeds.

Most of that 70% has no idea how right-wing she is.

LOL

Hillary might not be as liberal as you like, but calling her "right wing" is ludicrous.

Are you going to tell me that her husband wasn't totally Republican-lite as President?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Accurate comments. The guy has been a White House Chief of Staff, CIA Director and Sec Def.  He doesn't need to promote himself or have other motives.

To sell books, Grumps. To sell books...

Oh he'd sell plenty without, but he's such a staunch Dem, blasting Obama solely to sell books makes no sense.

I'm not sure about that. It certainly starts a conversation that I'm not sure would occur otherwise. Perhaps I'm wrong but it seems like some memoirs go unnoticed if they don't include "juicy" tidbits like these.

In all reality, Panetta is a Clintonista......so maybe a few jabs were necessary.  

We really need to take down the entire Clinton wing of the party.

Well considering half the party supported Hillary in 2008 and like 70% of the party supports her now, you'll be awfully lonely if that succeeds.

Most of that 70% has no idea how right-wing she is.

LOL

Hillary might not be as liberal as you like, but calling her "right wing" is ludicrous.

Are you going to tell me that her husband wasn't totally Republican-lite as President?

Even if he was, exactly how is that relevant to Hillary?

But just for the record, yes I will. There's more to government than just the presidency. Most of the bad legislation Bill signed was overwhelmingly passed by a right wing Congress (controlled by Gingrich and the proto-Tea Party) with veto proof majorities. The 90s could've been a lot worse if Bill wasn't around to curb the worst excesses of said right wing Congress. But I digress. I'm far more interested in my initial question.

Truman vetoed Taft-Hartley despite veto proof majorities. Hillary is closely tied to Bill's record. But she has a record of her own, whether it's lying about an Al Qaeda link to Iraq, voting for Kyl-Lieberman to threaten Iran, criticizing Obama for not being enough of a warmonger, close ties to Indian outsourcers, pushing fracking on other countries as Secretary of State, and is generally pro Wall Street.