Casual Observation

11 Comments

1. 

   Marie2 on August 10, 2013 at 11:43 am

   What?  You don’t like the consummate Democratic Party insider and business partner of one of Hillary Clinton’s siblings nominee?  It’s a piece of the Hillary juggernaut to the WH.

   • 

     BooMan on August 10, 2013 at 12:19 pm

     Who could have predicted?

2. 

   Xantar on August 10, 2013 at 12:18 pm

   Terry McAuliffe is a horrible candidate, and I’ll hate seeing him as governor of Virginia. But he won’t try to pass an anti-sodomy law. He could be persuaded to stop funding “pregnancy crisis centers.” And he won’t be virulently anti-gay. That will do for the next four years.

   • 

     BooMan on August 10, 2013 at 12:20 pm

     It’s trade off between what you mentioned and spoiling the Dem brand in Virginia.  

     • 

       Baud on August 10, 2013 at 12:42 pm

       I keep hearing this.  Is that really a thing?  Does Bob McDonnell spoil the GOP brand with his corruption?  Even assuming Mcauliffe wins and is a horrible governor, we need to stop believing that collective guilt is legitimate when it comes to the Democratic Party.

       • 

         BooMan on August 10, 2013 at 1:08 pm

         I think it depends.

         If you ask me whether or not the Dem candidate in 2016 has a better chance of winning the state with McAuliffe in charge, I’d have to say emphatically ‘no.’  This is both because he is bound to be hated and because the same can said of Cooch.  

         On the other hand, McAuliffe can prevent all manner of mischief simply by not being Cooch.  

     • 

       Xantar on August 10, 2013 at 12:52 pm

       If I accept your premise, McAuliffe still comes out ahead in my book. I’ll even campaign for him.

3. 

   Phil Perspective on August 10, 2013 at 12:35 pm

   Speaking of scum .. there is more on Summers(only good for the next 30 hours):

   I Know What You Did Last, Summers: The Shady Deals That Will Hand Larry The Fed

   • 

     BooMan on August 10, 2013 at 1:21 pm

     That’s very interesting.  It helps explain why Obama is keeping Summers name in play. He has to keep his word.  

     I wonder whether he will feel compelled to appoint Summers.  Perhaps he just needs enough pressure to be able to convince Summers that it ain’t happening.  

   • 

     IL JimP on August 10, 2013 at 1:55 pm

     I don’t see how he makes the assertion that Larry Summers is the front-runner based on what the President said yesterday:

     Major Garrett.

     Q Thank you, Mr. President. I’d like to ask you about this debate that’s playing itself out in editorial pages, in the blogosphere, even in the Senate Democratic caucus, about the choice you eventually will make for the next Federal Reserve chairman. There is a perception among Democrats that Larry Summers has the inside track, and perhaps you’ve made some assurances to him about that. Janet Yellen is the vice chair of the Federal Reserve. There are many women in the Senate who are Democrats who believe that breaking the glass ceiling there would be historic and important.

     THE PRESIDENT: Right.

     Q Are you annoyed by this sort of roiling debate? Do you find it any way unseemly? And do you believe this will be one of the most important — if not the most important — economic decisions you’ll make in the remainder of your presidency?

     THE PRESIDENT: It is definitely one of the most important economic decisions that I’ll make in the remainder of my presidency. The Federal Reserve chairman is not just one of the most important economic policymakers in America, he or she is one of the most important policymakers in the world. And that person presumably will stay on after I’m President. So this, along with Supreme Court appointments, is probably as important a decision as I make as President.

     I have a range of outstanding candidates. You’ve mentioned two of them — Mr. Summers and Mr. Yellen — Ms. Yellen. And they’re both terrific people.

     I think the perception that Mr. Summers might have an inside track simply had to do with a bunch of attacks that I was hearing on Mr. Summers preemptively, which is sort of a standard Washington exercise, that I don’t like. Because when somebody has worked hard for me and worked hard on behalf of the American people, and I know the quality of those people, and I see them getting slapped around in the press for no reason — before they’ve even been nominated for anything — then I want to make sure that somebody is standing up for them. I felt the same way when people were attacking Susan Rice before she was nominated for anything. So I tend to defend folks who I think have done a good job and don’t deserve attacks.

     But I consider them both outstanding candidates. My main criteria — I’ve stated this before, but I want to repeat it — my main criteria for the Fed Reserve chairman is somebody who understands they’ve got a dual mandate. A critical part of the job is making sure that we keep inflation in check, that our monetary policy is sound, that the dollar is sound. Those are all critical components of the job. And we’ve seen what happens when the Fed is not paying attention. We saw, prior to Paul Volcker coming into place, inflation shooting up in ways that really damaged the real economy.

     But the other mandate is full employment. And right now, if you look at the biggest challenges we have, the challenge is not inflation; the challenge is we’ve still got too many people out of work, too many long-term unemployed, too much slack in the economy, and we’re not growing as fast as we should. And so I want a Fed chairman who’s able to look at those issues and have a perspective that keeps an eye on inflation, makes sure that we’re not seeing artificial bubbles in place, but also recognizing, you know what, a big part of my job right now is to make sure the economy is growing quickly and robustly, and is sustained and durable, so that people who work hard in this country are able to find a job.

     And, frankly, I think both Larry Summers and Janet Yellen are highly qualified candidates. There are a couple of other candidates who are highly qualified as well. I’ll make the decision in the fall.

     Q Can you see how the perception of you defending Larry Summers as vigorously as you just did and in other quarters lead some to believe you’ve already made up your mind?

     THE PRESIDENT: Well, except I just told you I haven’t. Major, I’d defend you if somebody was saying something that wasn’t true about you. (Laughter.) I really would. In fact, I’ve done that in the White House some times. (Laughter.)

     Carol Lee. And, Carol, congratulations on Hudson.

     He seemed to go out of the way to say that wasn’t the case yesterday.

4. 

   wibekah on August 10, 2013 at 7:16 pm

   I just can’t believe this post.  I just came back from a fundraiser for Terry McAuliffe and I have every intention of voting for him and campaigning for him.  The idea that somehow how, down the line, we’ll be better off with Ken Cuccinelli, is obscene.  Didn’t we learn anything from Bush/Gore?  Are you seriously suggesting that the people who felt there was no difference between the two, were right?

   Does North Carolina give you no pause?  Seriously, you must have one hell of a crystal ball to foresee that Terry will be so disastrous.  Let me point out one real, difference that matters to me:  Under Terry McCauliffe, we will get Medicaid expansion and someone who will work to make health care reform a success.  I volunteer at our free clinic.  We have a waiting list that approaches five years for patients that don’t have an acute illness.  For that reason alone, I would vote for him.  But there are so many more.