A Few... Calm Questions, Regarding The Status And Future Of Elizabeth Warren...

[WillyT]

Let's say that all this is true... Warren doesn't want the job. Warren has set up a super duper agency, and had a hand in selecting the upcoming appointed head. Warren is all good and satisfied.

1) Who in the FUCK is in charge of communications at the WH?

Because that Bloomberg Headline (Obama Eliminates Warren as Consumer Head), and similar variants, is being picked up tonight in paper after paper across the country: http://www.google.com/webhp?hl=en&ned=us&tab=nw#q=elizabeth+warren&hl=en&tbm=nws&source=lnt&tbs=sbd:1&sa=X&ei=fPQgTqCmFo64sQPly8VX&ved=0CBYQpwUoAQ&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=158405ac10b7c632&biw=1024&bih=679 So tomorrow morning the nation, at least the part that does not post at DU, will be reading about how Obama did not pick Warren to head the new agency.

2) Are they THAT out of touch, or do they hate the liberal/progressive wing of the party so much that they are willing to dismiss the possible negative reaction to this news?

3) Why didn't they leak this earlier? Why dump it out on a Friday night? (Ooo, ooo, I know that one!)

4) Are they going to be smart enough to have Elizabeth Warren say or do something to calm everybody down? Like maybe have her there with Obama when he announces, and maybe say a few words in support of the new nominee???

5) Are we dealing with the gang that couldn't shoot straight, or is there something far more cynical going on?

:shrug:

[nobodyspecial]

1. Last time I looked

the PR people don't get to write the headlines.

This is a leak by an unnamed source, not the White House. I guess you would have to ask anonymous if they thought it would piss off liberals, and that's exactly why they pre-empted the WH rollout of the news to get everybody riled up.

The report says "according to a person briefed on the matter." Sometimes Republicans are also briefed, but I'm sure they wouldn't leak this on purpose to get the blogs churning all weekend without a weekend response.

If Warren herself addresses it, I'm sure many will still find fault, saying she was pressured or coerced to step aside. I'll be sure to watch for your response if she does as I'm sure you'll just let it go.

"Are we dealing with the gang that couldn't shoot straight, or is there something far more cynical going on?" Love this. Our only two choices are incompetent or corrupt. You're quite a wordsmith.

[WillyT]

2. Well Thank You... BTW, You Forgot Your Profile...

:D

:hi:

[nobodyspecial]

4. Well, I'm sure you think you know what that means

But it doesn't.

Love how you chose to go after me than address any of the points I made.

Of course, since I don't hate Obama, I am somehow suspect. Although, some people are so friendly. You're the second person to greet me. I wonder how many people have tried to get me banned so far.

Last time I looked, we were still allowed to support Obama and the Dems around here -- or has that changed?

[U4ikLefty]

18. still no profile?

telling

[tkmorris]

7. GOOD PR people make certain THEY control what leaks

And when. For example, in this case, if a leak had been chosen as the preferred method to control the narrative, good PR people would have created a leak stating that Warren did not want the job but instead chose to advise the President on who would be a proper nominee. Perhaps go even further and state that Warren had been offered the job but had turned it down, reluctantly, to a deeply disappointed President.

You see how that works? No doubt those with evil in their hearts would attempt to "counter-leak" something along the lines of what was actually leaked in our reality, but in such games the first story to hit the papers usually wins. In this alternative reality Obama gets away smelling clean, Warren looks noble, and you have every opportunity for your base to have confidence in whoever is ultimately nominated.

Meanwhile, back on our own timeline, not so much.

[WillyT]

8. Thank You !!!

Exactly!!!

:hi:

[nobodyspecial]

9. Umm... PR people don't control every leak

If it was deliberate, yours would be a good strategy. That why I don't think anybody on Obama's side did it. My guess is a GOPer caught wind of it and ran to the paper with it, knowing it would sow discord. And so many here are just playing right into it.

I may not be happy with things, but I'm not going to let blind hatred of Obama let me be played by the RW.

[madinmaryland]

3. Dude. Layoff the "Jolt". Why don't you just say the Ms. Warren is unqualified

for the job and leave it there.

:shrug:

[WillyT]

5. Huh ??? - I'm Currently Pissed That She Is NOT Going To Be The Agency Head...

I believe she is the MOST qualified.

Also pissed at the WH for once again fumbling the ball.

Maybe you were posting to someone else???

:shrug:

Or... were you being :sarcasm:

[sabrina 1]

10. There is nobody in the country more qualified and I don't think

Willy is saying anything other than that. The question that needs to be answered is 'what happened'? Why is the most qualified person for the job, we know this because of how scared Wall St. is of her and how hard the Republicans fought to keep her AND the agency from succeeding, but why then, is she going to spend time with her family, when just weeks ago she was still expecting to be appointed to the job?

[riderinthestorm]

6. I agree with all your points. K & R (to zero by the way, WTF?) nt

[WillyT]

11. Thanks...

I'm an Unrec magnet, LOL!

:evilgrin:

:hi:

[sabrina 1]

12. Rec'd ~ the talking points are meant to be that she 'never wanted

the job' so anything that contradicts that, won't be too popular with some.

Geithner did not want her, so she's going home to 'spend time with the family'. Funny how just two weeks ago she forgot to tell those groups who were gathering support for her appointment that she 'didn't want the job'. :eyes:

[WillyT]

13. Kick !!!

:kick:

[WillyT]

14. Last Kick From Me...

I think...

:kick:

[JoePhilly]

15. What percentage of the 40% of Americans who vote know her name?

I do find it funny that everything that the administration does, or doesn't do, or might do, or considered doing, or says, or doesn't say, gets twisted into an example of how the Obama administration hates liberals and progressives.

Let's imagine they nominate some one else other than Warren, and #4 happens.

Will you be more or less angry at Obama?

Or ... will you conclude there is something "far more cynical going on" ... and that Warren is part of it?

I mean, if she likes the pick ... maybe they are blackmailing her?

[WillyT]

16. Oh I'm Pretty Sure A Significant Percentage Of Activists, Volunteers...

donors, phone-bankers, and precinct walkers know her name.

If you follow and care about politics in general, a significant number know her name, and a large portion of them know the political calculus that went into this decision.

:shrug:

[JoePhilly]

17. And if #4 happens .... ???

You left that part out.

[WillyT]

19. They BETTER Do #4, Or They Really Are The Keystone Cops...

:shrug: