dagblog - Comments for "Petraeus at CIA?" http://dagblog.com/link/petraeus-cia-9982 Comments for "Petraeus at CIA?" en On the other hand, Panetta http://dagblog.com/comment/116943#comment-116943 <a id="comment-116943"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/comment/116929#comment-116929">I like the way the CIA goes</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>On the other hand, Panetta used to be a Republican, or at least worked for a lot of them.  So there's *that* bipartisanship, all in one CIA director, now SecDef.  This is like musical chairs; Gates must have to go to Dyncorps or Martin-Marietta or something. </p> <p>Wikicables indicated that Cheney, Rummy, Leon and Petraeus play pool at the Cheney's once a week.  Mullen is optional cuz he is no party animal, while Dick puts a lampshade on his head when he has enough single-malt in him.  They say he also cheats.</p></div></div></div> Wed, 27 Apr 2011 17:17:00 +0000 we are stardust comment 116943 at http://dagblog.com I like the way the CIA goes http://dagblog.com/comment/116929#comment-116929 <a id="comment-116929"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/link/petraeus-cia-9982">Petraeus at CIA?</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p><span style="text-decoration: line-through;">I like the way the CIA goes to a Republican.</span></p><p><span style="text-decoration: line-through;"> Sweeeeeeeet sweeeeeet bipartisanship!  </span></p><p><span style="text-decoration: line-through;">However, I'm sure this will cause no problems for Democrats down the road.</span></p><p><em><span style="text-decoration: line-through;">Ouch. Ouch. Stop, you're hurting me. How'd you get down here in Mum'</span></em><em><span style="text-decoration: line-through;">s basement? How'd you find me? What're those badges? And who is this Donald you keep talking to on your cells? Ouch!!!!!</span></em></p><p>In fact, I welcome our new CIA Overlords.</p></div></div></div> Wed, 27 Apr 2011 16:35:39 +0000 quinn esq comment 116929 at http://dagblog.com For my money, David Dayen has http://dagblog.com/comment/116910#comment-116910 <a id="comment-116910"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/link/petraeus-cia-9982">Petraeus at CIA?</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>For my money, David Dayen has it right:</p> <p><em>"Panetta was Chief of Staff under Bill Clinton and before that a US Representative from the Central Coast of California. He’s been CIA Director in the Obama Administration, which as I understand it now is basically the Secretary of Defense job, given all the covert operations. And then you have a military commander moving to the CIA. So the merging of the military and the intelligence community is complete. Within a few years it’ll just be one big black op. The good news is they can cut the military budget then, and put everything into the secret, off-the-books intelligence budget so as not to raise suspicion."</em></p> <p>Someone left <a href="http://www.thenation.com/blog/36661/petraeus-link-troubling-suicide-iraq-ted-westhusing-story">this sad, sad link </a>in the comment thread.  Never knew.  Military with moral codes must suffer often.</p></div></div></div> Wed, 27 Apr 2011 14:47:40 +0000 we are stardust comment 116910 at http://dagblog.com