Ex-Clinton Administration officials who are dubious?

[Eric J in MN]

Mike McCurry is lobbying against Net Neutrality.

Jamie S. Gorelick is seeking retroactive-immunity for phone companies who destroyed our privacy.

Lanny J. Davis bashed the liberal blog "The Daily Kos" in a Wall Street Journal op-ed.

Can you name any others?

[aquart]

1. Why don't you state up front who you're stomping for?

Because this back door attack is beyond disingenuous.

[Eric J in MN]

6. I voted for Kucinich in 2004. NT

NT

[peacetalksforall]

16. Why link this posting to this campaign? There are many people who

revered Bill Clinton and didn't see the things that we're learning. It is raw disappointment to learn what these people are doing and what they've said since 2000. So question - there can't be an exchange about past close aides and defenders without tying it to this campaign?

Are any of the three mentioned working for the Senators campaign? If not, isn't analysis permitted? I like lists and the organization that comes with learning - they are aides to memory.

DU is about education and sharing. For me, by me, of me.

[Maribelle]

19. Raw disappointment to learn what these people are doing?

That's it, you simply believe without question anything anyone posts, and experience this "raw disappointment" in your brain?

It's a pack of lies, these "dubious" assertations.

You might want think about being a little kinder to your brain.

[peacetalksforall]

21. I read about McCurry before today. Is it not true? What are you

getting at - are you saying it's not true?

If true, it's raw disappointment to me.

If you're talking about Gorelick - it's true that I don't know if it's true or not - so, are you saying that it's not true about Gorelick?

Are you advocating some kind of process that DUers should go through.

I do research myself and I'm frequently saying that i'm waiting for the other side of a story or that I'm not believing anything since Yahoo didn't demand more than four short paragraphs to cover the story that someone linked to.

The more I write the less I understand about what you're saying?

[Maribelle]

22. Let's put it this way then - You beleive McCurry is being dubious because ...

he is not pro Net Neturality, or having the FCC dictate how the internet will roll out? Did I clearly state your point? If not, please correct me.

Then, let's clarify this even further, shall we. Based on three definitions of dubious below, which of the three best fits your impression of Dubious McCurry, 1, 2 or 3.

dubious adj

1. unsure about outcome: not sure about an outcome or conclusion
I was a little dubious about whether or not to trust him.


2. possibly dishonest or immoral: likely to be dishonest, untrustworthy, or morally worrisome in some way
It's a dubious proposition.


3. of uncertain quality: of uncertain quality, intention, or appropriateness
The thesis is based on several dubious assumptions.


Please clarify this one.

[MethuenProgressive]

2. Out of how many 'Ex-Clinton Administration officials'?

You named 3. How many do you suppose there were over 8 years?

[wyldwolf]

3. The Dailykos blog gets bashed on DU. That makes Davis "dubious?"

[Eric J in MN]

4. DUers don't claim that Daily Kos is anti-semitic,

...as far as I've seen.

Misleading people about Comments at a liberal blog to argue that the blog is anti-semitic does make Lanny J. Davis dubious.

[wyldwolf]

7. there are anti-semitic post on Dkos

Markos, addressing this on Hardball, said he has no control over what people post there.

[Eric J in MN]

8. What do you think of this op-ed by Lanny J. Davis?

http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110008763

[wyldwolf]

9. I believe Davis held back

Liberal Fundamentalism has the potential to be as big a problem as Conservative Fundamentalism.

[cmkramer]

23. I bet he said it with a straight face too.

I read Lanny Davis' op-ed about DAILYKOS. I thought it was fairly mild myself.

Problem is the lefty blogs can dish it out, but they can't take it.

[Maribelle]

14. Lanny Davis did not claim the Daily Kos is anti-semitic

He, however, did not like the post of tomjones, did he now.

Lanny Davis is unambiguous and truthful, the opposite of dubious.

[Eric J in MN]

17. tomjones was being sarcastic.

If Lanny Davis cared about the truth instead of just wanting to smear Daily Kos, he'd have realized taht.

[Maribelle]

18. He did not smear Daily Kos.

He did not call Daily Kos anti-semetic, and he did not smear them. Not only that, I think that Daily Kos is big and brave enough not to worry.

And if tomjones was merely being sarcastic, it probably was unclear.

Perhaps you and Ore Eyeley need a rality check.

[liberalnurse]

12. Don't worry............

Such Flame-bait threads are just a reflection of their abusive, impotent personalities ....They have no where else to channel frustration. Remember the bully in the school yard type...No one here really cares....honestly.

I pay attention to what our Candidates actually say and do.......That's what has impact, not a flame bait junkie thread at DU.

[antigop]

5. So who all signed the letter?......

http://www.workingassetsblog.com/2007/09/money_party_vs_people_party_du_1.html

edit to add following excerpt:
>>
I'm probably underestimating the extent of corporate influence here, too, considering some others on the letter likely work at big corporations or corporate front groups, but aren't technically registered as lobbyists. For instance, the corporate-funded Democratic Leadership Council's Will Marshall is one of the signatories.

So there you have it - as populist Senators fight for the middle class and fight for workers abroad, a slew of former Clinton administration officials-turned-lobbyists is working directly with the Bush White House to try to ram a set of new NAFTAs through Congress.
>>

[niceypoo]

10. And your point is?

You forgot to mention Dick Morris. I suppose he is an undercover Clinton mole working to undermine america also?

[antigop]

11. Did he sign the letter? n/t

[emilyg]

13. and your point is??

[Eric J in MN]

15. A recent article by Glenn Greenwald said Jamie S. Gorelick is advising...

...phone companies who destroyed our privacy on how to get Congress to give them retroactive-immunity.

I was wondering what other ex-Clinton officials are up to.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/09/22/telecom_immunity/index.html

[antigop]

20. How many ex-Clinton officials signed the letter?

http://www.workingassetsblog.com/2007/09/money_party_vs_people_party_du_1.html

edit to add following excerpt:
>>
I'm probably underestimating the extent of corporate influence here, too, considering some others on the letter likely work at big corporations or corporate front groups, but aren't technically registered as lobbyists. For instance, the corporate-funded Democratic Leadership Council's Will Marshall is one of the signatories.

So there you have it - as populist Senators fight for the middle class and fight for workers abroad, a slew of former Clinton administration officials-turned-lobbyists is working directly with the Bush White House to try to ram a set of new NAFTAs through Congress.
>>

<edit> fix link