Dana Milbank argues that, irascible and difficult though he might be, Rahm Emanuel is actually the best of Obama’s close advisers, not his worst.
I came to a similar conclusion here. Of course, being the best in Obama’s Gang of Four isn’t saying much.
This entry was posted
on Saturday, February 20th, 2010 at 11:24 am and is filed under Obama.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Previously a lifelong Democrat, born in New York and living in New England, surrounded by liberals on all sides, I've found myself slowly but surely 
February 20th, 2010 at 1:28 pm
What does Greg Craig know and when did he know it? Did they promise him the presidency of GM in return for his silence?
February 20th, 2010 at 11:01 pm
Well, Goebbels gave good propaganda advice, Martin Bormann was a very efficient secretary and Himmler was certainly “irascible.” And Dana’s point is??
February 21st, 2010 at 2:56 am
Does the concept “being damned with faint praise” mean anything to you?
February 21st, 2010 at 11:01 am
Best for whom?
February 21st, 2010 at 2:29 pm
Emanuel is probably the source for Milbank’s story, and he is trying to hang responsibility for Obama’s disastrous first year on Jarrett and Gibbs before the Left Democrats can hang it on him. Conclusion, Emanuel thinks that someone’s head will roll, and he has doubled down. If he wins, he will probably have a stronger hand in picking the replacements. If he loses, he’s gone anyway.
This is a big story.