Privately, White House officials have expressed increasing frustration with Holder since last year, in large part because of his decision to investigate whether past CIA interrogation techniques were illegal. In the New Yorker piece, Mayer writes that Emanuel was frustrated not only that Holder took a backward-looking approach toward the CIA investigations but also try Khaled Sheikh Mohammed in federal court — despite objections from Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), an important administration ally on other issues, including the closure of the Guantanamo Bay detention center.

One wonders how much sway Emanuel has in the Obama WH as it may be that Holder and the President are ideological soul mates. The war on the previous administration gets top billing.

Jennifer Rubin speculates further:

Interesting that Emanuel and his spinners are now distancing the White House from their attorney general. One wonders where Obama stands in this drama. Isn’t he, after all, the commander in chief? Either the president was content to go along with Holder’s decisions until they went south or he subcontracted, with no oversight, some of the most critical decisions of his presidency to a lawyer who is prone to making the kind of mistakes a “first-year lawyer would get fired for.

Either way, Obama now must suffer the results of Holder’s ill-advised decisions. There will be much speculation, given Emanuel’s comments, as to whether the White House is getting ready to throw Holder under that proverbial bus. Now, as the Democrats join the Republicans to block the KSM trial and to deny funds for moving detainees to Illinois, it would be as good a time as any.

Removing an AG is messy, messy business. The politcal canyon that Hoder has dug for the president and their party is immense and growing like a Florida sink hole.

Does it matter to Obama?

Likely, no. He had no better opportunity than he did during his SOTU address ten days ago. A dramatic change in terrorist policy would have won himself considerable political capital that he could have used on his own domestic agenda. But the President choser not to. It would discredit his most frequently used segue, “the failed policies of the last eight years, ” something that is clearly ingrained in his psyche.

Why did Boxer fail to think that way?

That is why those 17 seconds in the U.S. Senate were so revealing and worthy of attention. They encapsulated the way in which modern liberalism has lowered the bar of civility for so many in America. And they revealed — yet another time — why this particular senator from California is an embarrassment to her colleagues, her state, and the U.S. miltary. It was not, unfortunately, an embarrassment to Barbara Boxer.

H/T: Jennifer Rubin

From Jennifer Rubin:

And that is why, ultimately, the Obama approach collapses upon itself. This is a president who prefers whenever possible to avoid military action, who isn’t willing to pay for a defense build-up and who is squeamish about using other ”sticks.” He believes in speeches and talk, which he envisions – because he is the luminous Obama — turning the hearts and minds of leaders and peoples previously not inclined to pay attention to us. But how does that work if Obama’s persona shrivels to that of a cold-hearted technocrat obsessed with engaging a loathsome regime? Who will listen to him then and be emboldened by his calls for change if he projects not moral vision, but embarrassing timidity and submissiveness toward one of the most reactionary regimes on the planet?

Obama has unmasked his own rhetoric as fraudulent. And for what — for the nonexistent chance to persuade the mullahs to give up their nukes?

From Charles Krauthammer:

Moreover, this incipient revolution is no longer about the election. Obama totally misses the point. The election allowed the political space and provided the spark for the eruption of anti-regime fervor that has been simmering for years and awaiting its moment. But people aren’t dying in the street because they want a recount of hanging chads in suburban Isfahan. They want to bring down the tyrannical, misogynist, corrupt theocracy that has imposed itself with the very baton-wielding goons that today attack the demonstrators.

This started out about election fraud. But like all revolutions, it has far outgrown its origins. What’s at stake now is the very legitimacy of this regime — and the future of the entire Middle East.

If his inner circle is filled with sycophants and only the like minded from his Chicago, leftist world, he sees everything through an anti-Israel filter. Nevermind the messiah angle. Its a vacuum that considers Obama’s ego far too heavily.

UPDATE: Egypt joins Cananda, France and Germany in codemning Iran and siding with the protestors. H/T to Gateway Pundit.

Is is that Obama is so naive and race-based in his thought processes that he believes that all Hispanic-Americans feel the same way as Sotomayor. Apparently two Hipspanic judges at the same La Raza conferences immediately took issus with her comments. This will prove to not be helpful in her confirmation.

Think Tea Parties for further evidence that Democrats are vulnerable. More from Jennifer Rubin yesterday afternoon who points to the quick turn of events for GOP fortunes in the Senate.

Republican members in the House are noticing and playing hardball by taking on Dem freshmen when they appear on the House floor.

At the very least, the statist micro-management approach to governance is a leap of faith. It has no record of ever succeeding. But I’m sure the Obama team has it all figured out

And Will says:

His administration cannot be faulted for failing to do well what cannot be done well — industrial policy, wherein the political class, with negligible experience in commerce, flounders. The administration can, however, be faulted for trying. The government’s wallow in the automobile industry, under this and the previous administration, merits a hockey coach’s evaluation of his team: “Every day you guys look worse and worse. And today you played like tomorrow.”

If Rubin and Will are correct, its further evidence that Obama has no interest in saving GM but it is two other things he cannot tell you about. First, its to reward and protect a voting constituency and bankroller of Democrat candidates. Second, it is to strongarm an industry into only making a type of vehicle he prefers.

It is worth noting that the Senators who blithely vote to confirm Panetta — and whomever else the popular new President sends up — are setting the bar for future presidents and their nominees. From Geithner we learned that lack of candor and chiseling the Treasury aren’t disqualifiers for a top economic post. From Eric Holder we learned that poor judgment and fibbing to Congress are no barriers to becoming Attorney General. And from Panetta we are learning that “expertise” is in the eye of the beholder and entirely optional for key national security slots.

This of course assumes that DEM senators end their hypocricy and would conduct themselves in such a way which allows this.

Republican strategist Glen Bolger said candidates must tread carefully to look presidential without coming off as presumptuous. “His campaign has made the strategic decision that they have to make voters believe the candidate has already won,” Mr. Bolger said. “The risk in that is that there is a fair amount of hubris.”

If Bolger is correct, many of the moves that the Obama campaign has made – the Berlin speech, the meetings in Washington this week, the naming of a transition team – are based on the theory that you are what you appear to be.

I believe Bolger’s right and the Obama campaign is counting on enough voters deciding on Obama based on the fawning fluff of MSM coverage.