Skip to main content

Please, president-elect Obama, keep your promise, starting with your cabinet and bring change to this nation, not re-cycling.

It's been a long time since Democrats have worked in the Whitehouse or have had cabinet positions. Maybe it makes some sense that to start things off, Obama would consider bringing in some democrats with Whitehouse experience. That, almost by necessity, means Clinton people, or pretty old Carter people.

Personally, when it came time to choose between Obama and Hillary, there was no question in my mind. I did NOT want another Clinton in the Whitehouse. And I don't want the Obama cabinet or administration to look like a Clinton one.

While way to conservative for me, and because he's crossed progressives too many times by supporting more centrist candidates in Democratic primaries, Rahm Emanuel makes sense as a choice. He's extraordinarly well connected to the house and is known as a tough guy-- perfect to play good-cop bad-cop, a game Obama is a master at. He'll be able to work with or ON Pelosi, Hoyer, the bluedogs, progressives and other caucuses.

But, I fear, will Emanuel open the gates for a herd of Clinton vets to invade the whitehouse? That would be a betrayal of the millions of voters, who in the primary, made a very clear non-Clinton choice. We need fresh blood, not Clinton people who were involved in supporting and defending NAFTA, the WTO and Clinton's effort to move the Democratic party to the right.

Come on, President-elect Obama. Sure, it makes sense to start with a few experienced hands. But we hired you to make CHANGE happen, not to recycle.

For example, appoint Robert F. Kennedy to head the EPA right away. You'll be bringing in a fresh face who has a stellar history defending the environment.

And, when it comes to recycling, please, please do NOT recycle more Goldman Sachs people. That CULTURE got us into this mess. There are plenty of really smart people who actually think with the bottom up approach you've spoken about so often. Prove you meant it by hiring someone who's walked that talk.

crossposted from OpEdNews.com

Update
It astonishes me that so many commenters have basically said to just trust Obama and let him do his thing. I can't remember how many times Obama has said he's into doing things from the bottom up. Well, Dailykos is one place where we can all give him a message of what we want. You can disagree with me about clinton appointees, but where do you get off suggesting that I just STF up and trust. The poll seems to indicate, with over 65% for no or just a few, that it's not a bad idea to speak up.

And there must be 20 posts suggesting I disagree on the Rahm Emanuel appointment. I have to assume that none of them read my actual comment. I'll repost it.

While way to conservative for me, and because he's crossed progressives too many times by supporting more centrist candidates in Democratic primaries, Rahm Emanuel makes sense as a choice. He's extraordinarly well connected to the house and is known as a tough guy-- perfect to play good-cop bad-cop, a game Obama is a master at. He'll be able to work with or ON Pelosi, Hoyer, the bluedogs, progressives and other caucuses.

Originally posted to http://www.opednews.com on Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 03:33 PM PST.

Poll

Should Build His Cabinet From Recycled Clinton Staffers?

24%97 votes
20%79 votes
1%7 votes
53%209 votes

| 392 votes | Vote | Results

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  You know what? I trusted Obama to run his (28+ / 0-)

    campaign.  I trust him to be able to run his White House, however and with whoever he sees fit.  Maybe you should do the same.

    "We waste no part of the animal."--Koko, Peter Straub

    by Red Reign on Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 03:35:59 PM PST

  •  People are overreacting (8+ / 0-)

    It only make sense to bring someone experienced as chief of staff to help set up the cabinet.

  •  Obama = No Drama (18+ / 0-)

    Everyone picked so far = WINNER.
    Let "the boss" be the boss.  I don't envy his job, he needs to build his team, and he must be allowed to freely hand pick whoever he feels will do the job the best.  We don't want change for the sake of change, don't throw out baby with bath water.

  •  Oh, give it a rest... (16+ / 0-)

    ...the man announced flat-out he was going to build a broad-spectrum coalition. If that can include Republicans (and it will), why not Clinton Democrats?

    This decision wasn't made lightly. It sends specific signals to Congress. I respect that.

    President Barack Hussein Obama. I say again: President Barack Hussein Obama!

    by Jsn on Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 03:36:54 PM PST

  •  Lighten up, Francis. n/t (9+ / 0-)

    "Go well through life"-Me (As far as I know)

    by MTmofo on Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 03:36:57 PM PST

  •  I voted for Obama to make these choices. (7+ / 0-)

    "I always wanted a son named Zamboni." Sarah Palin

    by llamaRCA on Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 03:37:26 PM PST

  •  If he announced RFK now, Bush would only (6+ / 0-)

    redouble his efforts to gut environmental regulations at the EPA while he has time left.

    •  And scientists the world over (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Mia Dolan

      would collectively groan and brace for 4-8 more years of scientific ignorance driving environmental policy.

      Denny Crane: But if he supports a law, and then agrees to let it lapse … then that would make him …

      Shirley Schmidt: A Democrat.

      by Jyrinx on Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 09:37:44 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Valium works well (8+ / 0-)

    The two are friends and it seems Emanuel gets things done. Besides, I don't have a problem with some of Clinton's exes. Some of them were pretty damned competent.

    You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war..... Albert Einstein,

    by tazz on Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 03:37:39 PM PST

  •  Keep in mind.... (7+ / 0-)

    For Chief of Staff, you generally want to have someone around who's been there before. The real test comes with his other appointments, but it's pretty smart to have someone there to help you through the process who knows what they're doing.

  •  From what I've read so far.. I would like to see: (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    awcomeon, Onomastic

    Defense: Chuck Hagel
    State: John Kerry
    EPA: Robert Kennedy Jr.
    Attorney General: Hillary Clinton

  •  It would be very tough to find a CoS (12+ / 0-)
    with the right skill set who didn't serve in the Clinton admin, don't you think?
  •  where's all this Clinton distrust coming from ? (5+ / 0-)

    seriously.

    Eight years is enough. We dont need more of the same.

    by PoliMorf on Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 03:38:44 PM PST

  •  Robert F. Kennedy (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    terjeanderson

    Was a Clinton loyalist too, though he did not have a role in the Bill Clinton White House.

    I see no reason why Hillary wouldn't have picked him as well.

    Face it.  The candidates weren't that different and you're gonna be dissappointed if you imagined an Obama White House as being different than a Clinton White House.

    Turns out Larry Summers is now rumored to be Treasury Secretary, too.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/...

    how can it be permissable/ to compromise my principle. -- robert palmer

    by Edgar08 on Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 03:40:13 PM PST

  •  ugh; veepstakes revisited (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    terjeanderson, Flaw

    We are sure predictable around here.

    I guess the next few weeks is all about tinfoil hats on Cabinet posts & the requisite critiques thereof.

    Charlie Brown, an American hero who lives in CA-04. This ain't over!

    by LaughingPlanet on Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 03:41:40 PM PST

  •  I, too, would (6+ / 0-)

    prefer outsiders and, better yet, progressive outsiders, although I can't say he'd be "breaking his promise" by appointing Clintonite neoliberals. He, for the most part, ran as one, his rhetoric of revolutionary change notwithstanding. When the crisis peaked, for example, he surrounded himself with Rubinites, then backed the bailout.

    Which is to say: by all means try to push Obama to the left--FDR didn't campaign as FDR in 32, either--but I have limited patience with the surprise over these appointees, which is either phony or uninformed.

  •  oh noes (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    freespeech, Gray, Flaw

    popsicle! oh noes! Pictures, Images and Photos

    President Barack H. Obama ended the Reagan Revolution and started the 21 Century!

    by Tricky on Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 03:42:35 PM PST

  •  Last night Keith asked Howard Fineman (15+ / 0-)

    what Obama would be looking for in his Cabinet.  Fineman's response?

    "Excellence."

    Chill out.  Obama's got this.

  •  And Bush cabinet, Gates is staying put! (0+ / 0-)

    Not confirmed, but hight speculated...

    I don't necessarily think it such a bad idea, they are probably thinking to keep some continuity and stability with two wars raging.  But still, anything left over from Bush is definitely not change.

    "I'm a pessimist because of intelligence, but an optimist because of will" - Antonio Gramsci

    by HGM MA on Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 03:44:20 PM PST

    •  good idea for a year or two (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      terjeanderson, Onomastic

      Gates is anything but a normal bush pick, he was chosen to be as far away from a political ideologue as possible after the rumsfeld disaster imo, and with the two wars it would give Obama some breathing room with a sec of defense who doesn't need to be brought up to speed immediately

      I really don't see gates as dem or repub, just a good sec of defense who has proven he will at least work at doing what is right as far as his president lets him. Obama will be calling the shots though so i expect even more doen that is right

      Powell on palin: I don't believe she's ready to be president of the United States, which is the job of the vice president.

      by vc2 on Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 03:54:57 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Waaah. n/t (0+ / 0-)

    Their number is negligible and they are stupid. -- Eisenhower

    by Pegasus on Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 03:45:42 PM PST

  •  The Clintons campaigned hard for Obama the last (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Terra Mystica

    month.  This is part of the payback, I believe.  

  •  Listen (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    housesella, emmasnacker, Onomastic

    Go read what Rahm has said about what issues you feel are important. For me health care is very important, and from what I have read Rahm feels the same way. Rahm also believes that we shouldn't reach too far, but the goal should be universal health care.

    I also think we should be thinking more about who is in charge of the relevant committees in the senate. Who is in charge of what committees determines what kind of legislation is going to hit Obama's desk. We should be organizing in those states that these committee members reside so we can have an influence over the bills before they reach the President's desk.

    I prefer peace Wouldn't have to have one worldly possession But essentially I'm an animal So just what do I do with all the aggression?

    by jbou on Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 03:46:55 PM PST

    •  I think this is the problem (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jimreyn, Terra Mystica, Onomastic

      with Rahm's politics:

      we shouldn't reach too far, but the goal should be universal health care.

      If not now, when?  Obama has the most political capital he will have for a long time in 2009.

      That said, while Rahm may influence policy, and certainly tactics, it's Obama who makes the real decisions in the end.  I'll see what actual bills are proposed and what Congress does to them.

      Our problems are too big for baby steps.  I think/hope Obama sees that also.  It will take bold action.  Hoefully, Rahm will be implementing a bold plan for change.

      "What we've seen the last few days is nothing less than the final verdict on an economic philosophy that has completely failed." -- Barack Obama

      by TomP on Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 03:54:09 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Sorry to bust your dolly, but (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Onomastic

        that statement fits Obama's health care plan to a "T". Even if Obama's plan were adopted with change, we'd be nowhere near the national health care plan we really need.

        All that is required for evil to flourish is for good people to stand by and do nothing.

        by davewill on Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 04:05:02 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  good grief (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    GreenCA, Lynwaz, Flaw, Vita Brevis

    As was proven throughout the campaign most of the advice handed out here was ignored with what appears to be a good result.

    After the past eight years I want the best and the brightest. If some worked in the Clinton Admin, fine if some have Rs I'm willing to listen to the logic.

    In the choice between changing ones mind and proving there's no need to do so, most people get busy on the proof.

    by jsfox on Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 03:47:09 PM PST

  •  So..... (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    SadEagle, Flaw, Roger Fox, Onomastic

    Just so I get this straight, you want an ideological litmus test for staff positions?

    I would guess that everyone that is chosen to work in the Administration will be interviewed and know what their duties will be as well as what Obama's policy position is.

    Last time I checked, policy is set by the President & it's the Department head's job to implement. I would much rather have someone that had experience & knew the ins & outs of getting things done, than someone with little to no experience but was of an acceptable ideological bent.

    That's how the previous administration ended up with a failed horse judge running FEMA ("Heckuva job Brownie").

    •  Right on Rimjob, I am a long way from liking Rahm (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Rimjob

      or a whole list of things hes done & said.

      But Rahm knows the Hill and will get stuff done. A near perfect match for COS.

      FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

      by Roger Fox on Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 04:37:23 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Not an ideological litmus test (0+ / 0-)

      He wants a loyalty test.  Never mind that Hillary Clinton - and her supporters - made the case for Obama all over the country and delivered their votes for the good guys, all after a campaign where the candidates offered similar policy objectives.

      Right on, Dr. Dean.

      by Mikey on Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 04:41:17 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  wait a minute, Barack has picked one (1) former (9+ / 0-)

    Clinton staffer and that pick warrants this concern? Everything else is rumor and speculation. Can we at least wait until he actually does something before we start criticizing? Christ.

    "The Work Begins Anew, The Hope Rises Again, And The Dream Lives On." -- The Lion

    by marabout40 on Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 03:48:00 PM PST

    •  Waiting... and Ideology (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Onomastic

      wait until he announces, then criticize. Brilliant!

      I don't want to see DLC people in there. I don't want to see right wingers in there. I want to see the best people and I don't think that means Clinton recycles. Some former Clinton staffers will be great as appointees, but if you look at the huffpo appointee/cabinet page, it's like clinton central.

      Regarding ideology, Bush based his appointments primarily upon ideology. I'm saying don't use Clinton appointees. That's all. I'm not saying choose based on ideology, though I'd like to see more progressives. This IS a progressive site, isn't it? OR are the shut up and trust Obama worshippers, sitting at the guru's feet going to tell everyone to shut up. Because when someone tells me to trust just about anyone and shut up, I start considering the source to be, well, not worth considering.

    •  what about his transition team? (0+ / 0-)

      His transition team--which has been publicly announced--is full of former Clinton staffers:

      http://www.mediamouse.org/...

      Also, I'd throw in that it isn't about simply criticizing, it's about trying to hold Obama accountable and push him in a progressive direction.

      http://www.mediamouse.org - Grand Rapids, MI Independent Media

      by mediamouse on Sat Nov 08, 2008 at 09:38:11 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  He may be choosing by talent (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    robkallopednews, freespeech, Lynwaz, Flaw

    as opposed to affiliation. That's what Lincoln did. Lincoln used the difference of opinions to get all the ideas, to have a spectrum of thought from which to choose. And Lincoln was in charge, no question, from first to last.

    From what I have seen, Obama will be in charge with no question. There isn't anyone he can hire that is going to be able to fool him or convince with spurious nonsense--Obama is seriously the smartest man politically that I have ever seen and if ideas don't meet his test it is unlikely they will be acted upon imho.

    His new website shows that he is still listening. AFIAC he is asking us to be part of his cabinet to balance the opinions of the insiders and give him support when times get tough on issues. The game has changed I think.

    820 Illinois-427 Senate Sponsored-152 Senate authored. Obama record on Bills. Palin record 0-0-0. Palin Lies-1 big one and counting.

    by marketgeek on Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 03:48:38 PM PST

  •  So the fact that Rahm is superb and a friend.... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Lynwaz, Flaw, alba

    Means nothing?  The only thing that matters about Congressman Emmanuel is a job he had in the 90's?

  •  for real? (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Lynwaz, terjeanderson, Flaw

    hello, in case you missed it, except for a few scattered 'PUMAs' and obviously some like you, the primary war is over.  In case you missed it, a very, very large number of powerful, smart and successful Democrats currently in DC worked for Bill- he was the last Democratic President, you know.

    Please don't pretend that you have some sort of ownership over the party because you a member of this community.  We are all Democrats, we share- even with former Clinton staffers.

    Give me a f'ing banana - Eddie Izzard

    by linc on Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 03:51:40 PM PST

  •  go to ezra klein's blog (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    freespeech

    and read.

    http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2008/09/time-not-for-a.html

    by bhagamu on Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 03:52:41 PM PST

  •  My mother, an artist, said it best (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    housesella, Flaw

    Obama is painting a picture, with intelligence and a vision for America. We may not understand all the brush strokes, and we will have to wait until his masterpiece is finished. Then we will know.

    Or something very close to that... sorry Mom.

    The Republicans are now like a wounded, cornered animal - and that makes them very dangerous.

    by DupageBlue on Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 03:54:58 PM PST

  •  If you want a Democrat... (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    SadEagle, Lynwaz, Flaw, davewill

    ...with Executive Branch experience, you're kinda stuck with Clinton people, since there probably aren't a lot of Carter aides who haven't yet reached retirement age.

    Let's give President Obama a few months actually in office, seeing how the old Clinton hands perform now that they're not shackled by a Republican Congress and a President who won by tacking to the center, and see how things go.  If he starts going centrist then, I'll join you in demanding some changes.  For now, I think it's way too early to say anything.

    Join the Matthew 25 Network and help Democrats win the next generation of evangelicals.

    by mistersite on Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 03:55:35 PM PST

  •  I see your point, but... (6+ / 0-)

    I disagree with your position.

    Obama needs as many Clinton people in his administration as is "reasonably feasible."  The far right wing nuts are preparing to unleash all types of hell on whatever priorities that Obama chooses to pursue in his first term.  Let's not forget what the Clintons went through.  Obama needs people around him who have experienced an administration under siege.

    The election is won, but in many ways the campaign is just beginning.

  •  hmmm...how was the economy under Clinton again? (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Lynwaz, terjeanderson, Flaw

    Oh, that's right...PRETTY DAMN GOOD...

    Keep your pants on...he's only tapped Rahm so far...

    Abortions for some, miniature American flags for others.

    by Aqualad08 on Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 03:58:46 PM PST

  •  I have two words for you: Carter Administration (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    askew, freespeech, Lynwaz, Nowhere Man, Flaw

    Barack Obama's battle didn't end upon winning the Presidency. No, to quote Winston Churchill, "Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning."

    If Obama wants to truly be President, he needs to balance his desires with working with a Democratic Congress that is itching to regain its power. In order to do that, Obama needs people who have connections in Congress and who know how to navigate through its corridors.

    This selection will help him do that. He has chosen his stick, his bad cop, with Emanuel. And hopefully Emanuel will be able to negotiate with Democrats and make sure that the government will go to the Center... which is what is needed in order to solidify the voters as Democrat and to keep the gains they have achieved.

    Jimmy Carter started office much like Obama, bringing about change. Unfortunately, he ended up angering a Democratic Congress that had even more power than the one we currently have. They ended up ignoring him and pushing past his vetos their own agenda which in turn damaged the Democratic party. After four years, Reagan came in and according to some started the slow demolition of this country.

    If we want Barack Obama to be a 2-term President and for his goals to be achieved, we need for him to work with Congress. Emanuel will help him do this.

    Trust Obama. He knows what he's doing. He's read the history books... and is looking to avoid the mistakes Carter made. This is why Emanuel was chosen for this appointment.

    Robert A. Howard, Tangents Reviews

    by Tangent101 on Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 03:58:49 PM PST

  •  Sorry, he needs some of the experience (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Lynwaz, Flaw, Onomastic

    of the Clinton administration.  Let's not start with the circular firing squad before the posts are even announced.

  •  Been pondering this and have concluded that Rahm (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Flaw

    is exactly the type of person to be WH Chief of Staff:

    The duties of the White House Chief of Staff vary greatly from one administration to another. However, he or she is responsible for overseeing the actions of the White House staff, managing the president's schedule, and deciding who is allowed to meet with the president. Because of these duties, the Chief of Staff has at various times been dubbed "The Gatekeeper" and "The Co-President".

    The President's "Gatekeeper" needs to be intelligent, politically astute, and should know many of the politicos who will seek the President's time. Rahm's politics may be too centrist for many on this site (including me!) but if President Obama hopes to build a bipartisan or nonpartisan administration, a centrist would make the perfect "gatekeeper."

    In addition, I'm sure that Team Obama has thoroughly vetted Emanuel for temperament ("no drama") and if they're satisfied that Emanuel can do the job, who am I to question them? They've pushed all the right buttons so far.

  •  the last time i checked the clinto administration (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Flaw, Roger Fox, Onomastic

    came with good economy, jobs and security.

    the ONLY thing i don't want from the clinton administration is his "under-the-table-sessions" with you know who.

    i could care less about anything else.

    •  There's one other thing I don't want back from (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      robkallopednews

      the Clinton years, and that is the damn drama. And I don't need to find it here. The diarist has some guestions about Rahm, as do many others, but thinks that Rahm will do a good job. The diarist's concern seems to be more about the number of Clinton folks who could walk back through the White House doors. That isn't necessarily Clinton bashing. It could just be wanting to go forward and not backwards. The Clinton years weren't always wonderful and Bill didn't do everything right.

      The diarist has concerns and guestions and wanted to share them with his fellow Kossacks. And right off the top he's told to shut up and called "mofo". I don't care for repugs calling me unpatriotic or far right "christians" telling me I'm going straight to hell. And what goes on here when someone does not toe the party line is the same thing. This is supposed to be the place where we can come and talk things through, get information and be safe in doing so. So please, if you really think Barack has got it all covered - then act like it. A few manners would be lovely.

      "After all, enough is enough." - Jiminy Cricket

      by Onomastic on Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 05:38:30 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  It's kind of disturbing how anti-democratic (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Roger Fox, Onomastic

    This Democratic thread got very quickly. "Shut up, if you knew WTF you were doing you should have run for president, blah blah blah."

    I took great solace in the "Chill the Fuck Out, I Got This" screensaver during the campaign. Obama's now about to be an elected representative -- you know, REPRESENTING -- from the ground up. He's got to have something to represent, which is to say our expressed opinions.

    In other words, Chill the Fuck Out. WE got this.

  •  I like the move. I have stopped second guessing (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Flaw

    there moves until they prove me right...

  •  yes we should have (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    freespeech, Flaw

    only inexperienced neophytes running the country.  

    What do you think fucked clinton up in the early 90's?  Not having had any experienced democrats.

    •  got it (0+ / 0-)

      unless someone has worked for clinton, they'll fuck up Obama.  There's no other way to be in a position to be a great cabinet member? The DLC stinks. Clinton people are all DLC. Hello?

      •  Is that totally necessary? (0+ / 0-)

        You have a problem with a group of people because you disagree with the person(s) they worked for? Throw the baby out with the bathwater much? Geez Louise! It's ok to disagree to disagree without ripping of peoples' head and...well, you get the gist.

        Dear America, Thank you for the thoughtful gift. It's just what I wanted. - me

        by left coast newbie on Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 05:11:19 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  It hasn't even been 48 hours (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    freespeech, Flaw, JoanMar

    since Obama won the Presidency. If people don't trust his ability to make decisions now, WTF did we all support him and vote for him?

    President Obama's every move will be scrutinized under the GOP microscope. I see no reason to get involved in GOP spin.

    We had his back 48 hours ago. What has changed that?

    I don't remember hearing an Obama pledge to consult Kossacks before every decision he makes. Must be I missed it?

    "Change has come to America." ...President-elect Barack Obama

    by Ekaterin on Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 04:10:21 PM PST

  •  Go Read Matt Yglesias (6+ / 0-)

    I like Yglesias's take on this. He makes a good point that Carter tried to bring in a bunch of DC outsider neophytes, and that it ended up being a prime reason he couldn't get things done. I'm a little too young to know how much truth there is to that, but from what I've read about Carter's presidency it rings true.

    Another good point Matt makes is that whether one personally likes Rahm or not, it is a little disingenuous to describe him solely as a recycled Clinton staffer-he's been rather successful in his other endeavors since then, and those experiences just as much as his time in the White House make him a worthy pick.

    •  There was one neophyte (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Onomastic

      a consummate outsider among them, one to whom much power was given to shift the power away from corporations to consumers. A man by the name of Ralph Nader. He gloriously pissed away everything and achieved nothing. Better to have people with some passion and a lot of skills to get things done than to have very passionate people who can't get shit done.

      I, Barack Hussein Obama, do solemnly swear ...

      by freespeech on Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 04:23:34 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  I think the Emanuel pick for CoS is great (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    terjeanderson

    This second guessing -- less than 48 hours after Obama was elected -- has got to end.  Emanuel has lots of pluses -- least of which is that he's all about promoting Democrats and the Democratic Party.

  •  So we're going to get eight of these ONOZ diaries (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    terjeanderson

    with every new appointment, right?

    Just checking

    "Well, the problem here is that you're out of candy. You're gonna need more candy." Rachel Maddow on the Big Bailout

    by cishart on Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 04:23:21 PM PST

  •  We were promised investigations (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Roger Fox

    This time, we don't let them get away.
    In that plan, Hiring a real intense bastard to stand at the door is a good move.
    Let Karl Rove tell the new administration he doesn't feel like showing up.

    There are two kinds of Republicans, millionaires, and chumps.

    by MadCityRag on Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 04:25:43 PM PST

  •  To the diarist: STFU (0+ / 0-)

    We won this election with the support of Clinton Democrats like me and Obama Democrats like you.  I think it's a contradiction to say that there is a difference between a Clinton Dem and an Obama Dem.  There isn't any from my perspective.  I was proud to have voted and supported both candidates.

    The Clinton Administration was the last legitimate government in this country and there are a lot of very competent people from that time, whose advice and support Obama will need.  Obama is a very smart person who is going through the process of picking the right people to handle the task of running this government.  

    I trust his judgment, and you should too.

    Alternative rock with something to say: http://www.myspace.com/globalshakedown

    by khyber900 on Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 04:33:10 PM PST

    •  STFU? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Onomastic

      and maybe kiss Obama's feet too? And god forbid actually thinking!

      I'm thrilled with Obama's victory, but hell if I'm going to let anyone tell me to STFU. And it is very disappointing that such attitude seems just fine to so many here at a supposedly progressive site. Since when did speaking opinions warrant such despicable reactions. Oh that's right, you're a clinton supporter. You get to tell me to STFU. And did I read somewhere that I was troll rated? For what? Thinking?

      •  Maybe if the argument wasn't so reminescent (0+ / 0-)

        of all the OLD divisiveness that belies change. Do you really believe that labeling people in order to express your disapproval of them is conducive to inclusivity? If you have a problem with Mr Emanuel's appointment, there is nothing wrong with naming it. If the only thing you have against him is that he served in a previous administration, that is doubtful to be seen as a "progressive" position. But, I'll forego telling you to STFU. Thinking isn't the issue, its the MANNER of thought that was rejected, IMHO. Peace.

        Dear America, Thank you for the thoughtful gift. It's just what I wanted. - me

        by left coast newbie on Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 05:03:24 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Read BO's fav book-Team of Rivals-Lincoln's Cabt, (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    terjeanderson

    ~we study the old to understand the new~from one thing know ten thousand~to see things truly one must see what is in the light and what lies hidden in shadow~

    by ArthurPoet on Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 04:41:16 PM PST

  •  A Kennedy is a fresh face? nt/ (0+ / 0-)
    •  Fresh Does Not Mean Unknown Okay (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      robkallopednews

      Robert Kennedy, Jr is not a household name and he hasn't really been a Washington fixture.  One reason is the DEMS have been out of power in the executive branch for 8 years.  So in many ways he would be a fresh face and change.

      •  Kennedy is not change. (0+ / 0-)

        He stands for ignorance in the face of science. Maybe he'd be a change from the Clinton years, but his attitude echos the Bush years.

        Denny Crane: But if he supports a law, and then agrees to let it lapse … then that would make him …

        Shirley Schmidt: A Democrat.

        by Jyrinx on Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 09:34:09 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Caroline Kennedy IS CHANGE (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          robkallopednews

          If you knew anything about Caroline you would know that although she's a Kennedy, she's stayed out of politics until now - other than campaigning loyally for her family and remaining devoted to her beloved Uncle Ted.  This in no way presumes she's a political neophyte.  She's a Constitutional scholar, an attorney, a human rights advocate, a best selling author, a scholar, and a woman of enormous dignity and grace.

          Caroline Kennedy has lived a life beyond reproach.   She's been gifted with great wealth and privilege but has never abused her gifts.  She's lived a life Americans can be proud of - often in the face of unbearable pain.  

          •  Erm, I was talking about Bobby Jr. :-) (0+ / 0-)

            I'm not saying there's anything wrong with picking a Kennedy, just that there's something wrong with this Kennedy.

            Denny Crane: But if he supports a law, and then agrees to let it lapse … then that would make him …

            Shirley Schmidt: A Democrat.

            by Jyrinx on Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 08:30:56 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

  •  your poll left me NO choices (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    terjeanderson, left coast newbie

    How about this choice:

    Rahm is a bulldog and will get shit done - he is an excellent choice for COS...

    I cannot answer your poll with those choices

    You know I left the Republican party a year ago to support Obama..came to Kos awhile back.

    Everyone is so supportive of Obama, until Nov 6 and all of the sudden he does not know what he is doing

    So you think you know better than Obama who his COS should be?  Just curious

  •  Keep your enemies closet (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    terjeanderson

    President-elect Obama is not going to create the same environment over the last eight years.  His administration will be one of inclusion. The Clinton Supporters came through for Obama. If he trust this guy, then I'm not going to complain.  Are we going to be like the conservatives?  A party that doesn't forgive.  It's time to move forward.

  •  Change is good (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    terjeanderson

    But I voted for getting shit done.

  •  We all need to chill the f$%^ out. (0+ / 0-)

  •  Why would Obama select some unknown (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    terjeanderson

    He need someone who know how to get things done.  How many of you could be his CoS?

  •  PATHETIC!!! (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    robkallopednews, terjeanderson

    Come on people...
    Are we gonna give this guy a chance or are we gonna act like gutter snipes on day 2 & help out the cuntservatards who are just foaming at the mouth???
    LAY OFF!!!

    Peace. Chap"Hussein"man

    by Chapman on Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 05:07:44 PM PST

  •  I don't know about you guys... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    terjeanderson

    ...but I voted for as much of a return to the Clinton years as I could get.  Heck, that's why I supported a Clinton i the primaries.  I don't expect Obama to give me as much Clinton as Clinton, but don't expect me to shed a tear if Obama sees some good in the 1990s and in some of the people who ran things back then.

    -5.38/-3.74 I've suffered for my country. Now it's your turn! --John McCain with apologies to Monty Python's "Protest Song"

    by Rich in PA on Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 05:08:53 PM PST

  •  Yes, we voted for change...from Bush! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    robkallopednews

    For me the question isn't whether Obama is "recycling" Clinton administration officials. The real question is whether he is naming people capable of doing a good job and who are committed to implementing the change agenda that Obama was elected on.  

    As you point out, there is a huge need for the Obama administration to include people who have meaningful experience in the White House - and that will invariably have to include folks who worked in the Clinton administration.

    I fought with Rahm at times when he was in the White House -- he could be a real asshole, but he was very focused and effective in almost everything he did. Despite philosophical differences with him, I think he is a good choice for CoS. I'm glad you see that.

    As for rumours about Treasury, Summers certainly wouldn't be my choice -- but whatever our preferences might be, I'd fully expect that Obama's choice for Treasury will be a very high profile establishment figure in order to send a message of calmness to the public, the markets, and the internal community. I think Volcker would be a far better choice, but we won't see a Robert Reich/ Paul Krugman in that post.

    I'm more than willing to criticize decisions and appointments that President-elect Obama makes, but it seems pretty premature to be in a panic about appointments that haven't been made yet.

    In the end, I believe that the Obama cabinet and senior appointments will include a good mix of old/new, moderate/progressive, as well as gender, race/ethnicity, geography etc.  

    Once social change begins,it cannot be reversed. You cannot uneducate the person who has learned to read...You cannot oppress people who are not afraid anymore.

    by terjeanderson on Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 05:32:13 PM PST

  •  kosmonauts (in the main) are homers, robkall; (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    robkallopednews

    you are always going to get this kind of overall homer reaction. The funny thing is that Obama accurately sensed the desire for a movement, and movements drive politics and politicians, not the reverse. But most middle class people are not trained to believe they have to push, struggle, keep on struggling, but (instead) eager to find someone they can trust, stop thinking, lie back and enjoy the scenery. . .

    True progressives are now in for some serious disenchantment.

  •  No to RFK, Jr. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Jyrinx
    For example, appoint Robert F. Kennedy to head the EPA right away. You'll be bringing in a fresh face who has a stellar history defending the environment.

    The biggest problem with the Bush administration in the EPA (and many other agencies) was the disregard for science and evidence.  Although RFK, Jr. does care about the environment, he shares the Bush administrations disregard for science.  He was very involved in promoting the purported vaccine-autism link, despite the lack of evidence to support that claim.

    Environmentalism gets is power from science and evidence.  Putting someone like RFK, Jr. at the EPA would be an absolute disaster.  

    •  AGREED. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Mia Dolan

      No RFK Jr. No, no, no. He put his personal crusade above the risk of the deaths of children. NO NO NO NO NO.

      Denny Crane: But if he supports a law, and then agrees to let it lapse … then that would make him …

      Shirley Schmidt: A Democrat.

      by Jyrinx on Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 09:33:00 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Oh please... (0+ / 0-)

      Bobby Kennedy is a terrific choice.  You're in the minority on this one.  

      Also - there are arguments on both sides for and against vaccines re: autism.  You're apparently on the side that there is no correlation.  You, too, have not been proven conclusively correct.  There is obviously NO conclusive answer at this time regarding the causes of autism.  No one knows for certain.   There are those who believe vaccines are a contributor and those who believe they are not.  You can't absolutely disprove Bobby's hypothesis any more than he can absolutely disprove yours - although I'm not certain what yours is.

      Why not admit you're on different sides of the autism issue and that neither of you knows for certain.  To rule out RFK Jr. for the environment job because he errs on the side of caution regarding vaccines and you do not is foolhardy at best.

      •  Wow (0+ / 0-)
        Your ignorance of how science works is simply breathtaking.

        There are arguments on both sides only to the extent that one side's argument is based on science and evidence and the other side's argument is based on pseudo-science and outright lies.  

        There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that vaccines cause autism.  While you cannot conclusively prove that there is no link, that is fairly common in science - it is very difficult to prove a negative.  That, however, does not mean that there is a valid scientific debate.  To say there is puts you in the category of the intelligent design and the anti-global warming proponents.  It is a gross misunderstanding of how science works, that unfortuntely, a lot of people like your self can't figure out.

        What RFK is doing is not erring on the side of caution.  Rather, it is disregarding science and evidence in making policy.  In RFK's case, it is repeatedly lying to support your "hypothesis."  What is foolhardy is discouraging vaccines,which is resulting in the comeback of diseases that have previously killed millions.

        Environmentalism gets its power from science and evidence.  Putting a liar and a hack like RFK at EPA will undermine the cause, and will seriously damage Obama's credibility.  I am not alone on this - a lot of scientists (and a lot of people on this thread) are horrified by the prospect of an RFK pick.  Your purported justification for that choice, and the stunning lack of understanding of sceince you display, is exactly why he can't be picked.

        •  FDA and mainstream medicine (0+ / 0-)

          Maybe, just maybe, big pharma has had something to do with the "science" involved in studying the Autism connection. The Bush FDA is not exactly trustworthy. It's a pawn of big pharma.

          Good on Kennedy for standing up to it.

          Science can be treated like a religion too. You know, the people who say the bible can say no wrong.

          Thomas Kuhn, in his groundbreaking book, Structure of Scientific Revolutions, talked about paradigm shifts. But he was thinking about corporatist sliming of science either.

          I've long thought that there's another category of science-- the Sphincter Police.

          Just remember how, for years, fat consumption was tied so closely to heart disease, until they spent a few billion on studies and found out they were wrong. How much has been spent checking the autism-vaccine connection?

          "too often, the head steals the heart's best blood."

          by robkallopednews on Sat Nov 08, 2008 at 11:37:00 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  Do. Not. Trust. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    robkallopednews

    Do speak up.

    IF you are a progressive, you might (oh please) have noticed that Obama is centrist in MANY ways.

    And DC will work on him HARD to pull him into the Democrats' vortex of giving-up-ness and whining we can't do what we hoped to.

    NOW is a great time to speak up.

    Be good to each other. It matters.

    by AllisonInSeattle on Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 10:59:44 PM PST

  •  I agree with Rob on this diary... (0+ / 0-)

    Rahm Emanuel is a sleaze.   He's a Scorcese caracature and a shameful choice.  Plus with him in charge there will never be equity in the Israel/Palestine issue. Emanuel is a stalwart ideological supporter of Israel who will battle against any equity for Palestinians.  His appointment sends the WRONG message to a world we supposedly want to keep peace with.

    I, too, wrote about the need for Obama NOT to recycle from past
    http://tinyurl.com/...

    I was thrilled when Samantha Power was enlisted by the Obama camp as a foreign affairs advisor and then DEEPLY DISAPPOINTED when the Obama campaign threw her under the bus for an essentially benign OFF THE RECORD remark re: Hillary Clinton. Considering how nasty the Clinton side got after Powers' dismissal, Powers' OFF THE RECORD reference to Hillary was a non issue.  

    CHANGE MEANS CHANGE!!  I'm an Obama supporter.  I've written about him and campaigned for him.  I'M ECSTATIC AT HIS ELECTION!!  I'm still crying and overwhelmed that we have Barack and MICHELLE.  Michelle Obama is an incredible woman and a magnificent role model and having her in the White House is an honor.  I believe the Michelle Obama White House will be the greatest of all time.  But Barack needs to populate his Executive Branch with agents of change - not agents of sleaze. No matter how you slice it - RAHMBO IS A SLEAZE - and his presence in the White House sullies it.

  •  Obama administration (0+ / 0-)

    I'm not going to waste my time.
    Obama must prove that real change has come.
    To me, Rahm Emmanuel means the DLC is still in charge.
    No change.
    The liberal and progressive base of the Democratic Party has been screwed again.
    Obama has allowed the "good old boys" in the for instance, the Hawaii Democratic Party to hang on.
    Personal experience and observation.
    Obama set the reform efforts back for us in the DP of Hawaii.
    Same old, same old until consistently proven otherwise.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site