I’m not sure about that. The magnitude of some of these problems gives him the chance to offer equally large solutions, if he’s so inclined. To my mind, the evidence so far says he is.
From early on in the election season I have been saying that I look forward to complaining about President Obama. So far I have been disappointed: nothing to complain about President-elect Obama so far. Damn.
Of course he will disappoint me in some things. He has not subscribed to my newsletter so he can’t know all of the right answers.
Hiring competent people based on skill sets more than partisan dogma who can actually get to work on day one? Doesn’t disappoint. That he would surround himself with the best of the old Clinton teams is not a surprise to anyone who was paying attention: from early in the campaign against Hillary it was easily noted that more of the old Clinton team had coalesced around Obama than Hillary and that he would use the best minds where ever he found them. He cares about getting the job done. National and planet loyalty cards. Not personal loyalty cards. (And that btw is a change.)
I will feel free to bitch when I believe he fucks up and I am sure that I will find those things to bitch about. There hasn’t been a President yet who hasn’t screwed up some in some way as best as I know. Highly doubtful that he will be much different. So far he just hasn’t had much of a chance to screw up. Give the man a chance. Have some patience kids. Wait for it.
I’m not saying that I wanted him to appoint unqualified people, but there are people who are both qualified, and not from the Clinton administration.
But at any rate, I guess we’ll have to wait until Obama is sworn in. I’ll concede that is is possible to have high ranking cabinet officials from the Clinton administration, and not have what would amount to a third Clinton term.
C’mon, Lib. My mention of Shodan was part of an implied parenthetical discussing the “That’s not change” line, wholly incidental to the OP.
I haven’t looked into it, nor do I take issue with the Holder choice, but I’m pretty sure there was a bit more to it. Like he waffled on waterboarding as torture and/or supported wireless wiretapping. Things like that. (Oh, and in case it’s not clear, obviously he didn’t do that in his position as ADA under Clinton, but said as much during Bush’s terms.)
The Audacity of Hope, p.11. Sometime in the four years subsequent to next January 20, he is going to actually have to do something.
You can get elected (apparently) being a Rorshach inkblot, but you can’t govern as one. He’s never had to learn that lesson before. Let’s see how fast he learns it.
Regards,
Shodan
I heard Karl Rove, of all people, defend Obama’s choices by pointing out that in order to hire experienced Democrats for his cabinet, he basically had a choice between hiring people from the Bush administration or people from the Carter administration.
Most of the pundits and columnists I’ve seen working the “Do you call this CHANGE?” angle are conservatives hoping to turn the liberal base against Obama. The bottom line is that the policies he pursues will still be his own. He’s hiring people who are experienced and able technicians, but they’re going to be implementing Obama’s policies, not their own.
I know some people were disappointed about Lieberman, and I know some people might be a little chagrined that he’s taking a very centrist, measured approach so far, but that just shows what I thought all along. Barack Obama is not a wild-eyed idealogue but a cold-blooded pragmatist. I think that’s what Presidents have to be. Clinton certainly was. Bush was an idealogue, and look where that got us.
I think that the liberal base will basically be satisfied if Obama can manage to make progress ina few significant areas – setting a withdrawal plan for Iraq, making some headway – any headway at all on the economy, stopping the right wing slide on the Supreme Court, rebuilding US relationships with the rest of the world, ending executive abuses like wire-tapping, closing Guantanamo and a few other things. Mainly just stopping and beginning to reverse the damage done by 8 years of You Know Who.
There are always going to be some left wingnuts who aren’t going to think he’s liberal enough juts like there are always right wingnuts who never think any Republican POTUS is conservative enough, but those people (on both sides) aren’t going anywhere at the end of the day.
Way ahead of you…
Good luck finding any guns now! MWA HA HA HAA!
I’m very unhappy with his pick of Eric Holder for Attorney General. The Drug War is the most socially destructive policy in this nation, and the fact that there is no one actually challenging it is disturbing.
Obama was on Barbara Walters last night and she brought up this “doesn’t look like change” meme, and he basically said, “I am the agent of change. I’m bringing in people with proven track records of making things happen that can bring about the change that I promised.”
Or something like that.
what kind of tardmuffin rips on a guy who hasnt even shown up for his first day on the job yet?
just curious.
I totally understand wanting things to get going 6 years ago to reverse the damage the current administration has done but this ain’t and episode of Hero’s where Peter is gonna poof back to “Now” and say we have to do things differently…we actually have to wait, maybe even a year or more to see if hes any good at this.
Critical1 He has started doing things though, he’s started hiring people. That’s a significant thing, and that’s what people are commenting on.
well its a bit more than that, I am hearing "omg he hired X?!?!?!?!? hes just Clinton 2.0
and all I am saying is yeah a bit early to make that call.
Seems like he’s going to keep Gates on as SecDef (at least for awhile). That’ll piss off a lot of the far left, but personally, I think it’s a smart thing to do.
Me neither. Boy, I tell ya, my husband’s relieved.
(Oh, and as for the OP, I’ve mostly heard the 'Wait,what?" talk from Republican voters too. I think I’ve figured out why none of them could “figure out what he stands for” before the election - surely nothing he’s done is surprising to anyone who’s read his website!)
I personally relish the idea of Clinton 2.0. An improved and updated version of Clinton, without all the bugs of the first release? Sign me up.
Correct me if I am wrong, but didn’t we have another administration somewhere between Clinton and Obama?
That’s probably not what we have to watch out for. Quite the reverse and much worse.
I actually hope that the community here doesn’t blindly follow and drool over his every decision (or just sweep them under the rug) for the next 8 years. I’m 100% ok with the magnifying glass and critical-eye treatment Bush has gotten here, but I want to know that it’s a two-way street.
Is there any reason to believe that this whole “outrage” over Obama’s cabinet picks isn’t just another blown up and manufactured story along the same lines of the PUMAs? So far the only hint of it I’ve seen has been from the media or people who are just predisposed to complain about Obama.
This is, uh, an interesting statement coming immediately after you yourself quoted Obama recognizing that he will inevitably disappoint a lot of people. What did you think he meant by that?
Not many, there aren’t. Anyone who served under Reagan or either Bush is tainted and not to be trusted. Who does that leave?