In the Arena

Team of Rivals

The President-Elect indicated to me last summer that he was interested in surrounding himself with the toughest, smartest people he could find in his Administration. People who would argue with each other, who would disagree with him. This seems a wise course of action. Obama has the strength and confidence, I believe, to be able to handle a little contention–and the lack of diverse, pushy voices is, in part, what killed the Administration of George W. Bush.

Last summer, Obama told me that he’d be open to talented Republicans–people like Robert Gates, who may well be asked to remain for a time as Secretary of Defense. That would be a good thing. Gates has been excellent.

But Obama should also be open to people in his own party, people who didn’t support him for President. Which brings me to Richard Holbrooke–who is, without question, the finest diplomat in the Democratic Party, but one who supported Hillary Clinton and has been a rival of several of Obama’s closest foreign policy advisers, namely Tony Lake and Susan Rice.

No one questions Holbrooke’s talent. Stories are told about his ambition and his, well, pushiness. I had the opportunity to watch Holbrooke close up during the Bosnia peace negotiations a decade ago. I spent a week on his shuttle, watching Holbrooke face down Slobodan Milosevic (who needed to be pushed)–and work, very nicely thank you, with the National Security Adviser Tony Lake, who was frequently in phone contact from Washington. Holbrooke put together a first-rate team for that effort–a team of rivals, in fact, including General Wes Clark, Don Kerrick (of the National Security Council, who should be getting consideration for National Security Adviser now) and Christopher Hill of the State Department. It was an incredible show, one of the few clear-cut diplomatic triumphs of the Clinton Administration.

There are others who would be acceptable, perhaps even very good Secretaries of State. I have high regard for Senators Kerry, Hagel and Dodd, General Jim Jones, career diplomats like Nicholas Burns and Chris Hill. But there is only one diplomat who has the skill and track record–historical memory and the working knowledge–to negotiate the deals that will be needed between India and Pakistan, Afghanistan and the Taliban and who will know how to play the game to come with Iran…and that’s Holbrooke.

I’ve known the man for 30 years. He is a friend, and our friendship made me reluctant to make this argument. But this is a difficult moment for our country overseas. We will have great Ambassadors in the President-Elect and Vice President Joe Biden. We also need our very best negotiator on board–and that’s Richard Holbrooke.

Related Topics: Uncategorized
  • Latest on Swampland

    Pete Souza / The White House via Getty Images

    Political Picures of the Week, May 18-25

    TIME’s photo editors bring you the best pictures of the past week from the Beltway and beyond.

    Obama Administration Blocks Global Health Fund To Fight Disease In Developing NationsHuffPost Politics

    From left: AP; ABACAUSA

    The Phony War: Obama and Romney Are Debating Character, Not Policy

    More than five months from Election Day, the back-and-forth about Mitt Romney’s record at Bain already feels played out. Unfortunately, there’s good reason to expect the campaign continues in this vein indefinitely. Neither Barack Obama nor Mitt Romney are terribly interested in dwelling on policy platforms. Romney’s plan to slash spending and keep taxes low on the wealthy isn’t especially popular, at least not at any level of detail beyond a blithe promise to shrink the deficit. Meanwhile, Obama’s signature first-term achievements, like health care, the stimulus and Wall Street reform, are all unpopular or tricky to sell. (The Dodd-Frank bill is the most popular of these, but hyping it means offending wealthy donors.) So what we’re getting instead is a superficial duel about character–and, worse, one that’s based on the largely false premise that the better man can better “manage” the economy back to health.

  • Hammerlock

    Joe–judging from your entry, it would seem there is a plethora of talent and a deep bench to choose from.
    .
    With that said, however, you can only choose one for a position. People will be disappointed no matter who gets chosen. That said, here’s hoping the best people are picked who will work in their chosen slot.

  • yoshiattack

    What I find interesting is that Kerry could be the Secretary of State. That just seems…odd. I felt bad for him in 2004, but I wonder if his famous long-winded monologues would serve him well in such a position.

  • terrapinion

    “…open to talented Republicans…”
    .
    At this point, given the demonstrated filth with which Republicans run their campaigns, given the demonstrated incompetence of Republican governance, and given the demonstrated failure of Republican ideals, tendencies and philosophy, I have to question the judgement, sanity and, yes, the talent of any politician that still clings to that party identification.
    .
    There is plenty of room for them in the Democratic Party. The ranks of the DLC could use the fresh blood.

  • terrapinion

    Plus, I agree with Yoshi. Kerry has no place in the Executive Branch. Keep him in the Senate where he can continue to be productive.

  • yoshiattack

    Terrapinion, don’t demonize the whole of the other party. It wouldn’t get Obama anywhere, and it won’t get the Democrats anywhere either.

    A lot of people who voted for McCain, believe it or not, did it because they have conservative beliefs that Obama opposes. Switching to the Democrats won’t really promote those beliefs.

    We’ve seen what monolithic ideological legislation has done for the GOP’s time in the seat of power.

  • etsumi

    No to Kerry or Holbrooke. I like Clark, though Hill would be a fine replacement for Condi the H20 carrier.

  • http://derekg.wordpress.com/ Derek

    If the people who voted Obama into office wanted a centrist running the country they would have voted for Clinton instead. Obama better be careful about surrounding himself with nothing but centrists, or right wingers. The majority of his appointees ought to be liberals, because that is who supported him.

  • http://pourmecoffee.blogspot.com pourmecoffee

    I am fascinated by the mix between “knowledge” and “skills” in these cabinet selections. It’s not something I’d given much thought to in the past. Typically, you hear a lot about knowledge – expertise and advice. In recommending Holbrooke for Secretary of State, you talk a lot about skills – actual talent at negotiating. It pinned my ears back a little, because I don’t really think about many other cabinet positions in terms of a sliding scale of ability at a discrete skill. I bet I should.

  • judgementz

    terrapinion,

    He got elected on the platform of bi-partisanship and running on conservative ideals. If he does not pick some members represent those conservative ideals he will go over like Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. We see what fabulous numbers they have racked up for the Dem controlled congress.

    Didn’t they get to single digits in July? Look dems can beat their dead horse George W Bush but, elections are two years away and if they don’t show more promise than they have in the previous two I think you are going to see a backlash.

    Pelosi and Reid said they where going to run bi-partisan and still got away with being able to blame their whipping boy, however that time is coming to a close. Now the dems will start to be held accountable. So lets hope they are smart and try a new tack of being bi-partisan instead of talking about it.

  • 53_3

    judgementz:
    .
    But last week, you said he was too liberal.
    .
    You wouldn’t be, uh, flipflopping, now, would you?

  • http://derekg.wordpress.com/ Derek

    Obama is the most liberal member of the Senate. That is what McCain kept saying. That is why he was elected. He owes the centrist cult nothing and it would be foolish of him to burn all his bridges with the Left, now that he has power. He will need their support in another 4 years. His choice for chief of staff is already a slap at the Left.

  • Friar Tuck

    Derek, give the man a chance, for cat’s sake. Rahm’s job is to be an enforcer, and that starts with the transition itself.

  • http://whatnot.bombdotcom.net/ John D. Moore

    I’m hearing a faint rumbling about Fareed Zakaria for Secretary of State? The prospect thrills me. On the off chance that he was offered it, would he take it?

  • trifecta

    The media shouldn’t be joining in on the center-right thing. The same people who said Obama was running as a socialist, can not be allowed to say that he ran as a centrist after he won without being challenged.

    Instead of being challenged, the media embraces the talking point. That is just horrifically wrong.

  • teresakopec

    zakaria would be great

  • Dee in Columbia MD

    How is it possible for so many people to live through a 2 year campaign run by a non-ideological candidate and come away thinking he’s a progressive, a centrist, or a conservative. The man is a pragmatist, one I might add, who has been telling us for 2 years that he detests labels because they are counterproductive and he is right. Obama wants people who have the skill set and the drive to get the job done. You want to know what’s wrong with Washington – it is that everyone comes from the same schools, the same backgrounds, and regardless of gender, race or sexual orientation, they think a like because they have come through a similar set of experiences. And this happens on both sides of the aisle. Obama wants to eliminate group think by surrounding himself with diversity of thought not just diversity of race and gender — but clearly a few days after the election everyone wants to retreat to their comfortable label driven corners and demand that Obama join them. I don’t know if Holbrooke is the man but if he has the necessary chops and there is no one else anywhere that has better abilities then he should be the man I don’t care what side he is on or who he use to support. The country is in trouble and if we don’t put up our A game it could very well go down the tubes. So I say the Obama scouts ought to be looking at any body who has got some serious game.

  • pseudonymous in NC

    Democratic Wilsonians potentially open the door for neocons. Ken Adelman is already sniffing around to see if there’s a way in.

    There are some obvious criteria to seek at State: diplomatic smarts, well-established relationships with foreign leaders, but also the sense that there’s no game of telephone between the SecState and the White House. Holbrooke’s interesting, and hard to label, though I’m guessing that Obama still talks to Sam Power — she may be offered a job, but probably not an outward-facing one where her temperament might cause problems — and her relationship with Holbrooke is fairly spiky on certain issues.

    Did you read Brady Kiesling’s book, Joe? Or David Jones’ piece in the AFSA journal earlier this year? One of the chief inward-facing tasks of the new SecState is to rebuild and retool the Foreign Service — remember, the US has more military band members than diplomats — while taking a hard look at the mechanisms of force projection. So that has to be weighed up as well. Holbrooke has the experience to rebuild State, but I’m not certain that he has the vision. Steve Clemons has a similar perspective: he’s worried about a Clinton III Cabinet, and I have to agree with him. He likes Hagel as a pick for outward-looking realism, which would slam the door on neoconnerie, but Hagel hasn’t explicitly signed on to Obama’s for-pol goals, which I think is a problem, and would need to be backed up by career State types to head the internal reform.

  • Dee in Columbia MD

    How is it possible for so many people to live through a 2 year campaign run by a non-ideological candidate and come away thinking he’s a progressive, a centrist, or a conservative. The man is a pragmatist, one I might add, who has been telling us for 2 years that he detests labels because they are counterproductive and he is right. Obama wants people who have the skill set and the drive to get the job done. You want to know what’s wrong with Washington – it is that everyone comes from the same schools, the same backgrounds, and regardless of gender, race or orientation, they think a like because they have come through a similar set of experiences. And this happens on both sides of the aisle. Obama wants to eliminate group think by surrounding himself with diversity of thought not just diversity of race and gender — but clearly a few days after the election everyone wants to retreat to their comfortable label driven corners and demand that Obama join them. I don’t know if Holbrooke is the man but if he has the necessary chops and there is no one else anywhere that has better abilities then he should be the man I don’t care what side he is on or who he use to support. The country is in trouble and we need to put up our A game. I say the Obama scouts ought to be looking at any body whose got some serious game.

  • judgementz

    53_3,

    I have posted little in the last few months just because of the climate around here and many of the fixtures here resorting to name calling and labeling instead of actually debating.

    His campaign and rhetoric was but, he is shaping up to be a lot more moderate than he was on the campaign. So who is actually going to emerge that guy from the campaign trail or the guy of the last 3 days?

  • bbpdx

    Holbrooke might be fine for the top job, don’t know. I’m going to say something that is impolitic, but I’m going to say it anyway:
    .
    I think it would be valuable for our main diplomats involved in our Middle East efforts from Israel to Pakistan to be non-Jews. Specifically, secularists or non-dogmatic Christians. I think that symbolically it makes it easier for the U.S. to play mediator.
    .
    This is the biggest issue in Israel of course, where it seems for decades now, when we seek to play “honest broker”, we send Jewish diplomats.
    .
    But it’s also an issue in dealing with Arab countries or with Iran. Symbolism is important in diplomacy, and they’re not religion-blind so its silly for us to pretend its not an issue.

  • bbpdx

    judgementz, I think he was pretty moderate on the campaign trail.
    .
    I think it was the Right who keep talking about how liberal he is (i.e. socialist) until people believed it.
    .
    He’s never sounded like anything so much as a pragmatist to me. Which is why I voted for him. When there are many big problems to be solved, a little pragmatism can’t hurt.

  • http://derekg.wordpress.com/ Derek

    The new motto of the Right “To the vanquished go the spoils.”

    A few days ago they were calling him a commie and friend of terrorists. Now they are complaining that he isn’t appointing more of them to cabinet positions.

  • trifecta

    John Edwards ran quite to the left of Obama. Dennis Kucinich ran very far to the left of Obama. Yet, if you listened to Fox noise, you would have believed that we would have Leon Trotsky discussion groups going on in the White House if Obama won.

    Obama is not that liberal. I just object to allowing the blowhards who accused him of being a commie to flip-flop the next day and say he ran as a Reagan democrat. They shouldn’t be allowed to be so dishonest.

  • Mr. Nice Guy

    @terrapinion: The ranks of the DLC could use the fresh blood.

    Hmm. Makes me wonder if we’ll see a case of “fight from the inside.” Will we hear, sometime in the future, how the Repugs sent younglings to the Democrats to infiltrate the party, and foment discord from within, to destroy the enemy?

    Not that the Dems need any help self-destructing…

  • Mr. Nice Guy

    @trifecta: They shouldn’t be allowed to be so dishonest.

    I agree. Let’s line ‘em up and shoot ‘em.

    Seriously – how do you get rid of a Carney, or a Scherer?

  • yoshiattack

    Threat much, Mr. Nice Guy? I know the reaction that would ensue if rusty happened to say that about somebody he doesn’t like…

  • http://pourmecoffee.blogspot.com pourmecoffee

    What the he** is wrong with you people? Paul Volcker is a nine foot tall gigantic monster-beast, most likely from space. How can you just sit there while this megazoid is a few inches away from our President. This is crazy.

  • Mr. Nice Guy

    Yoshi, my friend, either you forgot your Xanax, or the batteries in your Acme Sarcasmo-meter, aka “snark detector,” need to be replaced.

  • nibblybits

    I echo others who find the idea of John Kerry as Sec of State bizarre. If anything, perhaps he’s better suited as Ambassador to France. But best of all, he should stay in the Senate and take the chairmanship of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that Biden just gave up.
    .
    After all, why oh why would Obama want to deplete Congress of his senior allies? Especially the Senate in which seats were so hard won that they are actually considering letting Lieberman continue to caucus with them simply for the possibility that they might need his vote.

  • nibblybits

    Let me also throw in Samantha Power as a close confidant and excellent candidate for a new generation of diplomat. (With all due respect to Holbrooke, he’s had his time in the past.)

  • 53_3

    judgementz:
    .
    Then the best thing you can do is to make a connection with facts , and try to avoid talking points.
    .
    Obama is no conservative, nor did he put forward any type of conservative agenda. I think he’s going to do his best to not make it difficult for small business, but other than that, the guy is showing a progressive agenda.
    .
    right now, his job is to stabilize things, then try to get the economy back on track. If he achieves that, then watch and see…

  • 53_3

    judgmentz:
    .
    ” have posted little in the last few months just because of the climate around here and many of the fixtures here resorting to name calling and labeling instead of actually debating.”
    .
    Far be it for me to raise the rather ugly pointer, but going to any right wing website is much, much worse. Worse yet, the moderators on those websites make sure that a dissenting voice has a muzzle, and, of course, gives the local dogs free reign.
    .
    Keep in mind that if you lose your connection with facts then you are wide open to attack.

  • oizydoizy

    I’m having some trouble imagining Richard Holbrooke as Secretary of State.

    A simulation involving Hal Holbrook on a holodeck would be helpful.

  • oizydoizy

    Oh, and by the way, Joe -

    Don’t you think Bill Richardson is angling for this position as we speak? You know, speaking of former Clintonistas.

  • efive

    Dick Durbin should be Senate Majority Leader. Harry Reid was mediocre, even as a place-saver.

  • bitterpill8

    Richard Holbrooke will be an effective choice for State: he is tough and he knows the neighbourhood. Things are at a place where no one has time for on the job training. Susan Rice may well be groomed to take over. I am not sure about Samantha Powers: maybe a place in the UN at No 2 or in a policy shop within State. Fareed Zakaria simply does not have access or credibility in India/Pakistan or in the ME. He is doing well with his new CNN program, but he comes off as someone who is skilled at that job. The post of Amb to Israel is also important. Does AIPAC get to have a say? I think so. But it may be time to appoint someone outside the faith. Hey Fareed Zakaria: what would you do if asked?

    Is it not great that we have choices. The one concern I have is that the bi-partisanship argument can go too far. I have great respect for Hagel and Lugar, but I don’t see them as being in the first rung. State has ome neocons; someone has to take a broom to that place.

  • http://derekg.wordpress.com/ Derek

    “Derek, give the man a chance, for cat’s sake. Rahm’s job is to be an enforcer, and that starts with the transition itself.”

    You will have to forgive me but I have a natural mistrust of anyone who is a member of the DLC. It also bothers me that so many of them, and other retreads, are being named as members of the new “liberal” administration. Even when liberals win enforcers are sent out to keep them in check.

  • sevenoaks07

    Bitter: Holbrooke would be on my list, too. I would not have any Republican at State. It is vital to project Pres elect Obama’s policy with its “Liberal bias”. John Meacham’s centre right bs is just another talking point. To a certain sector of our commentariat our country will always be “centre-right” no matter how voters do their job.

    It would be helpful to hear about suggestions for the NSC from knowlegdeable posters here.

    The Economic Team is issue No 1 and I hope we will see some nomination soon. My very limited experience in these things tells me that more often than not the better candidates are simply not interested in a job that has all the problems and requires one to take a hefty pay cut. Which is why we end up with Rubin and Paulson and Corzine in a governorship. Having made their bundle these men are ready for a bit of “sacrifice”. Not being snarky at all. I believe even the diminutive Robert Reich is not short of a buck or two.

    On a lighter note: has anyone seen Paul Volcker and Robert Reich side by side recently?

  • rustyreturns

    The same Holbrooke who made a deal with the devil himself Joe Klein? “Karadzic demands alleged documents of Holbrooke deal“.
    http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5hwO7bpHiL9c6SmHPul9VoK0dep0w

    Or, perhaps you mean the man who helped a non-military Larry Lawrence to be buried at Arlington Cemetery just a few years ago? “Holbrooke helped Larry Lawrence get rights to be interred at Arlington National Cemetery. Lawrence died on January 10, 1996, and was buried at Arlington National Cemetery. Bill Clinton presided over Lawrence’s burial at Arlington and delivered the eulogy. In 1997 his body was disinterred and brought to California after congressional investigators searched military records and found no evidence that Lawrence was ever in the Merchant Marine”.

    And, this little goody of his days cavorting with the likes of Suharto in East Timor, “in August of 1977, then Assistant Secretary of State Richard Holbrooke traveled to Indonesia to meet with Suharto in the midst of one of the Indonesian military’s brutal counterinsurgency campaigns in East Timor in which tens of thousands of East Timorese were being slaughtered. Holbrooke visited officially to press for human rights reform, however once Suharto was met by Holbrooke, he (Suharto) was praised for Indonesia’s human rights improvements and was told that he in fact welcomed the steps that Indonesia had taken to open East Timor to the West, allowing a delegation of congressmen to enter the territory under strict military guard, where they were greeted by staged celebrations, welcoming the Indonesian armed forces.

    Behind the scenes, Holbrooke and Zbigniew Brzezinski played point in trying to frustrate the efforts of congressional human rights activists to try and condition or stop US military assistance to Indonesia and in fact accelerated the flow of weapons to Indonesia at the height of the genocide.”

    Yes Ladies and Gentlemen, the finest of Democrat Diplomats at your disposal to the new Obama Administration. “Change YOU can believe in”!!!

  • sgwhiteinfla

    Derek,
    .
    Have any other positions been filled? This is why people always say that Democrats know how to screw things up. We are less than a week from a historic election getting the presidency back and here we are arguing about people being selected for the administration who havent even been selected for the administration. And I would remind everyone that we had a pretty good run with Clinton in office so if Obama picks up some of the people from that administration who were actually good at their jobs why is that a bad thing? Can we get behind our new president for at least 2 weeks and give him a chance to actually name his staff before we start criticizing it? At this rate the GOP won’t have to tear Obama down, his own supporters will beat them to it!

  • nibblybits

    And Clinton had lousy appointments, starting from his chief of staff Mac McLarty to his Cabinet posts, many of whom were political chips being called in. I hope that Obama will resist the lobbying of people who think they are ‘owed’ and instead picks the best people for the job. He should keep in mind that Clinton lost Congress a couple years in, because he couldn’t get his major promises, including health care, passed or had to make huge compromises like Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.
    .
    Which is another reason why Rahm is such a great choice, in spite of his personal demeanor. With Rahm working the House and Biden working the Senate, hopefully the Dem majority will fall in line.
    .
    Which is also why it’s imperative that Waxman is able to unseat Dingell over at the House Energy and Commerce committee. Dingell will block Obama’s alternative fuels agenda, as a stooge of the auto industry. The Energy Committee chair is too important to leave in his special interest hands.

  • wvng

    For those who are saying that Obama is now changing his positions (judgement et al), I would submit that I have never seen a candidate for President who was clearer or more consistent in his positions.
    .
    Just this morning, in President-Elect Obama’s first ever Saturday morning address, he repeated these core policy positions and restated the need to press forward on them all as component parts of an overall strategy to dig us out of a ditch and move us forward as a nation. Remember, this is a guy who understands strategic thinking, as opposed to repub tactical thinking. Obama’s radio address is here:
    http://otrans.3cdn.net/a935f21490985cc7e6_z3m6ztacs.mp3
    .
    For those who say he didn’t offer policy detail, that simply translates into “I accepted the RW talking point that he didn’t offer detail and chose not read the highly detailed white papers he had on virtually every conceivable policy area.”
    .
    I really look forward to having a President who speaks to us as adults.

  • http://derekg.wordpress.com/ Derek

    I don’t see why the Left needs to take a backseat to the centrists or right-wing, when it comes to making suggestions for the open positions. We keep hearing old names mentioned, from the same group that supported deregulation, and the war in Iraq. I wonder how those ideas turned out? If this election is really about change then the new “liberal” president’s staff ought to reflect it.

  • sgwhiteinfla

    Derek Says:
    .
    Saturday, November 8, 2008 at 6:13 am
    “Derek, give the man a chance, for cat’s sake. Rahm’s job is to be an enforcer, and that starts with the transition itself.”
    .
    You will have to forgive me but I have a natural mistrust of anyone who is a member of the DLC. It also bothers me that so many of them, and other retreads, are being named as members of the new “liberal” administration.
    *********************************************************
    .
    I see nothing wrong with promoting whom we think would be the best guy or woman for some post. I see nothing wrong with debating the merits of a person who has already been named. But look at your own words. You are saying you are bothered by ficticious people. So far there has been one position officially announced and thats Rahm Emmanuel for COS. So all I am saying is if you are pi$$ed then be pi$$ed at the people who are SUGGESTING the names that you don’t agree with. But don’t get so worked up about people who many never see the light of day in an Obama administration.

  • sgwhiteinfla

    Derek Says:
    .

    “Derek, give the man a chance, for cat’s sake. Rahm’s job is to be an enforcer, and that starts with the transition itself.”
    .
    You will have to forgive me but I have a natural mistrust of anyone who is a member of the DLC. It also bothers me that so many of them, and other retreads, are being named as members of the new “liberal” administration.
    *********************************************************
    .
    I see nothing wrong with liberals/progressives promoting whom we think would be the best guy or woman for some post. I see nothing wrong with us debating the merits of a person who has already been named. But look at your own words. You are saying you are bothered by ficticious people. So far there has been one position officially announced and thats Rahm Emmanuel for COS. So all I am saying is if you are pi$$ed then be pi$$ed at the people who are SUGGESTING the names that you don’t agree with. But don’t get so worked up about people who many never see the light of day in an Obama administration.

  • http://derekg.wordpress.com/ Derek

    The list of people being considered for the important positions has been discussed pretty clearly. So far it looks like the only job a liberal will have is cleaning the toilets. If you are happy with that, fine. Pardon me for not being happy about it.

  • James, Los Angeles

    I’m in favor of putting some old hands in critical cabinet positions: State, Justice, Defense, Treasury. The Bushies have left a number of time bombs as detailed by this extraordinary essay in Esquire.
    .
    .

    More than any other recent election, we are voting this year not merely for a president but to overthrow two governments. The one we can see is the one in which constitutional order has been defaced, the national spirit degraded, and the country unrecognizable because so much of the best of itself has been sold off or frittered away. The other one is the far more insidious one, a doppelgänger nation of black prisons, shredded memos, and secret justifications for even more secret crimes. Moreover, the current administration has worked hard not only to immunize itself from the political and legal consequences of the government we can see, but it has also worked within the one we cannot see in order to perpetuate itself.
    .
    .

    For the past several months, it has worked to make extricating ourselves from the catastrophe it has wrought in Iraq as hard as possible. It has sought to make permanent the culture of corporate brigandage and predatory incompetence that it has made a hallmark of its stewardship of the country and its government. Salted throughout the vast bureaucracy are dozens of little homeschooled land mines, the products of a dozen cheapjack diploma mills selling patent-medicine history to the spiritually gullible. The fantastical hiring practices that only recently have come to light in the Department of Justice are only the most visible example of this, but the poisonous philosophy that has guided this administration is in all the institutions of the government Barack Obama hopes to lead. It is not dormant. It is there, replicating itself like a virus does in the cells of the body, waiting until it can erupt and debilitate him and his administration.

    .
    .
    .
    Esquire Endorses Barack Obama for President – Election 2008 – Esquire

  • wvng

    President-elect Obama’s first radio address is here:
    http://otrans.3cdn.net/a935f21490985cc7e6_z3m6ztacs.mp3

  • sevenoaks07

    Ok Let’s discuss people who are actually nominated since I don’t see us being consulted before a nomination is made. Patience and Peace.

  • http://derekg.wordpress.com/ Derek

    Anyone notice Obama changing his tune on getting out of Iraq? I wonder if it has anything to do with keeping the Republican “Gates” in his position.

    I wonder who will be put in charge of persecuting the war crimes conducted by the previous administration, Karl Rove.

  • sgwhiteinfla

    Yep I can see it now. Democrats will be boycotting Obama before he makes it to the inauguration. Sad really.

  • sgwhiteinfla

    Derek
    .
    No I have not seen Obama changing his tune on Irac. In fact the Iraqis are now more inclined to sign on to the SOFA due to Obama’s election according to some reports because they believe that he will get our troops out of Iraq. There is also an article out that an army recruiter is using Obama’s victory as a tool to help bring in new recruits by telling them that by the time they are done with their deferment of 2 years Obama will have the military out of Iraq. But you are more than welcome to try to back that up with some links or quotes or something.

  • sgwhiteinfla

    Iraq that is

  • James, Los Angeles

    .
    *Barack Obama will responsibly end the war in Iraq:
    .
    Immediately upon taking office, Obama will give his Secretary of Defense and military commanders a new mission in Iraq: successfully ending the war. The removal of our troops will be responsible and phased.
    .
    .
    * Encourage political accommodation:
    .
    Obama and Biden will press Iraq’s leaders to take responsibility for their future and to substantially spend their oil revenues on their own reconstruction.
    .
    .
    * Increase stability in Iraq and the region:
    .
    Obama and Biden will launch an aggressive diplomatic effort to reach a comprehensive compact on the stability of Iraq and the region. They also will address Iraq’s refugee crisis.

    I don’t see how he is “changing is tune on getting out of Iraq.”

    .
    Barack Obama and Joe Biden: The Change We Need | Iraq

  • rose83

    Derek, sorry to break the news but Obama was never that liberal. He supported banning flag burning and FISA. He was a moderate on Iraq, after he got into the senate. The only evidence we have that he’s a true liberal is the Iraq speech, a speech that he quickly walked back during the early stages of the war. So while like you I’m unhappy about the Emanuel appointment, I’m not surprised.

    I’d really like to see Samantha Powers somewhere. Maybe UN ambassador or National Security Advisor? I disagree with her on many things – and I think she is at times borderline naive – but she’s sincere and honest, two qualities that are now desperately needed.

    What’s so frustrating is that Obama has a mandate for a progressive agenda, and the country – the world actually – desperately needs one. If he isn’t able to turn this horrible situation around, there will be consequences in 2010 and maybe even in 2012. If he advances old DLC ideas and things don’t improve, it’s not like voters will conclude he wasn’t sufficiently progressive so they need to vote in a more progressive Congress. They’ll vote in Republicans. Some so-called strategists don’t seem to get that…

    sg, no we’re not boycotting anyone! We’re just doing what Joe Klein and David Brooks are doing: arguing for Obama to appoint the people we want, and complaining when he doesn’t. This is a normal part of the political process.

  • Paul-no not that one

    sg, after the last 8 years I can understand why people are anxious about who is being named. I want new people/new ideas too.
    Having said that, there are people who have been here all during this process and a couple of them have been “concerned” about the silliest of things to the point it is hard to take them to seriously.

  • rose83

    Please free me from moderation!

  • Paul-no not that one

    “too” seriously, that is.

  • rose83

    Derek, I’m sure he’ll end the Iraq war. He doesn’t have a choice as someone – maybe David Gergen – pointed out: if he doesn’t end the war he’ll face a primary challenge. He remembers 1968. In addition, even conservatives are happy to the end the war at this point. Only McCain was still attached to the idea of a hundred years war. So there’s nothing pushing him to keep troops in Iraq, albeit with the exception of a small permanent base that is inexpensive and doesn’t result in American casualties.

    P-NNTO, sometimes people are just pessimistic. Like me… Unfortunately we’re often proven right, but we’re always happy when we’re not.

  • sgwhiteinfla

    PNNTO
    .
    I agree that the concern trolls are in full effect. In less than a week we have gone from “end all the cronyism” to “if he doesnt hire my guy im going to have a hissy fit”. Its amusing and troubling all at the same time. To call it petty would be an insult to the word petty. And even useless doesn’t begin to encomp@ss what arguing about who President Elect Obama will name to his cabinent more than 3 months before ANY of them will make their first decision amounts to. Now it will be Obama supporters that I will be having to send to snopes.com because they got a chain email that they believe that Bill Ayers is going to be named Education Secretary in Obama’s administration. My how times have changed.

  • Paul-no not that one

    Maybe it is just semantics but pessimism, cynical, critical, and sour aren’t synonymous but in 2008 they have come to be.

  • Paul-no not that one

    Again sg, it’s been a horrible 8 years. I think I “get” why people are wanting something different-NOW. I don’t blame them.

  • http://derekg.wordpress.com/ Derek

    Obama started backing off his 16 month Iraq withdrawal during the campaign. If he leaves the same people in charge that are there now we already know what their position is, it’s over when they say it’s over.

  • James, Los Angeles

    ANYone who Obama appoints to exec office is going to be “something different.” Jeeeb all those incompetent ideological ignorant dumba$$es that bushie appointed — that isn’t going to happen in an Obama admin. You can see he put a lot of thought into the CoS appointment.

    We want the Obama Presidency to be *successful* above all. As the essay I quoted from notes, the bushie republican insects have infested the executive branch in a bigtime way just as they did during Nixon’s time — that’s where we *got* the Cheneys and the Rumsfelds and the Wolfowitz wackos. Obama needs people with the Knowledge, Skills, and Abilities (KSAs) to guide us through what looks to be some very, very tough years.

    .

  • James, Los Angeles

    Derek, my man, I have to say that you are really taking some skin off the glow of victory. Chill.

    This is for you:
    obama_chill.jpg (JPEG Image, 499×349 pixels)

  • sgwhiteinfla

    Derek
    .
    Please provide back up to your words. Because you are beginning to sound a lot like a McCain talking point. Its especially non news worthy considering that the SOFA will have a 16 month timetable included in it. But still I would LOVE to see where you got it from that Obamaa backed off his timetable for withdrawal.

  • sgwhiteinfla

    PNNTO
    .
    I understand in a way but my counter to that would be how many people actually BELIEVED Bush’s bullsh!t. Ok maybe they could get a pass in 2000, but in 2004? Bush showed what he was about from the outset appointing his Dad’s old cabinent with a few exceptions and all of his dad’s cronies you will notice were the biggest phuck ups. So if Obama starts vetting some Bush 41 cabinet members I will start getting worried. But other than that I just feel like everyone needs to take a deep deep breath.

  • sgwhiteinfla

    PNNTO
    .
    I understand in a way but my counter to that would be how many people actually BELIEVED Bush’s bullsh!t. Ok maybe they could get a p@ss in 2000, but in 2004? Bush showed what he was about from the outset appointing his Dad’s old cabinent along with one of his cronies as VP. And with very few exceptions I will remind you that his dad’s cronies were the biggest phuck ups. So if Obama starts vetting some of Bush 41 cabinet members I will start getting worried. But other than that I just feel like everyone needs to take a deep deep breath.

  • http://derekg.wordpress.com/ Derek

    “Please provide back up to your words. ”
    .

    Obama to ‘refine’ Iraq plan

  • sgwhiteinfla

    Derek
    .
    Here is the information from the link you provided. Definitely a concern troll
    .
    Obama told reporters in Fargo, N.D., that he is “going to do a thorough assessment.”
    .

    “When I go to Iraq and I have a chance to talk to some of the commanders on the ground, I’m sure I’ll have more information and will continue to refine my policies,” he said, according to CBS News. “I have been consistent, throughout this process, that I believe the war in Iraq was a mistake.”
    .

    Obama later said at a second news conference he still intends to stick to the timeline.
    .
    At the second meeting with reporters, Obama said: “We’re going to try this again. Apparently I wasn’t clear enough this morning on my position with respect to the war in Iraq. … I have said throughout this campaign that … I would bring our troops home at a pace of one to two brigades per month and at that pace we would have our combat troops out in 16 months. That position has not changed. I have not equivocated on that position. I am not searching for maneuvering room with respect to that position.

  • sgwhiteinfla

    Derek
    .
    Here is the information from the link you provided. Definitely a concern troll
    .
    Obama told reporters in Fargo, N.D., that he is “going to do a thorough @ssessment.”
    .

    “When I go to Iraq and I have a chance to talk to some of the commanders on the ground, I’m sure I’ll have more information and will continue to refine my policies,” he said, according to CBS News. “I have been consistent, throughout this process, that I believe the war in Iraq was a mistake.”
    .

    Obama later said at a second news conference he still intends to stick to the timeline.
    .
    At the second meeting with reporters, Obama said: “We’re going to try this again. Apparently I wasn’t clear enough this morning on my position with respect to the war in Iraq. … I have said throughout this campaign that … I would bring our troops home at a pace of one to two brigades per month and at that pace we would have our combat troops out in 16 months. That position has not changed. I have not equivocated on that position. I am not searching for maneuvering room with respect to that position.

  • Paul-no not that one

    From Derek’s link-
    Obama said: “We’re going to try this again. Apparently I wasn’t clear enough this morning on my position with respect to the war in Iraq. … I have said throughout this campaign that … I would bring our troops home at a pace of one to two brigades per month and at that pace we would have our combat troops out in 16 months. That position has not changed. I have not equivocated on that position. I am not searching for maneuvering room with respect to that position
    .
    .
    That was in response to the idea of removing the forces “immediately” what ever that might have meant in the real world.
    Actually that quote disproves your @ssertion that “Obama started backing off his 16 month Iraq withdrawal during the campaign”

  • sgwhiteinfla

    lol PNNTO
    .
    I beat you to it lol

  • James, Los Angeles

    You are believeing Mike effin’ Allen? hahahahaha!
    .
    Here:
    .
    “Barack Obama and Joe Biden believe we must be as careful getting out of Iraq as we were careless getting in. Immediately upon taking office, Obama will give his Secretary of Defense and military commanders a new mission in Iraq: ending the war. The removal of our troops will be responsible and phased, directed by military commanders on the ground and done in consultation with the Iraqi government. Military experts believe we can safely redeploy combat brigades from Iraq at a pace of 1 to 2 brigades a month that would remove them in 16 months. That would be the summer of 2010 – more than 7 years after the war began.”
    .
    From Barack Obama and Joe Biden: The Change We Need | Iraq
    .
    Dude. Get a grip. Mike Allen is no reliable source.
    .

  • http://derekg.wordpress.com/ Derek

    Cherry pick much sgwhiteinfla? He said he was going to refine his plan, and then he said he wasn’t. Axelrod then went back to the position Obama held in the morning. Sounds like they will fit in nicely with the centrist cult in DC, the one that claimed the war would be ended back in 2,006.

  • Paul-no not that one

    sg, I bow to the better person!

  • sgwhiteinfla

    Derek=Jamesryan
    .
    PNNTO
    .
    Definitely not better just faster on cut and paste lol. And probably luckier with the mods!
    .
    Now that we are done with troll bashing, did anybody else see Lawerence O’donnell go the frack off on Mika and Pat Buchannan yesterday? The only thing that could have made it better would have been if Joe Scarborough would have been in the discussion as well. I wanted to stand up and cheer to the TV.
    .
    http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/odonnell-buchanan-gop-embraces-ignorance

  • http://derekg.wordpress.com/ Derek

    sgwhiteinfla you are an ignorant joke. I’m done with you idiot.

  • sgwhiteinfla

    Further proof that Derek=Jamesryan
    .
    BUHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

  • http://derekg.wordpress.com/ Derek

    I’ve been here this this board started moron.

  • sgwhiteinfla

    Uhmmm Derek, I thought you were done with me. Run along now. If you notice several other people have already called you out too. Not much for you to accomplish with your concern trolling here. Try again later

  • http://derekg.wordpress.com/ Derek

    Do run this place idiot or do you just think you do?

  • sgwhiteinfla

    Awwww poow wittle Dewek’s feewings are hurt.
    .
    Cry me a river troll.
    .
    For you to say you’re “done” with me you sure still have a lot to say
    .
    By the way, I can do this all day. Whacking trolls is my PLEASURE!
    .
    So have at it Derek/Jamesryan
    .
    Lets see whatcha got.

  • Paul-no not that one

    Derek you said “”Obama started backing off his 16 month Iraq withdrawal during the campaign”
    Your link showed him saying the opposite. What am I missing?

  • rose83

    Derek, it’s nice to see someone who is more pessimistic/cynical/critical/sour than I am! Seriously, it may not be in exactly 16 months, but Obama will end the war in Iraq. There’s no reason for him to “stay the course.”

    sg, I think you’re newer to Swampland, so maybe you just don’t know this, but Derek is a longtime commenter who is definitely not a Jamesryan. You may completely trust Obama, but you must be able to see that some progressives are worried that Obama will let his base down, like so many other Presidents have. We remember FISA. Maybe we’re wrong, maybe we’re sour – and again, I don’t even share Derek’s Iraq concerns – but please don’t become like one of those Bush supporters who can’t bear any criticism of their leader. Let’s not constantly divide the world between people who are for us and against us.

  • Paul-no not that one

    Nicely framed.
    .
    Someone makes a specious argument. Is asked for evidence for that position. Evidence shows just the opposite. It is pointed out that it did not support the @ssertion.
    Conclusion – some people are becoming like Bush supporters because they can’t bear criticism.
    .
    Classic.

  • rose83

    P-NNTO, Derek’s point is that he left the door open to changing his plans. I actually agree with Greg Sargent’s take: These strike me as less a signal of a coming change in his position on withdrawal and more like a combined effort to defuse the charge that he’ll withdraw recklessly and to preserve flexibility as commander in chief. http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/07/obama_suggests_he_may_refine_i.php
    .
    There’s no evidence that he was actually changing his plans, and the news organizations who interpreted it that way were being especially… inventive. But I can see why Derek – and other progressives at the time – would be concerned (yes, someone can genuinely be concerned) that Obama was preparing to back away from his firm commitments on Iraq. I don’t see it that way, but I’m not going to dismiss or ridicule people who see it differently.

  • sgwhiteinfla

    rose83
    .
    Reread ALL of my posts on this thread. Show me where i said ANYTHING about trusting Obama blindly. As a matter of fact go to my post at 10:29 when I advocated debating REAL issues. There is a huge difference between complaining about people getting jobs which they have NOT been given and genuinely debating who SHOULD get the job. There is also a big difference between criticising someone for something they have done and criticizing someone for what they MIGHT do. I could give less than a sh!t how long Derek or anybody else has been on this thread, when you make up sh!t I will call you on it just as PNNTO did and just as James did when Derek tried to say Obama was backing off of his pledge to bring troops home from Iraq.
    .
    In closing, if you want to spend your time complaining about things that every pundit says Obama MIGHT do then wear yourself out. But I am going to say something about how ridiculous it is every time I see it being done.

  • Paul-no not that one

    Nicely framed.
    .
    Someone makes a specious argument. Is asked for evidence for that position. Evidence shows just the opposite. It is pointed out that it did not support the @ssertion.
    Conclusion – some people are becoming like Bush supporters because they can’t bear criticism.
    .
    Cl@ssic.
    (repost from help comment)

  • http://derekg.wordpress.com/ Derek

    ‘sg, I think you’re newer to Swampland, so maybe you just don’t know this, but Derek is a longtime commenter who is definitely not a Jamesryan.”

    When did sg show up? There are few things more ignorant than conspiracy theorists.

    This place must be starting to go downhill.

  • sgwhiteinfla

    Derek
    .
    The only thing more ignorant than a conspiracy theorist is someone who pushes a meme and then provides evidence of the opposite. Just my opinion. lol

  • wvng

    I posted something 3 hours ago that is still in moderation. Here’s a snippet that seems relevant:
    .
    Just this morning, in President-Elect Obama’s first ever Saturday morning address, he repeated his core policy positions and restated the need to press forward on them all as component parts of an overall strategy to dig us out of a ditch and move us forward as a nation. Remember, this is a guy who understands strategic thinking, as opposed to repub tactical thinking. Obama’s radio address is here:
    http://otrans.3cdn.net/a935f21490985cc7e6_z3m6ztacs.mp3

  • http://derekg.wordpress.com/ Derek

    “There’s no evidence that he was actually changing his plans, and the news organizations who interpreted it that way were being especially… inventive.”

    What does “refining” the plan mean? That was Obama’s word not the media’s.

  • wvng

    I give up until moderation is fixed.

  • Paul-no not that one

    If a President Obama withdrew the troops in 17 months rather than 16 months would that be a “change” or a “refinement”?

  • sgwhiteinfla

    rose83
    .
    I clicked on the link to Greg Sargent’s article which you provided. I then clicked on his source link. I suggest you do the same or you can skip it and click the link I provide. It has an update on it including the second press conference the SAME DAY where Obama reiterated the 16 month timetable.
    .
    http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/07/03/obama-open-to-refine-iraq-withdrawal-timeline/

  • sgwhiteinfla

    Definition of refinement.
    .
    “My 16-month timeline, if you examine everything that I’ve said, was always premised on making sure that our troops were safe,” he said. “I said that based on the information that we had received from our commanders that one to two brigades a month could be pulled out safely, from a logistical perspective. My guiding approach continues to be that we’ve got to make sure that our troops are safe and that Iraq is stable.”
    .
    It refers to the pace of the withdrawal not the withdrawal itself. But I guess some people would want our troops shipped home without considering the situation on the ground or how that might put the troops who arent the first ones out in harms way.

  • rose83

    sg, you’re saying that you’re happy to debate real issues, but you’re not actually doing that. Obama made one appointment that many progressives are unhappy about. You may disagree, but you can’t really think that we’re being crazy on this one. Then on a post about shortlists, some people expressed disappointment with the shortlists. This is all pretty typical. Why are you so upset?

    There is also a big difference between criticising someone for something they have done and criticizing someone for what they MIGHT do.
    -
    That’s the central misunderstanding. If progressives stay happily silent during the transition, while centrists and conservatives like Joe Klein and David Brooks push for their dream appointments, then Obama is less likely to appoint progressives. This is all uncontroversial; I doubt you disagree. Obama’s campaign was fueled by progressive advocacy efforts, many of them in the blogosphere. Those efforts didn’t just vanish after he won. Obama is always saying that we are the change we need. Now progressives are taking him at his word. This is all good news for democracy.

    But sure, if you really think that Obama is just as likely to appoint progressives whether or not his base speaks out and asks him to appoint them, then yes, we must seem like secret Republicans and/or paranoid progressives.

    P-NNTO, read the Obama quote again. Do you honestly think that it’s impossible for an objective person to conclude that Obama was leaving the door open to changing his Iraq plans? Don’t just say that Obama said nothing about changing his plans. That’s a strawman argument. The issue is whether Obama was laying the groundwork for a later shift in Iraq policy.

    Derek, he was keeping his options open, or, as Sargents suggests, appearing to keep his options open to be more electable. But there is a big difference between keeping options open, and actually exercising those options.

  • http://derekg.wordpress.com/ Derek

    Last Wednesday Ryan Crocker said there would be no change in Iraq policy, once Obama was elected, and an Iraqi politician said Obama had to say he was pulling troops out, just to get elected. Anyone want to bet the troops will be out in 16 months?

  • rose83

    I suggest you do the same or you can skip it and click the link I provide.

    sg, I think you’re confusing me with Derek. I’m convinced Obama will end the war in Iraq. No one, including Derek, has been able to suggest a reason why Obama would stay in Iraq. It just makes no sense.

  • http://derekg.wordpress.com/ Derek

    “But I guess some people would want our troops shipped home without considering the situation on the ground or how that might put the troops who arent the first ones out in harms way.”

    So no you are accusing me of wanting to get the troops killed? I think I know who the real right-wing troll is here now.

  • sgwhiteinfla

    rose83
    .
    Ill tell you again go read the thread. It doesnt take much effort to refute you on this. You do have cut and paste don’t you? So cut and paste where I criticized someone for their dissappointment of Obama’s shortlist. You are trying to fight a strawman but thats not going to work with me. Yesterday you said you were convinced that Obama’s selection of Rahm was a bad one. I countered with why we can’t know whether its good or bad just yet and as proof I pointed to the people who were saying it was a good selection to counter those you were using to say it was a bad one. On this thread Derek first said he was upset about people getting jobs when nobody but Rahm has even gotten a job. Then he came with the bullsh!t meme about Obama backing off withdrawing from Iraq which myself and 2 other people called him out on. You can have your opinion and I will have mine but what you CAN’T do is make up sh!t and say thats what I have done
    .
    Again cut and paste where I have been unreasonable to ANYBODY on this thread about their beliefs.
    .
    Ill hold my breath

  • rose83

    Derek, I’d bet that they’re out of there by the midterms. Except for a small permanent base.

    About Crocker, do you have a link? And maybe he was just referring to the current incarnation of Bush’s Iraq policies, which are much closer to Obama’s than McCain’s.

  • sgwhiteinfla

    Derek says
    .
    “But I guess some people would want our troops shipped home without considering the situation on the ground or how that might put the troops who arent the first ones out in harms way.”

    So no you are accusing me of wanting to get the troops killed? I think I know who the real right-wing troll is here now.
    .
    But Derek previously said
    .
    “There’s no evidence that he was actually changing his plans, and the news organizations who interpreted it that way were being especially… inventive.”

    What does “refining” the plan mean? That was Obama’s word not the media’s.
    .
    And then Derek said this
    .
    Last Wednesday Ryan Crocker said there would be no change in Iraq policy, once Obama was elected, and an Iraqi politician said Obama had to say he was pulling troops out, just to get elected. Anyone want to bet the troops will be out in 16 months?
    .
    So Derek if you are saying you DO care about the lives of the soldiers then why are you opposed to Obama as you put it “refining” his plan according to conditions on the ground? Now if you can answer that question in a way that makes sense I would love to hear it. Otherwise I think the REAL troll will truly be exposed.

  • 53_3

    I think that there is probably a range of opinions within the military as to how long it will take to withdraw.
    .
    Having watched the conduct of several other wars and brushfire battles, I would say that withdrawing is entirely doable in 16 months.
    .
    After all, like Powell, soldiers soldier.

  • Paul-no not that one

    I think “Ryan Crocker said there would be no change in Iraq policy, once Obama was elected”
    is true strictly speaking but I think he was referring to the time between November and January.

    U.S. Amba$sador Ryan Crocker invited Zebari and other top Iraqi officials to a post-election party at the U.S. Emb@ssy, during which he stressed that change would not come suddenly.

    “While this historic election has changed a great many things,” Crocker said, “we will also have full continuity of policy and purpose as we move through our transition.”

  • Paul-no not that one

    I think one thing Rose, Derek, sg, and I all can come together on is reading our comments looking for letter combinations that will trigger the mods is a pain in the @ss.

  • rose83

    sg, well I interpreted saying that Derek = Jamesryan, and talking about how you like to whack trolls, as not being open to reasoned debates.

    Yesterday you said you were convinced that Obama’s selection of Rahm was a bad one. I countered with why we can’t know whether its good or bad just yet and as proof I pointed to the people who were saying it was a good selection to counter those you were using to say it was a bad one.

    No, I said that Obama’s choice of Rahm suggested he would pursue DLC policies. “Bad” is way too simplistic. Pointing to people who say that Emanuel is a good choice isn’t refuting my argument. I asked for evidence of Rahm’s progressive record and no one provided any.

  • rose83

    So Derek if you are saying you DO care about the lives of the soldiers then why are you opposed to Obama as you put it “refining” his plan according to conditions on the ground? Now if you can answer that question in a way that makes sense I would love to hear it. Otherwise I think the REAL troll will truly be exposed.

    sg, wow. Obviously I’ve been wasting my time attempting to find common ground with you.

    P-NNTO, agreed. And we never saw wvng’s contribution to the debate. Very frustrating.

  • Paul-no not that one

    This might be considered progressive-
    H.R.1738 : To require payments to State and local governments for infrastructure and social services needs in the same amount as the amount of relief and reconstruction funds provided to Iraq.
    Sponsor: Rep Emanuel, Rahm

  • Paul-no not that one

    And this perhaps-
    H.R.3411 : To prevent any adult who, as a juvenile, committed an offense that would be a crime of violence if committed by an adult, from possessing a firearm.
    Sponsor: Rep Emanuel, Rahm

  • sgwhiteinfla

    rose83
    .
    Here is the first thing you said yesterday
    .
    rose83 Says:

    I just read Chris Bowers’ take on Emanuel, and I’m now convinced that he is not a good choice.
    .
    It wasnt until after that when you brought up whether he had a progressive record. Now you didnt literally say he was a bad choice but obviously you didnt allow for the fact that he might be a good choice either. And funny enough its because he didnt match up with your ideology when I thought Obama’s whole platform has been about getting away with strict ideologies. Derek started talking about Obama backing off from getting the troops out of Iraq. When presented with evidence that he was wrong he continued the same meme. Thats the definition of a troll which Jamesryan was and yes I take GREAT enjoyment in whacking trolls. But what you have to acknowledge is before it ever got there I pointed out that he was factually incorrect several times INCLUDING the fact that the SOFA will have a timetable on it anyway.
    .
    Now as for my comment to Derek thats a very realistic question. If you or he or anybody else is so concerned that Obama won’t follow a strict time table off 16 months even if conditions on the ground are not conducive to it then its a valid question to ask for an explanation of how that squares with caring about the soldiers lives. You see I live the Iraq war I dont just talk about it. I have friends and family over in Iraq right now and thats one of the many reasons I voted for Obama. But I for DAMM sure do not want my friends and family members or for that matter anybody else’s friends and family members put in harms way just in the hopes of living up to a campaign promise. Thats the kind of sh!t I would expect George Bush to do. But hey if thats what works for you so be it. Again I understand we won’t agree on everything. But when I see something that I think is bullsh!t then I will say that.

  • sgwhiteinfla

    PNNTO
    .
    When the mods get me now I just cut and paste what I wrote and put it back in the reply box and look for the word @ss. Its amazing how much we use that word and never even thing about it. I dang near went crazy yesterday trying to find out where I had used it because I kept getting sent to moderation. Turns out it was in “encomp@ss”
    .
    But hey it will get fixed last Monday!
    .
    lol

  • rose83

    P-NNTO, thanks. Actually that seems quite compatible with both DLC and progressive polices, which brings me back to a point I made yesterday: DLC is still way better than the last 8 years. I believe that Emanuel is also a strong supporter of health care reform, which is the foundation of fundamental economic reform.

    Thanks again for citing evidence. It’s a good reminder that even the worst-case scenario for an Obama Administration – a DLC administration essentially – is far better than the alternative. This morning I read a fascinating (and concise) NY Times magazine article on rehabilitating terrorists in Saudi Arabia and when I finished it I thought, “Someone in the next Obama Administration is also reading this article.” They were no doubt carefully considering its implications, questioning the arguments that it cites and looking at it with an open-mind, rather than just ignoring it or disregarding it as more proof that the NY Times is elitist and anti-American. It’s a nice feeling to know that the WH will soon be full of smart people who actually seek out information.

    Here’s the link: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/09/magazine/09jihadis-t.html?pagewanted=1&ref=magazine

  • Paul-no not that one

    sg, you were the one who clued me into the letter combination trigger a while back. It’s a comment box. It’s a puzzle. It’s two in one!
    .
    Rahm like most politicians, certainly on the Democratic side, is a mixed bag. You could name most any politician you would consider “progressive” and I could likely find positions that you strongly dislike.
    That’s not a challenge btw!
    .
    Thanks for pointing me to the NYT Magazine story, I will read the dead tree tomorrow. Slowly as to frustrate my SO as she waits for the crossword. It’s a household tradition. ha

  • sgwhiteinfla

    For anybody that cares Palin got revenge on Trooper Wooten after all.
    .
    http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=6210144&page=1

  • rose83

    sg, I went on to cite evidence of why I didn’t like the Emanuel choice, which made the source of my opposition pretty clear.

    And we all support the troops and want what’s best for them. I’m sure that Derek is concerned that the “refine” comment was intended to allow Obama to later change his Iraq plans and keep the troops there longer. Which we believe is bad for the troops. Questioning people’s loyalty to the troops is way over the line. Don’t do that, don’t be like rusty.

    If you or he or anybody else is so concerned that Obama won’t follow a strict time table off 16 months even if conditions on the ground are not conducive to it then its a valid question to ask for an explanation of how that squares with caring about the soldiers lives.

    Come on, you know this is not about strict timetables.

    P-NNTO, I am in awe of anyone who can make a serious attempt at the NY Times crossword. I actually find calculus easier than crosswords!

  • sgwhiteinfla

    rose83
    .
    Its funny that you have responded to me twice whereas Derek has stopped responding. MAYBE just maybe you don’t speak for him and what he believes. Everything he has said today was focused on strict timetables. I don’t know if you and he are friends or what but I am going by what I have seen today. Derek has every right to say he doesnt care about strict timetables. How about we let HIM do it?

  • sgwhiteinfla

    rose83
    .
    One more thing before I go for awhile. You just said we all support the troops and want whats best for them. Would you say the same thing about George Bush and D!ck Cheney? I would not. And I think that disproves your statement in my mind.

  • Paul-no not that one

    Not to change the topic, he says as he does, but seeing that Palin post reminded me of sg’s prediction that the McCain people would bury her.
    Thom Hartmann speculated yesterday that the people behind the leaks were Romney staffers who were hired to work for the McCain camp.
    The reasoning is that Romney sees Palin as his competition in 4 years and wants to be done with her now when she is weak.

  • sgwhiteinfla

    PNNTO
    .
    Several websites, Ambinder for one, have somewhat debunked the Romney rumor about them being behind the smears. Also if you go to newsweek right now you can see their “book of secrets” from their embedded journalists about the whole of the campaign on both sides. They were granted unprecedented access but only if they agreed not to reveal anything until after the election. Most of the info is included in there and is attributed to unnamed McCain staffers. Its an interesting, and funny albeit LONG read either way. And there are some pretty juicy nuggets. Like how Obama kept laughing when he was doing debate prep because he was supposed to act like he had faux outrage at something they thought McCain would say.
    .
    Here is the link. It goes by chapters.
    .
    http://www.newsweek.com/id/167581

  • rose83

    Major error from Newsweek (which is always on-topic at Time!). Apparently Sen. Sununu, the New Hampshire Senator Palin allegedly refused to acknowledge on stage because he is pro-choice, is in fact pro-life: http://www.prochoiceamerica.org/news/press-releases/2008/pr11042008_shaheenwin.html

    I initially saw it on the Weekly Standard – I love watching their party collapse in on itself; it’s more uplifting than an Amy Adams movie – and then verified it. It’s a pretty bad mistake that raises doubts about their other reporting.

  • sgwhiteinfla

    I think the detail was wrong but the substance was right. Fox News also reported that she didnt acknowledge them when she was on stage with them. Now as for why that might be in dispute but whether she did or didnt snub them does not.

  • sgwhiteinfla

    Then again just thinking about it whose to say that Palin didnt THINK they were BOTH pro choice since Bradley is? Birds of a feather and all that.
    .
    Then again the background info on Bradley was also wrong

  • Paul-no not that one

    Thanks I’ll read the Newsweek story. If it is McCain people than much praise to sg for calling it WEEKS ago.
    I have to say I don’t have a dog in that fight.

  • rose83

    I’m hoping Palin wins because I think she could be the Goldwater of 2012. Although maybe a horrible defeat for her would make it more difficult for a Democratic woman to run in 2016…

  • Paul-no not that one

    Rose, thanks for the link. Good, good stuff. And yes LONG.

  • wvng

    testing: address.

  • kathy

    C-SPAN has been running a roast of Rahm from 2005. Certainly makes clear he can be abrasive and foul-mouthed, but also paints a picture of him as affectionate and kind. Not surprisingly, he’s complex.
    .
    Obama had a funny line about Emanuel cutting off part of his middle finger – said it had the effect of nearly rendering him mute.
    .
    The roast was for the benefit of a group to combat epilepsy, founded by David Axelrod and his wife, who seem to be compelling people. The web site is cureepilepsy.org

  • kathy

    Had a conversation with someone this summer (Elvis?) who didn’t recognize the name Jim Jones having another tag than General Jim Jones. A generational thing.
    .
    CNN has a special tomorrow night on Jonestown (This is the origin of the phrase “drinking the kool-aid” though it was, as it happens, flavor-aid, that was laced with arsenic to kill his followers.)

  • kathy

    Sorry – I think it was cyanide, not arsenic. Not that the details matter when you’re drinking the kool-aid.

  • Paul-no not that one

    If anyone is looking for something to read check out the Newsweek story that Rose has linked at 2:32.

  • pirate wench (demwoman)

    It hasn’t even been a week since the election!
    .
    I understand it’s Joe’s job to opine, but I am content to wait and see who President-elect Obama selects for his administration. I was worried about his choices in the primaries, but he was spot-on. I was worried at times about his choices regarding not responding to the McCain slime during the race, but he was spot-on. I’m sure he’s been working on this for weeks now, at least, and I have confidence he’ll choose the best people to represent both the Obama administration and the USA.
    .
    Actually, it’s kind of refreshing to have this sort of confidence…the past 8 bumbling, corruption-filled years were such a nightmare!
    .
    Now let me go through and make sure I don’t have any a$$ combinations here…

  • http://derekg.wordpress.com/ Derek

    “So Derek if you are saying you DO care about the lives of the soldiers then why are you opposed to Obama as you put it “refining” his plan according to conditions on the ground?”

    I told you I was done with you.

    You are an idiot.

  • newliberty

    Dear Barack Obama:

    I beg you…please take our Governor Deval Patrick to Washington with you. He was elected after a brilliant Axelrod-run campaign, as you were, but has done virtually nothing for the state of Massachusetts. His Lieutenant Governor, Tim Murray, is of a much higher caliber and has far more experience than DeVille Patrick ever will. I would be so grateful to have Murray as our Governor. That’s the change that Massachusetts needs. Please…we don’t need a Governor bred of Chigaco politics running this state. Take him to Washington. Give him a job with little influence but high salary…he likes that. Please.

  • http://www.inworldstudios.com jayackroyd

    Thanks for pointing me to the NYT Magazine story, I will read the dead tree tomorrow. Slowly as to frustrate my SO as she waits for the crossword. It’s a household tradition. ha

    Today’s, Saturday’s, was uncharacteristically easy.

  • kathy

    The Jonestown special is Thursday night, not tonight.

  • wmryan2010

    Not to dodge the debate going on, but I’d just like to add my own two cents. Namely that Holbrooke, amongst the rank and file, is not very well liked (and that’s an understatement). He’s got a rep for being a diva and having a terrible temper. Obama should not screw this up. The diplomatic corps has liberal sentiments but Clinton consistently screwed them over by first appointing Christopher who did nothing as Clinton cut State’s budget and then Albright who had a small coterie of advisers and didn’t trust the everyday diplomat at all and was not a very effective manager.

    The gold standard of secretaries of state is Powell. He inspired the diplomatic corps, he was a very well respected voice be it in the UN, Foggy Bottom or abroad.

    People don’t realize this but fundamentally, being secretary of state is about managing. It’s a bureaucracy. Holbrooke may be a fine negotiator but I don’t think he’s a very credible manager when he has engendered strong dislike amongst the people he’ll be leading. The person who fits the bill is Richardson- he has executive experience, he’s familiar with the foreign arena and he’s competent. As one FSO told me,”Our problem historically has been we have had Secretaries of State with foreign policy smarts, but with deficient management ability”. Richardson fits those criteria.

    As for Kerry? People are surprised when they find out that he wants the job. In addition to the prestige that would appeal to him, the fact is, his dad was a foreign service officer. I wouldn’t be surprised if running the place he grew up in would not appeal to him, from a romantic point of view.

blog comments powered by Disqus