At least these guys aren't in wheelchairs, like the Reaganistas that Bush put in. So far Obama is acting very presidential, critical to a credible transition to power. If that's coming from Podesta and Emanuel, fine, but I think it's coming from Himself and that's who will inspire - or command - change.

I hope all those smart people realize that if we don't take "extremem measures" on global warming, nothing else will matter...

LONDON (Reuters) - The world will have to bet on extreme measures to avoid serious global warming, the International Energy Agency said on Wednesday, adding to growing worries that governments have under-estimated the problem...

http://uk.reuters.com/article/burningIssues/idUKTRE4AB2L220081112

like the Reaganistas that Bush put in. SteveB

Cheney and Rummy were Nixon/Ford guys. Even worse.

Frankly, many of Clinton's staff and secretaries were very competent. I more worried about the Republicans he brings in. Hope there are no Dick Morrisses.

Change, schmange -- Obama is assembling a team that will help him a) hit the ground running; and b) get stuff done.

Notice that Obama didn't really campaign on the old "Washington is a cesspool and I'm the outsider that's going to go in and clean it out" message. As much as I originally thought that was what he was doing in the primary, he really wasn't. Instead his message was more "we're going in the wrong direction, and it's up to all of us to turn it around." He didn't really throw a lot of blame a "Washington" (other than going after lobbyists), it was more of a "we're all in this together" message.

And given that, the idea that his staff (and likely cabinet) are going to contain some old DC vets as well as some young guns is not exactly surprising (to me anyway). The change he campaigned on wasn't a "throw the bums out" change but a shift in direction. And if you have a bunch of people who don't know what they're doing, you're not going to be able to shift direction very fast.

Of course, it doesn't need to be said that these guys need to be watched like hawks to make sure they don't fall into old rhythms. Which is why it sure would be nice to have a functional press. At least we still have citizens' watchdog groups to make noise if things start stumbling backwards.

I am reserving judgment for a while, but I think several positive points can be made about these first moves.

Rahm Emmanuel may have been a Clinton aide, but he has now worked in the House, and now is coming to the White House as a more experienced person than he was before. Also, consider the balance: VP, a multi-term senator, and CoS, a congressperson.

I also agree with SteveB in the comments that we are not getting a ton of old guys from previous Bush and Reagan admins. Another point I would make is that such appointments for Dubya were meant to reassure that Dubya had "experienced people" around him, given the low expectations for him personally. In Obama's case, I think while we can see some experience in the persons he is working with, clearly the vision and leadership has been laid out by the man at the top of the ticket. This is not old hands guiding the newbie so he does not screw up (which describes Dubya in 2001 to a tee), but consultation by a leader looking to accomplish as much as possible.

As with many on the left, I am prepared to step forward when I disagree. At the moment, I do not think we need to be adversarial. Yet.

End. Of. Thread.

What NonyNony said...

I don't have a problem with the way Obama is aligning his White House staff.

1.) Clinton didn't have a competent WH team in place and it cost him dearly. Message discipline or lack thereof probably cost him the congress in 1994.

2.) Carter brought in his trusted Georgians and ended up spinning his tires and being utterly ineffectual.

3.) Rag on Rahm all you want for being too centrist and not progressive enough, but the fact remains that the middle makes up a greater share of the electorate than those on either side put together. A pragmatic centrist who knows how to say "No" is a feature, not a bug.

OT - at the Republican Governors' meeting in Miami, they are discussing how to move the party forward. First speaker? Frank Luntz. Evidently they think their problem is proper phrasing.

Competence is a virtue!!

Man, why didn't you mention this back in 2000? Could have made all the difference!

Man, why didn't you mention this back in 2000? Could have made all the difference!

I did! But nobody listened to me back then!

Just ask my kids! They were teenagers then and are in their twenties now, and they will tell you I have gotten a LOT smarter in the interceding eight years!

Nice sideways plug for PoliSciFi there, Steve... :-)

One of the significant reasons Obama is clearly going to be a good if not superior leader is his theoretical know how in the Constitution. Here, Obama is given the chance to be able to exercise and apply his knowledge of the Constitution. This is something to point out because the majority of Republicans do not govern by that law. The Contract with America is the most pitiful example of not governing by rule within the Constitution. That is being the primer core of Conservatism, to work within the law. Whats really funny is the open suggestion in the media that they the Republicans will with everything they have oppose the Obama agenda. What trying to line up with the Constitution is not something good?

So many times, and especially McCain saying “We were taken to the wood shed�. Well, McCain would like to think that it is over as far as being in the Dog House with that bad label, instead of the White House. Here, these kinds of minds don’t need to find out what they did wrong, they know, and are frightened for the consequences of deliberate deception in fraud and corruption. After inauguration day, this is usually the real surprise. Will Obama give Bush a pass if he does, Obama’s career will be short.

Here, will Obama have the steel spine Biden talks about, if not the Republicans along with the Media smell blood and go after Obama, likely driving him out of office. Or, with every energy Obama, and the Democrats have Bush and Company out in the open they must address accountability. If it done with experts especially from and within the education field with teams of accounting audits down as timely as possible could likely reveal a huge wide corruption all across the system especially the Homeland Security agency, Federal Reserve, FISA, FBI, CIA. Pentagon, the Treasury, the World Bank, the International Monetary fund, and the IRS it self need an audit. It’s all screwed up. You don’t need a steel spine to do that stuff just common sense tells you when taking over this business of the country one need to dig in and pry out those secrets because they are buried and hidden and Bush and Company hope you don’t find them.

Why doesn't he bring in Joe the Plumber instead ? Then we'd really have a fresh face ! And Joe could bring in Sarah Palin, so we could have someone on Obama's staff who doesn't know anything ! Then everything would be so much better because we would have some fresh faces in the administration. How would that be ? Jesus, people, are we really all going to get this stupid this early ?

The "this isn't change" or the "some much for change" people are idiots. They need to stop acting like change means hiring cats, speaking chinese, and wearing Zubaz to work. It doesn't.

If GM wants to survive it will have to change. Are they going to fire everyone, close all plants and open a taco stand ? No, they will get new leadership, with new ideas, retool, and keep people who know how to make a cars, making cars, just cleaner and more efficient ones.

McCain "campaigned" on changing how Washington works. Obama campaigned on changing the nation's priorities and direction.

How the hell can you do the latter if you don't know how Washington works?

Seems like commons sense, that Obama would bring in Washington insiders who know how to work within the system to get things done.

Nobody cares how Washington works as long as it gets done what needs to get done, and I have confidence that Obama knows where we're going and will hire the right guys to get us there.

For now.

It has occurred to me how similar it is that Bush,jr., took in all the hotshots from daddy's regime, like Rumsfeld, Cheney, to make up for jr.'s lack of experience, and how awful they were the second time around. Hopefully we won't have the same macabre experience with Obama's recycled counselors from the Clinton administration.

It's not that I'm concerned that Rahm is too centrist and not progressive enough, it's that he is a corporate shill and a Likudist. He and the Clintons were dismissive of the 50 state strategy and Emmanuel is responsible for former republican Tim Mahoney's nomination over a grassroots candidate. He's a DLCer who went along with Bush for eight years.

But I get the feeling that this may be a move on Obama's part to "keep your friends close, keep you enemies closer", i wonder how he plans on emasculating Lieberman?

And if Obama had picked a lot of "fresh faces" they would have screamed that he was picking a team that was woefully inexperienced.

They can blow it out their ear.

Tin foil hat time:
Rahm Emmanuel placed in a position of subservience to President Obama potentially takes him out of a position of opposition in Congress, gives cover that he is giving respect to the DLC types, and offers the delusion they have an "in".

Did Obama de-fang Congress?

I lack info to be confident about this in any way,. but the pre-emptive strike hypothesis amused me.