Gates is no ideologue (it's not clear to me that he is even a Republican) and this is good news.

I wasn't particularly concerned about Gates, but this solidifies my feeling that Obama knows what he's doing there - just like he seems to about most things.

The main thing is that Gates really should be SecDef for only a couple of years under Obama. Once the withdrawal from Iraq is close enough to done that nobody's worried about it anymore, it'll be time for a Dem in that position. Maybe move Hillary over from State at that point, and move Susan Rice from UN to State.

First, per the claim by MSLBs that Gates is "apolitical" - hah! His Wiki bio notes his college activity in Young Republicans.

And, of course, there's his Iran-Contra connections. And, not just Iran-Contra. How much did Gates know about mining Nicaraguan harbors, Central American death squads and their CIA support, etc.?

I understand the political reasons to keep Gates. If things start to go (more) south in Iraq after the withdrawal starts, having Gates gives Obama some bipartisan cover and hopefully shields him from top brass backstabbers leaking to the press.

The neocons need to be purged no matter what, though, and this goes some way as reassurance on that front.

Second, not everybody is so kindly disposed to former Navy Secretary Richard Danzig having a prominent role in DoD either. From the real left, Alexander Cockburn at Counterpunch:
Somewhere don the road we’ll probably end up with another slimy fellow, former Navy Secretary Richard Danzig, who counts among his regular roosts CSIS and the Center for A New American Security, also decorated by the odious Robert Kaplan and Dr John Nagl.
The Center for A New American Security? It's another John Podesta tentacle. The Clintonite employment counselor, if you will.

If "change" means the Bipartisan Foreign Policy Establishment, well, there you go. CSIS just confirms this.

I see Gates as a highly skilled waterboy, more than as an ideologue, and certainly not a neoconservative. I think he will implement whatever policy is handed to him, especially with direct-reports who are fully on the team. Remember, Gates was on the Iraq Study Group. I suspect that group's report and recommendation coincides with Gates' opinions. As I recall, that report was embraced by Obama.

I am tired of this whole Clinton meme as a challenge to the promise of change. The promise was never to change from Clinton. It was a promise to change from Bush. Does anyone really think that the Obama administration will not be a major change from the Bush administration? Did anyone belive that Obama was running as an anti-Clintonite? If you did, you really were not paying attention to whom his advisors were during the campaign.

So Chris Bowers was wrong about something? What a shock!

Why do people cite him and his fellow travelers like they are credible voices of any kind? Gates's appointment obviously did not mean "that all of his top advisors would also stay on." This was, apparently, simply wrong. And on what basis did Bowers make this claim? None that I can see. Bowers and Stoller are a joke.

I haven't read anything by Alexander Cockburn lately, but he used to have a weekly column in the LA Times back in the '80s and I thought the guy was a raving nutcase. He really did write the kind of stuff that the wingnuts accuse all liberals of believing. If he's changed, fine, but I wouldn't bet on it.

Catfish,

I think Obama's use of the word 'change' means way more than change from Bush. A change from Bush can be left unsaid because it's so obvious; any Democrat would offer a change from Bush. Hillary used the word in that sense. Obama, though, has something far deeper in mind, e.g., a change in how Washington works, coming up with good solutions to problems that are ideology-free or at least ideology neutral, fighting lobbyist influence, etc., etc. It's hard to envision that this 'change' will really take place, given the current level of ideological fervor, but I guess it's worth a try. If it doesn't work O can switch to an openly liberal agenda. I feel much better about O's cabinet picks now that I've heard him say he'll make the decisions as to the direction the various departments will take. Excellent.

David NOE,

Alexander Cockburn writes for Counterpunch now. You can find him at Counterpunch.org. I agree with your impression of him although he tends to be a mixed bag, sometimes accurate, sometimes not. I e-mailed him a year ago after he wrote an article about Gore's interest in global warming being only an attempt for personal gain, monetary and otherwise and to a large degree pooh-poohed global warming itself. Better to take Cockburn with a grain of salt.

Bowers and Stoller are a joke.

Hey John, go fuck yourself.