What a schmuck.

Obama should find a way to dump Gregg asap, and figure out how he got into this mess in the first place.

Withdraw his nomination, then. Why is he being offered a job if he won't support the President's priorities?

The Menshiviks just let the Bolsheviks into their cabinet. Greg will be a GOP stooge leaking every discussion to Nat. Rev., Weekly Standard, Faux News, and The Politico, and undermining the Obama program from within the Commerce Dept. (They control much of the government statistics on economic activity).

Obama will be defeated by his own 'bipartisanship', because the media and GOP don't play by those rules.

Is his new name "Dick"?

Obama is going to have to talk directly to the country over the heads of Congress and the media.

I remember when Lyndon Johnson engaged in 'jawboning'.

To hear the Republicans and the MSM tell it the stimulus bill is never going to do what is needed. The incompetence of the Democrats in handling this situation, and their unwillingness to confront the misinformation being peddled, is absolutely astounding.

Tell me again why Gregg's choice was made? What does he bring to Obama's cabinet but elusive "bipartisanship"?

This whole Gregg business shows that Obama isn't willing to stand up for his own principles in the stimulus bill. What is going on here? I don't get it. I at least thought that Rahm Emanuel would have been a bulldog. These guys are letting the GOP run the show.

And this guy is going to be working FOR Obama once he gets to commerce? Sure he is...

Why do we continue to throw these numbf*cks sops?

I just hope to hell Obama knows more about politics than the rest of us. He out-maneuvered Bill Clinton, so maybe he does.

He's hanging out on the ropes, waiting for the GOP to get hired of hitting him. Cassius Clay beat Sonny Liston, got a new name, and won the title that way.

Maybe it'll work for Obama. Maybe.

It's a shame that Obama, like most Democrats, is hell-bent on defeating himself. I had to question Gregg's selection from the first, since Gregg has publicly called for the Commerce department to be abolished. Didn't we just get through with 8 years of cabinet-level seats being filled by people who despised the missions of the departments they headed? (See chiao, elaine as but one prominent example.)

And then Gregg put conditions on his accepting the post--conditions that guaranteed no political gain whatever for Obama.

And as a final flourish, he's basically helping to defeat the policies of the man who appointed him to the position before he even gets the position.

Meanwhile, Obama stands by and flaps his jaws into the ether. Make his case to the people? Probably not, considering the right-wing noise machine is in full throat, Obama's own actions (and inactions) provide them with continuous ammunition, and there are no other Democrats willing to publicly defend their own party, programs, policies, or president.

We're fucked.

Uh, has anyone considered that Gregg is abstaining to avoid voting "no"?

Mike

But Gregg is a Republican and part of the math in the Senate. Hillary's nomination had no such impact.

BTW, thanks to all the posters in the Struggling Stimulus thread, below. Y'all inspired me to write this.
.

I see the Republicans settling in their active role of being in the minority. What did Democrats do when they were in the minority? Not much in my opinion, other than being spineless on issue after issue and afraid of their own shadow.
Now they are in the majority and they are still spineless and afraid of "BOO" and their own shadow.
Come on show some backbone and spunk! The nation desperately needs you to.

Uh, has anyone considered that Gregg is abstaining to avoid voting "no"?

If Gregg was planning on voting "no", then why the hell is he being considered as commerce secretary? Shouldn't that be, you know, someone who supports Obama's agenda?

Obama should let Gregg know that his vote for cloture is a requirement if he wants the job, especially if it's going to be close.

Wouldn't the simulus need just 59 votes then? Is it a 3/5 majority or is it 60 votes?

Now only 59 votes are required to invoke cloture.

I had given hope that Pelosi or Reid would be effective leaders, but I assumed Obama would show some leadership. Sadly, I was wrong. Those of us on the center-left are in some deep shit. Our leadership has failed us.

Obama better start kickin' butt and stop trying to be nice to Republicans. They just view it as weakness. Talk about vetting candidates!!! His own cabinet member choice will not support him.

Obama, you are blowing off huge amounts of political advantage. STOP IT!

Seriously...Obama to Gregg:

"You vote with us or I'm getting a different Comm. Secry."

Where's Rahm?
Time for some serious muscle on this one.

Why can't he vote for cloture (which requires 3/5) and then abstain from the final up-or-down (which only requires a majority?

As someone once said,"I screwed up." Gregg will have to resign, not simply abstain, before 3/5th of the duly-sworn members = 59.

Obama has no move. He cannot be seen as trying to leverage the nomination for Gregg's support and he cannot be seen withdrawing the nomination for lack of support. Gregg, and the Republicans by extension have the upper hand in this situation, and they didn't even have to do anything to earn it.

If this is part of that vaunted plan I hear so many people claim Obama has, I'd sure like to know how.

The dude should have the guts to resign his seat. That, BTW, is an effective yea vote (reducing the number from 99 to 98 turns 3/5 into 59). Ass.

Could it be that the necessary "couple of republican votes" are already lined up and in the bag, thus allowing Gregg to save face with his party? Having Republicans in your cabinet gets you no inclusiveness or outreach points if you make them renounce their party as part of the deal.

I like Krugman's blog about the economy. He comments there simply is no "middle ground" for Obama with regards to Bi-Partisanship. I think he's right, unfortunately.

I don't want to fall into the "If only the czar knew about this..." trap, and I'll admit to getting a little nervous by the apparent missteps Obama and Emmanuel have been making this week. There are moments when I worry that we're witnessing a train-wreck before the third week is out.

And then I remember all the voices clamoring for Obama to "get tough" with Hilary Clinton, and all the voices clamoring for Obama to "hit back" against McCain. And then I remember the night of November 4, 2008.

And I decide to wait a little before rendering judgment on this administration and its political savvy.

I wonder if Obama's take is that, despite dire warnings that have more or less convinced the American people that we're in crisis, that for too many, it doesn't yet feel like a crisis. Maybe things have to get worse before people are ready for him to shoulder aside the Republicans and do what's needed. Sure, we on the left are ready, but then, he's our party's guy. But a lot of people remain in the middle, and while they like Obama, they might not be ready for a radical reimagining of the government's role.

Should the Republicans succeed in killing this bill, and the economy continue to slide, then in a couple of months there might be enough impetus to roll over the Blue Dogs and GOPpers alike. Put another way: FDR wasn't elected until three years into the Great Depression; the sense of urgency was much more tangible.

Time will tell.

Could it be that the necessary "couple of republican votes" are already lined up and in the bag, thus allowing Gregg to save face with his party?

I think this is a possibility that is worth considering before everyone starts flipping out. Personally, while there may still need to be some horse trading done, I really can't imagine that Snowe and Collins join a filibuster of the stimulus package when all is said and done.

Obama should let Gregg know that his vote for cloture is a requirement if he wants the job

So should the Senate Democratic leadership.

Obama needs to hire some better talent scouts. A common theme running through the Geithner and Daschle debacles was that these two tax cheats and influence peddlers were the only people in a country of 300 million people qualified for the jobs.

Now we have the spectacle of a Democratic president so enamored of appointing a Republican senator to his cabinet that he goes along with the senator's condition that a Republican must be appointed to succeed him. By a Democratic governor. Despite the fact that he wants to dismantle the agency he wants to head, Gregg clearly is yet another one of these guys who is the only person in the entire country qualified for the job.

Obama must be using the same executive recruiting experts who insist that investment and banking dudes who've lost mega-billions for their companies deserve to keep getting billions in bonuses because they might take their talents elsewhere.

It is truly disappointing to learn that we have such a dearth of talent in our nation.

I suggest that most of the nation does not understand Obama's methodology because they do not understand the new paradigm. His thinking is so outside the box that those unwilling or unable to remove the constraints of "old ways of thinking" are left to speculate using only the precedents set in place by old politics. Now is the time to elevate thinking and responses to the paradigm of cooperation, collaboration and compassion. Once again, I suggest the work of Jean Houston, www.jeanhouston.com, to explore this new way of thinking and being. The feminine is now in ascendance, and the masculine is struggling to survive. Resistance is futile. Change is happening and will not be stopped.

I am committed to Oneness through Justice and Transformation
peace,
st john

Obama all but assured a senate pick up in 2010 where one was not a lock at all.

He is gonna go over these clowns' heads, and make his pitch and say: if we do nothing and the economy gets worse, just look to the Republicans. They (the Rs) are for doing NOTHING. so when we do nothing, then you know whom to blame. we are talking abotu a possible great drepression.

Seriously...Obama to Gregg:

"You vote with us or I'm getting a different Comm. Secry."

Where's Rahm?
Time for some serious muscle on this one.
Posted by: Aynsley on February 4, 2009

ditto

What's the point of bringing him on board if he isn't going to support the plan?

Why are the dems not on the air every second they can get repeating this mantra.."people are losing jobs left and right and the Republican party is voting against new jobs for every main street American. We have to emphasize that it is the right that is keeping you from getting a decent paying job. And if you don't have a job they don't want you to get any public assistance either. They want to Catch-22 every out-of-work American.
Call them out on their obfuscation, make the public aware that they are spreading lies about the stimulus package. Get it out to the media.

Damn, I just get more and more pissed about the Dems just sitting there and doing nothing while the Reps lie and lie and lie. It's enough to make me want to go postal.

Call your Senator, tell him to shut the f**k up and vote on the stimulus. I did and it was very cathartic.

For god sakes, make the Republicans filibuster. Please! While more horrendous economic news rolls in, these Republican traitors will be jaw jacking on the Senate floor with their filibuster.

Shouldn't this be enough reason for Pres. Obama to withdraw the nomination? I mean, Gregg's not even waiting to get confirmed before he starts to undercut his potential future boss.

-Z

Are we sure Liberman will vote for cloture?

Are we really sure it's a bad thing if Republicans hold up the economic recovery unanimously.

It might be a briar patch they're throwing us into.

Are we really sure it's a bad thing if Republicans hold up the economic recovery unanimously.

Politically, it might help Democrats in the 2010 elections (or it might lead to a repeat of 1994, when the Republican's success in blocking Clinton's signature issues and the perception that they both had vision and could get things done while the Democrats didn't helped sweep them to victory.) If it helped Democrats in the election, that might be seen as good from the perspective of "tribal" partisan Democrats who are financially secure enough that the economic disaster in the meantime wouldn't affect them much.

OTOH, it would be pretty bad for most everyone in the country, particularly the most vulnerable, so for anyone for whom governing, as opposed to viewing politics as a sporting rivalry between your favorite team and their longtime rival, is important, it would be undesirable.