Obama Transition: Not A Good Sign

So Obama proposes a controversial CIA head and doesn't even talk to Feinstein, incoming head of the Senate Intelligence Comittee? Now she and another senior Dem, Rockefeller, are criticizing it and, in fact, him in the press?

That's beyond amateurish. It's dumb to the point of being incompetent.

Usually it's a year or two into a new administration before the calls begin for a newer president to bring in some old hand to come in, get things under control and try to turn them around. Yet, in terms of Cabinet posts, all Obama has done is place a lot of very old retreads on board already. That is not bold, let alone audacious and it certainly isn't change.

I've been more than fair to Obama since November and I hope to continue to be, but we are starting to get further into amateur hour here than I'd honestly like to see.

Potentially having the most would be appointees derailed even before confirmation hearings begin is not a sign of the competence with which someone seemed to have run Obama's campaign.

I haven't found his public relations efforts on those items, Blago and major world developments to be very inspirational either. For now at least, Obama is beginning to look like someone not up to the job. Images of a shirtless Obama trolling the surf in Hawaii can only take his administration so far.

Comments

[IslamoLlama]

"-- Usually it's a year or two into a new administration before the calls begin for a newer president to bring in some old hand to come in, get things under control and try to turn them around. Yet, in terms of Cabinet posts, all Obama has done is place a lot of very old retreads on board already. That is not bold, let alone audacious and it certainly isn't change. --"

I bet you really regret voting for him.

"-- I've been more than fair to Obama since November --"

Hahahaha!

"-- and I hope to continue to be, --"

ahahaha!

"-- but we are starting to get further into amateur hour here than I'd honestly like to see. --"

See, if I were Barack Obama, I'd be picking up Nixon and Reagen retreads, because that's real change.

Again, I'm not really sure what you were expecting, Dan. Did you think he was going to nominate annoymous nobodies with zero political experience all under the age of 30? It's worth noting that Obama never really attempted to distance himself from the Clinton Administration during his general election run and he's embraced a number of Clinton Era policies going straight back to his Senate term.

The "change" Obama embodies is a change from Bush-Era policies. Bashing him for his cabinet picks because they aren't sufficiently novice indicates that you haven't actually followed the Obama platforms from day one. And given that Obama has served a grand total of -14 days in office, its continuously amusing to watch you slander him on job performance in an office he isn't even holding yet.

[jharp]

Guess why Congress poll numbers are so bad. Hint. It's the republicans.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/113449/Republicans-Congress-Less-Popular-Than-Bush.aspx

"According to the latest Gallup Poll, 67% of Americans disapprove of Bush, while 69% disapprove of Republicans in the House and Senate"

"The 25% approval rating for the Republicans in Congress establishes a new Gallup Poll low"

[Fred Beloit]

"The 'change' Obama embodies is a change from Bush-Era policies."
Yukuty yuk yuk. Pull the other one.

"Bush era policies?" Moe, you mean like bailing out failing companies, cutting taxes, leaving Iraq only when it has been completely mopped up, keeping the same Sec. of Defense, beginning a surge and keeping Patraeus in command in Afghanistan, using retreads from past same-party administrations, increasing the deficit? That what you mean?

Hopey? Changy? Same-o, same-o?

[Fred Beloit]

I wonder if Harpo (Steve P.) is interested in this anomaly, if that's what it is:
From Harpo's link:
"Congress' overall approval rating -- asked without reference to either party and measured in a Dec. 4-7 Gallup Poll -- is just 20%. Typically, both Congressional parties receive higher approval ratings than the institution overall. Asking about the individual parties appears to cause respondents to answer in more partisan terms. In general, ratings of Congress overall do not vary much by party affiliation, but the approval ratings of the parties in Congress show large differences when looking at party affiliation."

So let's see. The class is made up of boys, avg ht 5' 1", and girls, 4' 10". The average height of the class overall is 4' 6". ?????????????????? Oh, it must be the other sexes throwing the nums off.

[Lala]

Panetta is good at keeping secrets says Bill Clinton. Other than that, who knows?

[IslamoLlama]

"-- Moe, you mean like bailing out failing companies, cutting taxes, leaving Iraq only when it has been completely mopped up, keeping the same Sec. of Defense, beginning a surge and keeping Patraeus in command in Afghanistan, using retreads from past same-party administrations, increasing the deficit? That what you mean? --"

Ah, another staunch Obama supporter. Seriously, Fred, why don't you take a step back from the Kool-aid. We know you've been a strong supporter of Obama's Iraq Policy and you never seem to shut up about how you applaud his commitment to tax cuts during a recession. In fact, I've heard nothing but praise from you on Obama's entire foreign policy platform. Seriously, pull his dick out of your mouth.

It's obvious that Obama is just a Bush-clone, and being a staunch supporter of Mr. 43, I'm shocked an Obama fanboi like you isn't off trolling the change.gov website like the other starstruck die hards.

:-p

Why everyone with two ounces of political acumen didn't realize this from day one staggers me, Fred. There are absolutely no differences between George Bush and Barack Obama.

Of course, by this logic, I can only conclude that any Bush supporter who opposes Barack Obama only opposes the man because he is black. So its a good thing you voted for Barry or you'd be a humongous racist, amirite?

[Lala]

Fred,
I understand the Steve P. reference. Good one.

[Fred Beloit]

Great, Lala. It is he.

I won't quote the very classy insult from Llamette, besides it is no argument at all. The argument is that Obama is just another pol, saying anything to be elected. The far Left dupes like Llamette, Harpo, et al were simply taken in. They shouldn't feel too bad. It happens to every generation.

[IslamoLlama]

We'll see how Obama rolls. If you're back here in a few months screaming about how unpatriotic and anti-American and commie-loving Obama is and how he's engaging in class warfare and surrendering to terrorists and taking Jesus out of America, I think we'll have discovered where your Bush-centric view and Obama's go their separate ways.

It is a cute little word game, calling Obama "just another pol". I'm not sure when anyone claimed Obama was not a politician. He just happens to be a politician that agrees with the majority of voting Americans.

But feel free to plug your ears, gum up your eyes, and scream, "What's a public policy?!"

[steveaz]

Dan,
Given that Obama plans on using the CIA to eavesdrop on terrorists' calls to America (and which competent executive wouldn't), Panetta's appointment makes a lot of sense.

Check out Newsweeks' cover this week, and you'll understand why Obama wants a loyal politico in the CIA's top spot. Panetta's job will be mainly a press-liaison's job, not a director's job.

And if things get nasty he'll be ready to fall on his sword. Loyal Clinton cronies are good for that.

[nina]

Harpo u don't quit,don't u. Still not at HP. 37% approval rating is not too far from 25%.
Give Urkle a year and we'll redo the poll. Not by Gallup who is in the pocket of CNN for their daily food.

[MarkJ]

jharp,

A sampling of Obama's picks....

SECRETARY OF STATE - HILLARY CLINTON, 61
SECRETARY OF DEFENSE - ROBERT GATES, 65
TREASURY SECRETARY - TIMOTHY GEITHNER, 47
HOMELAND SECURITY - JANET NAPOLITANO, 51
NATIONAL ECONOMIC COUNCIL - LAWRENCE SUMMERS, 53
NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER - GEN. JAMES JONES, 65
ATTORNEY GENERAL - ERIC HOLDER, 58
SECRETARY OF ENERGY - STEVEN CHU, 61
SECRETARY OF INTERIOR - KEN SALAZAR, 54
ENERGY, ENVIRONMENT COORDINATOR - CAROL BROWNER, 53
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES - TOM DASCHLE, 61
SECRETARY OF EDUCATION - ARNE DUNCAN, 44
SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE - TOM VILSACK, 58
SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION - RAY LAHOOD, 63
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION - MARY SCHAPIRO, 53
SECRETARY OF LABOR - HILDA SOLIS, 51
U.S. TRADE REPRESENTATIVE - RON KIRK, 54 (actually Obama's second-string pick after Xavier Becerra turned down the job)
DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE - ADM. DENNIS BLAIR, 61
CIA DIRECTOR - LEON PANETTA, 70
SECRETARY OF COMMERCE - BILL RICHARDSON, 61 (ooops! he withdrew, didn't he?)
HEAD, PRESIDENT'S ECONOMIC RECOVERY ADVISORY BOARD - Paul Volcker, 81

Such young, fresh faces, filled with unconventional thoughts and bold new ideas. Mostly male. Mostly white. Mostly in their late 50's and early 60's. And mostly "Old Beltway Hands."

O whisper to me again, jharp, those magic words "Hope and Change" that mean so much.

[jharp]

Posted by: MarkJ

I've got no problem at all with Obama's selections. As a matter of fact I like them.

All underlings. All answer to the President.

The change is the GOP getting run out of town.

And I couldn't be happier. How about you?

[Anon]

LOL, the GOP is getting run out of town? That is pretty funny. The GOP does need to retool its message a bit, but I would say that worst president in history+worst economic crisis since 29+worst presidential campaign of the last 20 years had much more to do w/the GOP losing than with any turn to the left or huge embrace of traditional Democratic tax and spend its all about the poor policies.

IF the GOP gets back to its traditions they will make huge gains in Congress in the 2010 election cycle. If not, they will become a rural/regional party that is unable to get anyone elected outside of the South or rural midwest and will no longer be of true national stature.

The Republican Party is one more on a long list of things that George Bush and Karl Rove have damaged almost beyond repair.

[jharp]

"LOL, the GOP is getting run out of town?"

Ah, voted out of town would have been better.

"The GOP does need to retool its message a bit"

I'd say a lot and I also would ask just what is their message?

"I would say that worst president in history+worst economic crisis since 29+worst presidential campaign of the last 20 years"

All events were intertwined. Please share with me the policies that the GOP didn't willingly and openly support George Bush. And the worst campaign in 20 years? His campaign was all about the continuation of GOP policy. War, torture, no health care reform, tax cuts for the rich, and most important a complete idiot as VP.

"IF the GOP gets back to its traditions"

Very interested in what traditions you refer to. And save the borrow and spend Reagan comparisons.

"If not, they will become a rural/regional party that is unable to get anyone elected outside of the South or rural midwest and will no longer be of true national stature."

That, is the GOP today. You are a tad late with your warning.

[Sergei]

This reeks of Clinton. Who else but Bill and Hillary allowed this nominee to be rammed through? Don't get me wrong, I am to the right of Attila the Hun, but Leon out of all the Clintonites is not really a bad guy. Under Bill, the CIA ran a pretty good act of rendition themselves - above and beyond the Bush administration. Keeping an open mind, maybe the leaks at the CIA need a good politician to reign all of them back in. However, I am sure the black ops, deep cover personnel would not appreciate this appointment. It's the Langley desk jockies that are the big problem.

[Totally Heterosexual Conservative]

That sound you just heard is the sound of Dan Riehl actually realizing that Barack doesn't give a fuck about what people like Dan Riehl think.

[Vonlonsesoync]

to download flash games at She25.com Fanstastico Girl

she25.com Fantastico Flash Girl invite

[IslamoLlama]

"-- That sound you just heard is the sound of Dan Riehl actually realizing that Barack doesn't give a fuck about what people like Dan Riehl think. --"

He's just internalized the old saw "Never trust anyone over 30" to the furthest extreme. Obama could replace Bob Gates with Noam Chompsky and Dan would be whining about how "that's not change you can believe in!!1!" because Chompsky isn't still in grad school. And he still hasn't come to terms with the fact that "Clinton retreads" doesn't work as a derogatory term if your audience genuinely enjoyed the Clinton Administration.

[Anon]

I guess it depends on what 'change' various people thought they were voting for when they voted for Obama. An Administration full of Clinton retreads is not going to be nearly as 'progressive' as the progressives want it to be, what it signals is more like 'business as usual', e.g. that nothing fundamental in D.C. around special interests, lobbyists, earmarks, pork, etc. is going to change...Obama is not going to remake Washington into a model of efficiency and sacrifice for the greater good.

If you were afraid that Obama was going to fill his administration with marxists and other truly nutty lefties, then an Administration full of Clinton retreads is somewhat comforting, because the Clinton Administration at the end of the day didn't do much of anything. His two great claims to fame, welfare reform and balancing the budget were done only because the Republicans had a veto proof majority and he had no choice. Other than that I can't even really think of what Clinton himself claims were his great accomplishments.

My opinion is that a Clinton II administration is going to gravely disappoint Obama's most 'righteous' supporters but probably get him re-elected, just like it got Clinton re elected. But, a signal that the country has moved hard left, it ain't.

[Fred Beloit]

I just looked it up in Fowler's and the example of "hyperbole" given there on page 223 is this by non-other than Llamette: " If you're [Fred} back here in a few months screaming about how unpatriotic and anti-American and commie-loving Obama is and how he's engaging in class warfare and surrendering to terrorists and taking Jesus out of America, I think we'll have discovered where your Bush-centric view and Obama's go their separate ways."

It is hard to scream through prose on the internet these days. In the early days all caps could approximate it, but no more. But hyperbole is Lamette's way of persuasion. Very effective as anyone can see.

[Fred Beloit]

Harpo writes: "I've got no problem at all with Obama's selections. As a matter of fact I like them.
All underlings. All answer to the President."

Well now, that is a REAL change. All of these people report to the Pres.? I though they all reported to Commerce Secretary. No wonder Harpo is so ecstupic...er ecstatic.

[Fred Beloit]

The WSJ doesn't forget that the midwives of malfeasance, the Democratics, are still trying to hide at the Fed level as well as the state. Dodd has still not released his promised info on the allegedly bribed-up special mortgage he received from those he was supposed to be watching for we citizens.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123128800174259195.html

[Totally Heterosexual Conservative]

I love this speculation that Obama supporters are going to be gravely disappointed if Barack doesn't create this perfect Marxist utopian, wingnuts, for some reason, believe, 2/3 of the public, i.e. his supporters actually seek. They'll never get it. The wingers think that "change" means brining in people no one has ever heard of. Kids with fancy laptops and ironic haircuts. No, "change," to most of us means a break with the diaster of the past 8 years. IN order to do that Barack has to attempt to cut out the massive rot of incompetent Bushies littering the federal government. A great way to accomplish this is to appoint competent folks who *gasp* think the Bush policies were and are criminal, coupled with not kowtowing to enablers like DiFi and Traitor Jay when they get their feelings hurt for not being included in the new team. Does DiFi really want to take on a very popular incoming president? Doubt it. Think she's gonna go to bat for the Bushies now that actual scrutiny is on her for her enabling? Not if she wants a career in CA.

It's really easy: if you are a Bushie or a Bushie enabler - don't call us; we'll call you. You don't matter any more.

[IslamoLlama]

"-- Obama is not going to remake Washington into a model of efficiency and sacrifice for the greater good. --"

Again, I'm not sure what you are asking for. Is Obama running all the moneychangers out of the temple and flipping the entire government on its ear while shouting "Viva La Revolutione!"? Uh... no.

He's not going to "remake Washington" into anything. He's going to work with the system he's got. Part of that system consists of the same insiders and power brokers that every President has had to deal with. Bush sampled advisors liberally from his father, Reagen, Ford, and Nixon. Clinton drew heavily from Carter and LBJ. Nixon took advise from Eisenhower administrators. Eisenhower borrowed heavily from Truman. Hoover pulled from Coolidge. FDR drew on Wilson's guys. Again, what sort of massive upheaval were you expecting?

Now, that said, there aren't too many John Yoos or Gonzos in Obama's new DoJ. They are largely anti-torture rule-of-law types who have been opposing the Unitary Executive theory straight back to its inception. I doubt Secretary of State Clinton will take as hands-off an approach as Condi Rice did in the Middle East. Bob Gates might still be at defense, but he'll have a markedly different mission than he would have had under "Korea Doctrine / 100-years in Iraq" McCain. Not to mention the immediate shift in policy on DADT, stem cell research, EPA enforcement, IRS enforcement, Civil Rights enforcement, and a host of other bureaucratic issues.

Again, this is a shift away from Bush-Era policy, not all policy. We're not embarking on a Maoist Great Leap Forward. There won't be a Che Guevera style revolution. There are policy shifts that America has been demanding for the last eight years that Obama will provide. But you're taking the term "Change" entirely too enthusiastically.

[Totally Heterosexual Conservative]

Save your breath Llama. Rush told them that Obama supporters are all clamoring for the great North American Marxist Revolution. Therefore, that's the end of the inquiry.

[North Dallas Thirty]

"I love this speculation that Obama supporters are going to be gravely disappointed if Barack doesn't create this perfect Marxist utopian, wingnuts, for some reason, believe, 2/3 of the public, i.e. his supporters actually seek."

It's not speculation.

http://eye-on-the-world.blogspot.com/2008/11/video-typical-obama-supporter-obama.html

How do you think this girl is going to take it when it turns out that the Obama supporters like yourself who told her she wouldn't have to pay her mortgage and gas lied?

And meanwhile, the Obama administration has already shown what its people are like with the Richardson appointment, the whole Blagojevich affair, Charlie Rangel, and Chris Dodd.

[Lala]

We are right to be worried -

" WOULD you ask your accountant to perform brain surgery on your child? That's the closest analogy I can find to the choice of Democratic Party hack Leon Panetta to head the CIA.

Earth to President-elect Obama: Intelligence is serious. And infernally complicated. When we politicize it - as we have for 16 years - we get 9/11. Or, yes, Iraq. "

more at http://www.nypost.com/seven/01072009/postopinion/opedcolumnists/an_awful_pick_148973.htm

[Totally Heterosexual Conservative]

Just because a dip-shit winger blog calls some random girl "typical" of Obama supporters doesn't make it so. But you know that. Or you're an idiot. Either way - easy to mock.

Richardson withdrew, likely at the request of Obama. Obama isn't connected to Blago, no matter how much baseless speculation you morans cling to. Rangel and Dodd are not members of the Obama team. Let me know when you solve the Obama birth certificate mystery, detective.

[Totally Heterosexual Conservative]

Oh, want another reason why no one gives a damn about what the right thinks any more?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090107/ap_on_re_us/joe_the_plumber;_ylt=AhvBrR71OnZOqnzpuv2WTjCs0NUE

Joe the Welfare Queen: War Correspondent for Pajamas Media

Is it becoming clearer now?

[Totally Heterosexual Conservative]

Oh, and Joe the Welfare Queen - whom even Neil Cavuto recognizes to be a buffoon: Pajamas Media War Correspondent

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090107/ap_on_re_us/joe_the_plumber;_ylt=AhvBrR71OnZOqnzpuv2WTjCs0NUE

Is the source of right wing irrelvance becoming any clearer to you all?

[Anon]

I only know what Obama's supporters have told me, and they have told me that Obama was going to fundamentally change things and that he was not a typical politician, indeed he was 'beyond' race and politics....isn't that why his supporters despised Hillary Clinton? Because she was more of the same old Washington inside the beltway lies and bribes? They have said, written, blogged and allegedly believed that Obama was going to be FDR and Lincoln and JFK all rolled into one.

And now, you say, all he aspires to is to roll back the worst of the Bush exceses?

Oh how far the mighty have fallen and he hasn't even taken office yet. LMAO.

[IslamoLlama]

"-- I only know what Obama's supporters have told me, and they have told me that Obama was going to fundamentally change things and that he was not a typical politician, indeed he was 'beyond' race and politics....isn't that why his supporters despised Hillary Clinton? Because she was more of the same old Washington inside the beltway lies and bribes? They have said, written, blogged and allegedly believed that Obama was going to be FDR and Lincoln and JFK all rolled into one. --"

The voices in your head don't count, Anon. Nor do pathetic little strawmen.

[Anon]

I very specifically said that my impression came from Obama's supporters, their words, their articles, their blogs. It has nothing to do w/any voices in my head and there is no straw man in the argument. What you are doing is setting the bar much, much lower already than it was set during the campaign.

If Obama's 'change you can believe in' was nothing more than bringing the country back in line with the law and fact based decision making and he positioned himself as Bill Clinton redux I would have voted for him!

That's not what he was selling.

[WAHOO WILLIE]

Yeah, a Clinton admin with a leader at the head instead of getting head may be a pretty good deal.

[templar knight]

Anon, talking to the liberal morons who post here is useless. You have eviserated the little shits, yet they continue to stick their collective tongue out at you all the while their guts are running down their pants and onto the ground. I've never seen anything comparable to it.

[templar knight]

Willie, welcome back!

[Anon]

I find some of these arguments very strange, jharp would have been a good Red Army member because he repeats the same stuff over and over again and no matter how many facts you give him, questions you ask him or scenarios you lay out for him his first post is exactly the same as his 698th post.

I also find it very strange that saying that the idea Obama's supporters thought they were voting for a Bill Clinton clone is total revisionist history becomes a straw man argument. I mean good god, how many pundits, experts, fans, politicians and regular 'folks' got positively teary eyed at the idea of Obama sweeping into DC and cleaning house. Now, all of a sudden, a bunch of Clintonista's is exactly what they all expected and I'm supposed to buy it?

I am HAPPY I tell you even THRILLED that his Admin looks like a centrist, slightly left leaning one and not something that Bill "destroying buildings is okay as long as they're empty" Ayers put together. I'm not convinced that Obama isn't the radical lefty I have thought he was, but so far, based on his cabinet at least, that isn't the direction he's going to go in. Of course it is still too early to tell. At this time in 2000 Bush still seemed like a decent, non zealot fellow who was going to stick to domestic affairs, bring back some class to the WH and compassionate conservativism was a buzz word.....

And I am always very, very amused at people who don't grasp and can't believe that I can think Bush was truly terrible as a president and still find nothing much to like about Obama or Hillary CLinton.

Still all a sign of how far discourse in this country has fallen though, very sad.

[IslamoLlama]

"-- What you are doing is setting the bar much, much lower already than it was set during the campaign.

If Obama's 'change you can believe in' was nothing more than bringing the country back in line with the law and fact based decision making and he positioned himself as Bill Clinton redux I would have voted for him!

That's not what he was selling. --"

I don't even know what to say. The Clinton Campaign in '92 revolved around economic recovery in the face of repeated recessions under Reagen and Bush, balancing the budget after decades of deficit spending, instating a universal health care policy, and reigning in bloated military spending. Le Gaspe! Obama's '08 Campaign revolved around economic recovery in the face of recurring Bush 43-era recessions, instating a universal health care policy, and getting out of Iraq (and thus cutting back the bloated military budget and massive deficit spending). Until the October economic collapse, balancing the budget was on his plate too, but that's not in the cards right now when government spending is the only thing keeping our economy on life support.

His major "Changes" in policy were getting out of Iraq, putting forward a health care plan, and reinstituting rule of law. Bush has gone so far afield, I think you confused "Change" back to the way it was in the 90s with some sort of massive new-age revolution.

[Vonlonsesoync]

Yours she25.com

[Sesso]

Great site.