There was a lot of political groundbreaking this year, first it was Obama's Iowa caucus victory that started out the year and was the first time an African American had won a majority white state in a primary campaign, then it was Hillary Clinton's candidacy and their bitter primary battle where she received more primary votes than any other woman candidate in history. There was also Sarah Palin, the second woman nominated as the running mate of a major party, and a first for the Republican Party. Obama's nomination by the Democratic Party and his subsequent general election victory were also huge accomplishments this year, but there was also a lot of political gears that kept moving as though none of these historic accomplishments took place.
One of the more fascinating facets of this was the '-card' politics that were played ceaselessly by all of the campaigns throughout both the primaries and general elections.
Because of all of the historic accomplishments of this years election, it would be nearly impossible to see a campaign where '-card' politics wasn't played. Early in the campaigns it was the gender-card vs. the race-card with Both Clinton and Obama running a tight and bitter battle. Later in the election it was the gender-card vs. the race-card in the general election battle after Palin was selected by McCain.
With one day before 2009 '-card' politics is continuing to be played in the continuing, and somewhat embarrassing battle over the senate seat in Illinois that Obama will vacate next month.
Governor Blagojevich, in a move that's winning him no friends, and despite criticism from his own state legislature as well as prominent national politicians, has nominated former Illinois Attorney General Roland Burris to the seat despite Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid saying that any seat nominated by Blago would not be seated when the senate re-convenes next week.
The move was shrewd politics by Blago, (however disgraceful) as Burris is an African-American, and is a respected leader, by nominating an African-American, Blago dared congress not to seat him and blatantly brought '-card' politics to the front stage, enlisting Bobby Rush, another African-American congressman from Chicago, to spout ridiculous talking points comparing Senate Democrats to George Wallace and using words like "lynch" when describing the media's criticism of Blagojevich.
Nominating Burris puts Senate Democrats (as well as the Obama transition team) on the defensive and continues to drag down their national party and stay as a smear on the image of the party that is about to assume almost ultimate control of the Federal Government. And Balgojevich is shamelessly playing the race card with all of his full muster.
Seeing who will budge first on this will be the interesting story of next week, but it seems that 2009 will ring in plagued by the same race-baiting politics that left many of the firsts and historical accomplishments of 2008 slightly tarnished.
Wednesday, December 31, 2008
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
McConnell dissents
I was hoping that Republicans would end the Obama-post-election-honeymoon-daydream, but only because I like keeping my blog chock full of drama and intrigue, which may be bad for a country in deep crisis that needs to become more bipartisan and cooperative, but is good for a political junkie like me that likes a good scoop.
Mitch McConnell, fresh from near-defeat in the most expensive Senate race in Kentucky history, said today that he will be urging fellow Republican senators to challenge Obama's and Democrat's plans for a massive economic stimulus bill that Obama wants on his desk on January 20th.
The bill has been called by many the most ambitous federal spending bill since the great depression and promises over $700 billion in aid to national infrastructure, state governments, and relief for working class families squeezed by the expanding recession.
This will be a chance for Republicans to dig their heels in early on and tarnish Obama's pledges to bring the country into a more cooperative spirit, and breakdown some of the gridlock that has plagued congress for many years. Some may see it as a last desperate stand by a party facing internal disunity, a dismal public perception and severe branding issues. Some others however, may see it as the foundation of building a new image for 2010, and a return to more classical conservative values of smaller government and tempered federal spending.
However, the majority of the population thinks the government needs to somehow involve itself personally into helping the ailing economy and there is broad, however cautious, support for Obama's ambitious plan.
McConnell is one a slippery slope here, especially after the Republican Party helped Bush and Henry Paulson pass thir equally massive $700 Billion Bailout in September. So not to sound like a complete sellout, and to seem like the GOP has some sort of spine, he seems intent on blocking what will be Obama's first bill as president.
Obama has the Democratic votes to ram the bill through Congress, but gaining support from leading Republicans would go a long way to build Obama some political capital and would also keep him from being demonized in the op-eds come next Spring.
Mitch McConnell, fresh from near-defeat in the most expensive Senate race in Kentucky history, said today that he will be urging fellow Republican senators to challenge Obama's and Democrat's plans for a massive economic stimulus bill that Obama wants on his desk on January 20th.
The bill has been called by many the most ambitous federal spending bill since the great depression and promises over $700 billion in aid to national infrastructure, state governments, and relief for working class families squeezed by the expanding recession.
This will be a chance for Republicans to dig their heels in early on and tarnish Obama's pledges to bring the country into a more cooperative spirit, and breakdown some of the gridlock that has plagued congress for many years. Some may see it as a last desperate stand by a party facing internal disunity, a dismal public perception and severe branding issues. Some others however, may see it as the foundation of building a new image for 2010, and a return to more classical conservative values of smaller government and tempered federal spending.
However, the majority of the population thinks the government needs to somehow involve itself personally into helping the ailing economy and there is broad, however cautious, support for Obama's ambitious plan.
McConnell is one a slippery slope here, especially after the Republican Party helped Bush and Henry Paulson pass thir equally massive $700 Billion Bailout in September. So not to sound like a complete sellout, and to seem like the GOP has some sort of spine, he seems intent on blocking what will be Obama's first bill as president.
Obama has the Democratic votes to ram the bill through Congress, but gaining support from leading Republicans would go a long way to build Obama some political capital and would also keep him from being demonized in the op-eds come next Spring.
Wednesday, December 24, 2008
Friday, December 19, 2008
Obama and the Progressive Left
I predicted last week while discussing Obama's first round of cabinet appointments that Obama would receive more heavy criticism from the left wing of his party then he would from the right, in fact a recent survey shows that as much as 57% of Republicans are content with Obama's cabinet picks, and while 85% of Democrats in the same survey said they were content, the media seems to focus on that remaing 15%, although this is understandable because this is also the most vocal, as well as liberal, wing of the Democratic Party.
As recently as this year, especially earlier this year, in the Democratic Primaries, Obama was the darling of the progressive left, his early caucus victories (and ultimately the nomination) as well as his early fundraising numbers and grassroots volunteerism were fueled by liberal activism within the party and some can argue that he is president by and large because of this fervent support.
The progressive blog Daily Kos hailed Obama as it's "patron saint" in 2004 after his keynote address at the Democratic Convention and his subsequent Senate election, and other liberal blogs such as the Huffington Post adamantly defended him throughout the primaries -- although it was a Huffington Post reporter that broke the 'cling to guns' bombshell -- and pushed his campaign's agenda. So what went wrong? Where's the love?
Obama's relationship with the progressive left has always been symbiotic in nature, but also very cautious. He's been careful not to be seen as too close to this wing of his party so as to continue to be known as inclusive to differing opinions and more politically moderate.
For most people that have followed the elections, as well as his career closely he has never projected an air of doctrinaire liberalism, and throughout the general election he took very centrist positions on most issues, especially in the arena of national security.
Throughout the campaign Obama made distinct promises to include conservatives and Republicans "at the table" and do what he could to reach out to those that disagreed with him, and has since formed most of his transition on this very issue, bringing leading liberals, moderates, and two Republicans into his cabinet and into his administration, including current Defense Secretary Robert Gates, as well as 4 of his former Presidential rivals including: Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, Bill Richardson, and Tom Vilsack. So it should come as no surprise, especially to the liberal blogosphere that has followed his rise in politics so closely, when he continues to follow this trend.
It's also one thing to note that it's never too soon to be thinking about 2012, and although Rick Warren is a polarizing figure in America, he's also very popular and respected amongst religious conservatives, a group that generally rejected Obama in the election. He's especially popular amongst those that no longer adhere to the more ultra-conservative and controversial dogmas of Pastors Falwell and Hagee.
Rick Warren's rise and background is also similar to Obama's, and Warren received intense criticism from some of his church for allowing Obama to speak at an AIDS awareness rally at Warren's church in 2006 due to Obama's stance on abortion. So I imagine amongst the two of them, both cautious coalition builders, there is a sense of shared purpose, if not shared opinion. (Warren also defended Jeremiah Wright calling him a "good pastor" at one point.)
One last point to be made is that if Obama lurched the country in a more left-ward direction, as maybe his predecessor did in his early administration with a more right-ward tilt, it would cause not only a logjam in congress, but also infighting amongst his own party which could prove disastrous politically for not only his legacy as president, but also for the midterm elections of 2010 and his own re-election in 2012. Something I don't think even the most brazen liberal would support.
As recently as this year, especially earlier this year, in the Democratic Primaries, Obama was the darling of the progressive left, his early caucus victories (and ultimately the nomination) as well as his early fundraising numbers and grassroots volunteerism were fueled by liberal activism within the party and some can argue that he is president by and large because of this fervent support.
The progressive blog Daily Kos hailed Obama as it's "patron saint" in 2004 after his keynote address at the Democratic Convention and his subsequent Senate election, and other liberal blogs such as the Huffington Post adamantly defended him throughout the primaries -- although it was a Huffington Post reporter that broke the 'cling to guns' bombshell -- and pushed his campaign's agenda. So what went wrong? Where's the love?
Obama's relationship with the progressive left has always been symbiotic in nature, but also very cautious. He's been careful not to be seen as too close to this wing of his party so as to continue to be known as inclusive to differing opinions and more politically moderate.
For most people that have followed the elections, as well as his career closely he has never projected an air of doctrinaire liberalism, and throughout the general election he took very centrist positions on most issues, especially in the arena of national security.
Throughout the campaign Obama made distinct promises to include conservatives and Republicans "at the table" and do what he could to reach out to those that disagreed with him, and has since formed most of his transition on this very issue, bringing leading liberals, moderates, and two Republicans into his cabinet and into his administration, including current Defense Secretary Robert Gates, as well as 4 of his former Presidential rivals including: Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, Bill Richardson, and Tom Vilsack. So it should come as no surprise, especially to the liberal blogosphere that has followed his rise in politics so closely, when he continues to follow this trend.
It's also one thing to note that it's never too soon to be thinking about 2012, and although Rick Warren is a polarizing figure in America, he's also very popular and respected amongst religious conservatives, a group that generally rejected Obama in the election. He's especially popular amongst those that no longer adhere to the more ultra-conservative and controversial dogmas of Pastors Falwell and Hagee.
Rick Warren's rise and background is also similar to Obama's, and Warren received intense criticism from some of his church for allowing Obama to speak at an AIDS awareness rally at Warren's church in 2006 due to Obama's stance on abortion. So I imagine amongst the two of them, both cautious coalition builders, there is a sense of shared purpose, if not shared opinion. (Warren also defended Jeremiah Wright calling him a "good pastor" at one point.)
One last point to be made is that if Obama lurched the country in a more left-ward direction, as maybe his predecessor did in his early administration with a more right-ward tilt, it would cause not only a logjam in congress, but also infighting amongst his own party which could prove disastrous politically for not only his legacy as president, but also for the midterm elections of 2010 and his own re-election in 2012. Something I don't think even the most brazen liberal would support.
Thursday, December 18, 2008
Who will be elected the head of the RNC?
Taking a bit of break from transition/inauguration/Caroline Kennedy blogging, one of the elections that's yet to happen, the election amongst top Republicans for who is going to chair the RNC, is going to be a very important first step for how the Republicans will get "out of the wilderness" after two straight congressional electoral thrashings, an American Public that has largely rejected (and partially blamed) conservative ideology in the face of an overwhelming economic crisis, and a lost Presidential Election for only the 4th time in 40 years, the next chairperson of the Republican National Committee will have almost as much work to do as the incoming President's administration.
Not only will the next chairperson have to reorganize almost every single state's offices and field staff, and effectively communicate strategy to the party's grassroots and their conservative base. They will also have to work out a party platform over the next two years that will put them back into favor with the public and challenge a Federal Government that is almost solely in the control of their rivals.
It may also be even more of a challenge since the DNC will now mostly be in control of Obama's massive, coveted email list, and have access to his unprecedented and equally massive volume of volunteers and staffers.
But just like how the majority of the 2008 Presidential election had more to do with Obama's successes and failures than it did McCain's, the 2010 midterm elections will have more to do with the successes and failures of Obama's performance as President -- as well as the performance of a so far ineffectual Democratic controlled congress -- than it will on how well the RNC crafts it's platform and mobilizes it's base over the next two years.
In 2004, the DNC responded to two consecutive (albeit close) presidential losses by moving to the left with the appointment of former Vermont governor and former presidential candidate Howard Dean as it's chairman, who crafted a '50 state strategy' that focused more on equal representation in more conservative states at every ballot level and helped set the stage for a better return for the Democrats nationwide in both '06 and '08.
It would probably be wise for the Republicans to follow a similar strategy, seeing as how Obama won 11 states in the most recent election that Bush carried easily in 2004. Drafting a more center of right or even moderate plank focused on classic GOP values such as tight fiscal accountability and government regulation in the face of a vast increase in Federal spending, as well as a more compelling energy argument than "drill, baby, drill" might be the ticket to a Republican surge in the next two nationwide elections. Especially after two straight elections where the RNC tried to focus on wedge issues such as gay marriage, abortion, and gun control had little effect on their fortunes.
A good read on the details all six of the candidates for next months RNC chair election can be found here (it's worth the click!)
Not only will the next chairperson have to reorganize almost every single state's offices and field staff, and effectively communicate strategy to the party's grassroots and their conservative base. They will also have to work out a party platform over the next two years that will put them back into favor with the public and challenge a Federal Government that is almost solely in the control of their rivals.
It may also be even more of a challenge since the DNC will now mostly be in control of Obama's massive, coveted email list, and have access to his unprecedented and equally massive volume of volunteers and staffers.
But just like how the majority of the 2008 Presidential election had more to do with Obama's successes and failures than it did McCain's, the 2010 midterm elections will have more to do with the successes and failures of Obama's performance as President -- as well as the performance of a so far ineffectual Democratic controlled congress -- than it will on how well the RNC crafts it's platform and mobilizes it's base over the next two years.
In 2004, the DNC responded to two consecutive (albeit close) presidential losses by moving to the left with the appointment of former Vermont governor and former presidential candidate Howard Dean as it's chairman, who crafted a '50 state strategy' that focused more on equal representation in more conservative states at every ballot level and helped set the stage for a better return for the Democrats nationwide in both '06 and '08.
It would probably be wise for the Republicans to follow a similar strategy, seeing as how Obama won 11 states in the most recent election that Bush carried easily in 2004. Drafting a more center of right or even moderate plank focused on classic GOP values such as tight fiscal accountability and government regulation in the face of a vast increase in Federal spending, as well as a more compelling energy argument than "drill, baby, drill" might be the ticket to a Republican surge in the next two nationwide elections. Especially after two straight elections where the RNC tried to focus on wedge issues such as gay marriage, abortion, and gun control had little effect on their fortunes.
A good read on the details all six of the candidates for next months RNC chair election can be found here (it's worth the click!)
Who did you think he was going to pick, Jeremiah Wright?
It seems that Obama outrages somesort of left-leaning group pretty much every day now...
Today Obama upset gay activists after announcing that pastor Rick Warren of Saddleback Church in California would give the invocation at the incoming president's inauguration.
Today Obama upset gay activists after announcing that pastor Rick Warren of Saddleback Church in California would give the invocation at the incoming president's inauguration.
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
Time's Person Of The year
Big shocker: It's Obama (Remember last year when Time got all that flack for making Vladimir Putin their person of the year?)
Senior Time editor Rick Stengel called him The "quintessential" person of the year.
More fascinating then the article and cover, which I'm pretty sure everyone saw coming, is a collection of 12 candid photos of Obama from when he was a Freshman at Occidental College in Los Angeles. The pictures are very candid (I swear picture 4 is of him smoking a joint)
Check it out here
Senior Time editor Rick Stengel called him The "quintessential" person of the year.
More fascinating then the article and cover, which I'm pretty sure everyone saw coming, is a collection of 12 candid photos of Obama from when he was a Freshman at Occidental College in Los Angeles. The pictures are very candid (I swear picture 4 is of him smoking a joint)
Check it out here
Kennedy 2016
Ben Smith has a tasty thought to start the day:
To get ahead of ourselves a little bit:
If Caroline Kennedy is appointed to the Senate and wins reelection, and Barack Obama serves two successful terms, Senator Kennedy from New York, into her second term after two high-profile campaigns, having amazed the pundits with her ability to step on and off charter jets in Rochester and be friendly to members of the City Council, will be an automatic top-tier candidate for president.
The Kennedy-Clinton primary will be a thing to watch.
You heard it here first.
To get ahead of ourselves a little bit:
If Caroline Kennedy is appointed to the Senate and wins reelection, and Barack Obama serves two successful terms, Senator Kennedy from New York, into her second term after two high-profile campaigns, having amazed the pundits with her ability to step on and off charter jets in Rochester and be friendly to members of the City Council, will be an automatic top-tier candidate for president.
The Kennedy-Clinton primary will be a thing to watch.
You heard it here first.
Tuesday, December 16, 2008
Pelosi to put her foot down
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi in a Politico article published to day says that she is committed to not let Rahm Emanuel, Obama's chief of staff, and Obama himself dictate policy to rank and file Democrats in The House.
From the article:
"In talks with Emanuel and others, sources say, Pelosi has “set parameters” for what she wants from Barack Obama and his White House staff — no surprises, and no backdoor efforts to go around her and other Democratic leaders by cutting deals with moderate New Democrats or conservative Blue Dogs.
Specifically, Pelosi has told Emanuel that she wants to know when representatives of the incoming administration have any contact with her rank-and-file Democrats — and why, sources say."
This is a good thing obviously, as congress is not meant to be a legislative body that just rolls over for the executive branch at every turn, especially for one that shares party affiliations, however, Pelosi remains very unpopular to the majority of Americans and has been accused by many of not standing up to the Bush administration enough on many issues from The Iraq War, to the FISA warantless wiretapping and retroactive immunity bill passed over the summer. It would almost seem silly that she wouldn't seem friendlier to a Democratic White House.
Her unpopularity could continue though if Obama, who's legislative agenda is currently in step with mainstream American opinion and who holds much higher approval ratings then Pelosi, could be seen as having his plans blocked in a power struggle with congress.
Pundits have also said that having Emanuel as his chief of staff was a decision that was made largely due to his negotiating skills on the hill as well as his close ties to both Republican and Democratic lawmakers.
Unclogging congress was one of the premier issues of the '08 campaign, and Obama's first year in office will probably be most largely defined by how well he can maneuver and negotiate with both The House and Senate, as many of the projects he needs approved immediately will be both grand and sweeping in the scope of addressing the nations multiple current crises.
From the article:
"In talks with Emanuel and others, sources say, Pelosi has “set parameters” for what she wants from Barack Obama and his White House staff — no surprises, and no backdoor efforts to go around her and other Democratic leaders by cutting deals with moderate New Democrats or conservative Blue Dogs.
Specifically, Pelosi has told Emanuel that she wants to know when representatives of the incoming administration have any contact with her rank-and-file Democrats — and why, sources say."
This is a good thing obviously, as congress is not meant to be a legislative body that just rolls over for the executive branch at every turn, especially for one that shares party affiliations, however, Pelosi remains very unpopular to the majority of Americans and has been accused by many of not standing up to the Bush administration enough on many issues from The Iraq War, to the FISA warantless wiretapping and retroactive immunity bill passed over the summer. It would almost seem silly that she wouldn't seem friendlier to a Democratic White House.
Her unpopularity could continue though if Obama, who's legislative agenda is currently in step with mainstream American opinion and who holds much higher approval ratings then Pelosi, could be seen as having his plans blocked in a power struggle with congress.
Pundits have also said that having Emanuel as his chief of staff was a decision that was made largely due to his negotiating skills on the hill as well as his close ties to both Republican and Democratic lawmakers.
Unclogging congress was one of the premier issues of the '08 campaign, and Obama's first year in office will probably be most largely defined by how well he can maneuver and negotiate with both The House and Senate, as many of the projects he needs approved immediately will be both grand and sweeping in the scope of addressing the nations multiple current crises.
Fun with Google
One of the story's thats gone largely unreported by the media is the transition teams open for questions site on the transitions website change.gov that encourages ordinary Americans to submit questions that'll be voted on by readers and answered by the transition team.
Any of these answers could be found by a simple google search, but show that the transition, and most likely Obama's white house, will continue this same kind of open online forum, and will vastly expand online access to the administration.
From the site:
Q: "Will you consider legalizing marijuana so that the government can regulate it, tax it, put age limits on it, and create millions of new jobs and create a billion dollar industry right here in the U.S.?" S. Man, Denton
A: President-elect Obama is not in favor of the legalization of marijuana.
Rats.
Any of these answers could be found by a simple google search, but show that the transition, and most likely Obama's white house, will continue this same kind of open online forum, and will vastly expand online access to the administration.
From the site:
Q: "Will you consider legalizing marijuana so that the government can regulate it, tax it, put age limits on it, and create millions of new jobs and create a billion dollar industry right here in the U.S.?" S. Man, Denton
A: President-elect Obama is not in favor of the legalization of marijuana.
Rats.
Colorado Senator Ken Salazar to head Interior
It seems that Ken Salazar, the long incumbent Senior Senator from Colorado, will be tapped to be the new Secretary Of The Interior, a token post that administration's give to people from places like Colorado, which usually get's very little love when it comes to high cabinet appointments.
Salazar is a moderate, respected Democrat and is pretty much a shoe-in for the job. However his appointment does create yet another vacant senate seat in a Democratic State.
Bill Ritter, the governor of Colorado is probably not happy that he is forced into this role, given the national headlines over both Rod Blagojevich and Caroline Kennedy/Hillary Clinton. He can still, at least, be somewhat relieved that there will be much less media scrutiny over this decision since the Department Of The Interior isn't by any means a powerful job in the administration, and Colorado politics, unlike New York or Chicago are neither notorious or infamous, nor is Bill Ritter currently involved in any federal investigations or scandals. My guess is he'd probably like to keep it that way, and will probably appoint the safest pick ever, even if it means someone that may not be able to win in 2010, but will keep anyone from the media, or the National and State Republican parties from out of his hair.
UPDATE: Here's a good companion article on Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's difficulties facing many senate obstacles with so many seats up in the air.
Salazar is a moderate, respected Democrat and is pretty much a shoe-in for the job. However his appointment does create yet another vacant senate seat in a Democratic State.
Bill Ritter, the governor of Colorado is probably not happy that he is forced into this role, given the national headlines over both Rod Blagojevich and Caroline Kennedy/Hillary Clinton. He can still, at least, be somewhat relieved that there will be much less media scrutiny over this decision since the Department Of The Interior isn't by any means a powerful job in the administration, and Colorado politics, unlike New York or Chicago are neither notorious or infamous, nor is Bill Ritter currently involved in any federal investigations or scandals. My guess is he'd probably like to keep it that way, and will probably appoint the safest pick ever, even if it means someone that may not be able to win in 2010, but will keep anyone from the media, or the National and State Republican parties from out of his hair.
UPDATE: Here's a good companion article on Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's difficulties facing many senate obstacles with so many seats up in the air.
Does Caroline Kennedy deserve the NY Senate Seat?
As Caroline Kennedy and her uncle Ted Kennedy continue to lobby for her to replace Hillary Clinton in the senate, questions are arising over whether she deserves it, and more importantly, is she qualified? Though many Americans who are part of the boomer generation and older may be moved to see the last of the Kennedys get in to politics, I don't think the "family business" explanation is necessarily a good approach, especially since she isn't being voted in.
After an increase in scrutiny over political back scratching post-Rod-Blagojevich-scandal, I wonder if every day Americans will still agree that Caroline Kennedy deserves a place in American politics simply because she's a Kennedy? I like Caroline Kennedy, but I am left thinking this looks an awful lot like another powerful political family throwing their weight around to get their relatives an unearned appointment (take note, Beau Biden).
After an increase in scrutiny over political back scratching post-Rod-Blagojevich-scandal, I wonder if every day Americans will still agree that Caroline Kennedy deserves a place in American politics simply because she's a Kennedy? I like Caroline Kennedy, but I am left thinking this looks an awful lot like another powerful political family throwing their weight around to get their relatives an unearned appointment (take note, Beau Biden).
Monday, December 15, 2008
Cairo? Or Jakarta?
We speculated last week that Obama would probably give a major foreign policy speech from an Islamic nation's capitol within the first 100 days of his administration, we also speculated that the location of that speech would be Cairo, Egypt.
Michael Fullilove makes the case that the speech should take place in Indonesia, another very populous muslim nation and a place that Obama actually lived as a child.
He writes: "Choosing Indonesia would throw light on the diversity and richness of Islam, which is not, contrary to lingering perceptions, practiced solely by Arabs or only in the Middle East. The country, home to the world’s largest Muslim population, does a reasonable job of managing its considerable religious heterogeneity. Going there would help Mr. Obama to reframe the debate in the West about Islam and terrorism."
Although Obama and Bush have very different views on how to deal with the problem of global terror and Islamic extremists, hopefully he at least has similar reflexes
Michael Fullilove makes the case that the speech should take place in Indonesia, another very populous muslim nation and a place that Obama actually lived as a child.
He writes: "Choosing Indonesia would throw light on the diversity and richness of Islam, which is not, contrary to lingering perceptions, practiced solely by Arabs or only in the Middle East. The country, home to the world’s largest Muslim population, does a reasonable job of managing its considerable religious heterogeneity. Going there would help Mr. Obama to reframe the debate in the West about Islam and terrorism."
Although Obama and Bush have very different views on how to deal with the problem of global terror and Islamic extremists, hopefully he at least has similar reflexes
Sweet Caroline
The New York Times says Caroline Kennedy is going to make her case to New York Governor David Paterson that she should be given the senate seat that will be vacated by Hillary Clinton in January.
No word on what Paterson's camp has said as he was unavailable for comment, according to the article.
Kennedy is clearly the front runner, at least in the media world, for this seat, so Fran Drescher has a lot of lobbying to do if she wants to be picked instead.
No word on what Paterson's camp has said as he was unavailable for comment, according to the article.
Kennedy is clearly the front runner, at least in the media world, for this seat, so Fran Drescher has a lot of lobbying to do if she wants to be picked instead.
Obama to report Blago conversations next week
At the request of the US attorney's office, and according to a Politico article the Obama transition team will release all information regarding conversations with Most Recently Disgraced Politician and late night joke fodder Rod Blagojevich.
Last Thursday Obama said that he would make the information available "within the next few days," but according to spokesman Dan Pfeiffer, the campaign has now deferred to next week "in order not to impede [the US Attorney's office] investigation of the governor."
This deferrment will only continue to keep the story alive, will worry Democrats that the transition team will be forced off message to continue answering pressing questions from both the media and the RNC, and will give the embattled Republicans further openings to try and tarnish Obama before his inauguration, now 35 days away.
Last Thursday Obama said that he would make the information available "within the next few days," but according to spokesman Dan Pfeiffer, the campaign has now deferred to next week "in order not to impede [the US Attorney's office] investigation of the governor."
This deferrment will only continue to keep the story alive, will worry Democrats that the transition team will be forced off message to continue answering pressing questions from both the media and the RNC, and will give the embattled Republicans further openings to try and tarnish Obama before his inauguration, now 35 days away.
Dissecting Detroit
Bill Kristol of the NYTimes wrote an intriguing op-ed piece today about disdain for the American auto industry on both the right and the left.
Kristol argues that political elites on both the right and the left seem to look down their noses at the auto industry because it is made up of largely blue collar workers. The right roots their disdain in the industry's contracts with the U.A.W., the left apparently can't get over the Big 3's environmental shortcomings.
There is no doubt a sense of contempt for the auto industry coming from all sides. I wonder though, is this disdain justified? What Bill Kristol doesn't mention in his piece is that the majority of regular, every day Americans also don't think the auto industry deserves a bail-out.
There is no doubt a longstanding and complicated tension between the upper crust of America and the working class. But could it be that the auto industry is no longer respected because they just missed the boat on so many levels? Does an industry that refused to innovate and stayed on the dock all these years really deserve a life preserver now that the dock is collapsing?
PS: It would be interesting to look back at history and see how the media was reporting the airline industry collapse of the 1970s...
Kristol argues that political elites on both the right and the left seem to look down their noses at the auto industry because it is made up of largely blue collar workers. The right roots their disdain in the industry's contracts with the U.A.W., the left apparently can't get over the Big 3's environmental shortcomings.
There is no doubt a sense of contempt for the auto industry coming from all sides. I wonder though, is this disdain justified? What Bill Kristol doesn't mention in his piece is that the majority of regular, every day Americans also don't think the auto industry deserves a bail-out.
There is no doubt a longstanding and complicated tension between the upper crust of America and the working class. But could it be that the auto industry is no longer respected because they just missed the boat on so many levels? Does an industry that refused to innovate and stayed on the dock all these years really deserve a life preserver now that the dock is collapsing?
PS: It would be interesting to look back at history and see how the media was reporting the airline industry collapse of the 1970s...
Friday, December 12, 2008
Your morning Blago
Yesterday at a press conference Obama said he was "absolutely certain" that none of his aides had been involved with deal making for his open seat.
His top aide David Axelrod walked back on comments that they had "spoken" last month.
This is a sticky moment for Obama, right now it seems the majority of the public are giving Obama the benefit of the doubt here, but it put's his transition team in an awkward place and Obama's hesitation to tackle the issue head on turned a one day story into a story that consumed much of the week, and likely next week as well, especially as a hungry media ready for news to fill the vacuous void left after the election is scrambling to be the first with new updates on the scandal.
The Washington Post gives Obama some relief here with an article detailing Obama's arm's length relationship with the embattled governor.
Politico also has a smart read about Obama's team being in damage control mode.
His top aide David Axelrod walked back on comments that they had "spoken" last month.
This is a sticky moment for Obama, right now it seems the majority of the public are giving Obama the benefit of the doubt here, but it put's his transition team in an awkward place and Obama's hesitation to tackle the issue head on turned a one day story into a story that consumed much of the week, and likely next week as well, especially as a hungry media ready for news to fill the vacuous void left after the election is scrambling to be the first with new updates on the scandal.
The Washington Post gives Obama some relief here with an article detailing Obama's arm's length relationship with the embattled governor.
Politico also has a smart read about Obama's team being in damage control mode.
Thursday, December 11, 2008
Liberals shown some love with new cabinet announcements
As has been discussed earlier in some of my blog postings it seems that the majority of Obama's criticism on the picks for his administration have come from the left-wing of his own party as opposed to traditional opposition from conservatives and Republicans.
However the liberal blogosphere was alive with the sound of music yesterday and today as two favorites of the left were announced to have key positions in the administration.
First would be former Senator Tom Daschle, who has already been leaked as the new Secretary of Health and Human Services. As a senator he was seen as a moderate but has since been leaning more left since his ousting in 2004, especially in the arena of health care reform, which he has become much more passionate about in recent years, co-authoring a book called "Critical" which came out earlier this year and that made a loud plea for health care reform and outlined ambitious plans for sweeping changes in the health care/pharmaceutical industry. Daschle, in addition to his job in the cabinet will head up the newly created "White House Office of Health Reform," a key indicator that Obama is serious about health care reform and his appointment of Daschle means it will be a top priority in his white house, probably more so than anybody on the right or left expected.
The second liberal darling that was leaked yesterday is Carol M. Browner, who will be brought into the white house as "energy czar." She is the former head of the EPA under President Clinton and takes a very aggressive posture on both climate change and alternative fuels, and is very popular with the left.
Obama is a careful calculator and knows he's going to need a lot of help on the left to enact a lot of his major plans, and these appointments are going a long way to building a coalition that can do that.
However the liberal blogosphere was alive with the sound of music yesterday and today as two favorites of the left were announced to have key positions in the administration.
First would be former Senator Tom Daschle, who has already been leaked as the new Secretary of Health and Human Services. As a senator he was seen as a moderate but has since been leaning more left since his ousting in 2004, especially in the arena of health care reform, which he has become much more passionate about in recent years, co-authoring a book called "Critical" which came out earlier this year and that made a loud plea for health care reform and outlined ambitious plans for sweeping changes in the health care/pharmaceutical industry. Daschle, in addition to his job in the cabinet will head up the newly created "White House Office of Health Reform," a key indicator that Obama is serious about health care reform and his appointment of Daschle means it will be a top priority in his white house, probably more so than anybody on the right or left expected.
The second liberal darling that was leaked yesterday is Carol M. Browner, who will be brought into the white house as "energy czar." She is the former head of the EPA under President Clinton and takes a very aggressive posture on both climate change and alternative fuels, and is very popular with the left.
Obama is a careful calculator and knows he's going to need a lot of help on the left to enact a lot of his major plans, and these appointments are going a long way to building a coalition that can do that.
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
Obama calls on Blagojevich to resign
The AP breaks the story, I think we all saw it coming, this was Obama's only option at this point. He also urges the Illinois senate to vote on having a special election to fill the seat.
This is a big gamble for Obama, as there is a decent chance the seat could be picked up by a Republican in a special election, as the state is weary of Democratic machine politics and embattled administrations.
It could also be a chance for Obama to burnish some real reformer cred and endorse an unknown or a reform candidate for the seat.
This is a big gamble for Obama, as there is a decent chance the seat could be picked up by a Republican in a special election, as the state is weary of Democratic machine politics and embattled administrations.
It could also be a chance for Obama to burnish some real reformer cred and endorse an unknown or a reform candidate for the seat.
Senator Kennedy?
What will Blagojevich's arrest do to David Paterson, the other governor who needs to fill a vacant senate seat? This one for New York, which will be vacated by Hillary Clinton when she takes over as the Secretary of State.
He needs to take extra pains to ensure that it doesn't look like he received anything in return for the seat, or fell under anyone's influence.
It has been said that Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-MA) has been privately lobbying for his niece Caroline Kennedy to fill the seat, however since this has been widely known to the press, Paterson may be under pressure to instead install a more outside figure so as to appear unbiased by the powerful family name and legacy.
He needs to take extra pains to ensure that it doesn't look like he received anything in return for the seat, or fell under anyone's influence.
It has been said that Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-MA) has been privately lobbying for his niece Caroline Kennedy to fill the seat, however since this has been widely known to the press, Paterson may be under pressure to instead install a more outside figure so as to appear unbiased by the powerful family name and legacy.
Obama and Blago cont.
As the story wears on and gains traction, the press is going to do demand to know every single detail as to Obama's relationship with Blagojevich, much as it has done with other shadowy Chicago figures such as Tony Rezko and Bill Ayers.
Coming from Chicago is both a plus and a minus for Obama as he has said that he was "toughened up" by the rough and tumble of urban politics, but also has to deal with the legacy of a city and state famously rampant with corruption, machine-politics, back-scratching, and deal-making.
Ben Smith and Jonathan Martin from Politico release the first seminal article here. It's definitely worth the click and basically shows just how much the wind has been taken out of the Obama transition's sails. (Do you think Obama will still have those daily press conferences?)
Also from Ben Smith's blog:
"The reality of Obama's relationship with the Chicago Democratic machine is more nuanced, and has been widely explored. He certainly isn't a creature of the machine, wasn't born into it like Daley or married into it like Blagojevich. He came up in the reformist enclave of Hyde Park, but -- as is often the case with a strong machine and talented outsiders -- after he emerged, the organization's leaders saw his promise, and gave him some leeway, and he didn't mount a crusade against their transactional political system. To have refused, for instance, to support Blagojevich in 2006 would have been a major reformist statement; Obama didn't make it, and instead backed the incumbent governor. Obama's tighest inner circle -- Jarrett, Emanuel, Axelrod, Bill Daley -- is composed of people at least one degree closer in, and who each made millions in part off their various connections.
Perhaps the best way to see him is as a neutral in the (lopsided) battle between machine and reformers in Illinois. That's the stance he took in a defining battle, the 2006 contest for the presidency of the Cook County Board of Commissioners. Reformers fault him for failing to support their champion; but he didn't endorse the machine favorite either. He stayed on the sidelines, and kept his focus on the White House. You can accuse him of cowardice for that, or you can grant him that he had decided to devote himself to larger causes and ambitions than Illinois political reform."
Coming from Chicago is both a plus and a minus for Obama as he has said that he was "toughened up" by the rough and tumble of urban politics, but also has to deal with the legacy of a city and state famously rampant with corruption, machine-politics, back-scratching, and deal-making.
Ben Smith and Jonathan Martin from Politico release the first seminal article here. It's definitely worth the click and basically shows just how much the wind has been taken out of the Obama transition's sails. (Do you think Obama will still have those daily press conferences?)
Also from Ben Smith's blog:
"The reality of Obama's relationship with the Chicago Democratic machine is more nuanced, and has been widely explored. He certainly isn't a creature of the machine, wasn't born into it like Daley or married into it like Blagojevich. He came up in the reformist enclave of Hyde Park, but -- as is often the case with a strong machine and talented outsiders -- after he emerged, the organization's leaders saw his promise, and gave him some leeway, and he didn't mount a crusade against their transactional political system. To have refused, for instance, to support Blagojevich in 2006 would have been a major reformist statement; Obama didn't make it, and instead backed the incumbent governor. Obama's tighest inner circle -- Jarrett, Emanuel, Axelrod, Bill Daley -- is composed of people at least one degree closer in, and who each made millions in part off their various connections.
Perhaps the best way to see him is as a neutral in the (lopsided) battle between machine and reformers in Illinois. That's the stance he took in a defining battle, the 2006 contest for the presidency of the Cook County Board of Commissioners. Reformers fault him for failing to support their champion; but he didn't endorse the machine favorite either. He stayed on the sidelines, and kept his focus on the White House. You can accuse him of cowardice for that, or you can grant him that he had decided to devote himself to larger causes and ambitions than Illinois political reform."
Blago on Obama: "Fuck Him!"
Well something that might put a wrench in Republican plans to try and tie Obama to the scandal facing ol' "Pay-Rod" (Thank you Chicago-Sun Times) is a tape released by the Justice Department detailing a tirade Blago goes on when the Obama transition doesn't want to "play ball," in regards to Obama's senate seat.
Blagojevich (about Obama): "He doesn't want to pay? Fuck him!"
Blago also calls Obama a "motherfucker" throughout the tirade.
Classy guy.
Blagojevich (about Obama): "He doesn't want to pay? Fuck him!"
Blago also calls Obama a "motherfucker" throughout the tirade.
Classy guy.
Happy Birthday Blago!
So apparently it's Rod Blagojevich's birthday today, whoops.
He's now the most recently disgraced politician, which gives Eliot Spitzer some time to maybe start speaking at universities and maybe appearing as a CNN analyst or something.
On another interesting note, and some silver lining for an embattled Republican party, the two largest Democratic states, New York and Illinois, are now being run by Lt. Governors. Signling what could be a major campaign issue for the GOP in 2010, employing the same tactics democrats used in 2006 to frame the other party as corrupt and unable to be trusted.
Also, one thing to look out for, will Republicans try and push an Obama-Blagojevich connection? And if so, how loudly will they do it and how far will they go?
He's now the most recently disgraced politician, which gives Eliot Spitzer some time to maybe start speaking at universities and maybe appearing as a CNN analyst or something.
On another interesting note, and some silver lining for an embattled Republican party, the two largest Democratic states, New York and Illinois, are now being run by Lt. Governors. Signling what could be a major campaign issue for the GOP in 2010, employing the same tactics democrats used in 2006 to frame the other party as corrupt and unable to be trusted.
Also, one thing to look out for, will Republicans try and push an Obama-Blagojevich connection? And if so, how loudly will they do it and how far will they go?
Tuesday, December 9, 2008
Where are the jobs for women?
The NYTimes published an interesting op-ed piece asking this very question of Barack Obama's plan to create new jobs with projects to upgrade the nation's infrastructure. The vast majority of these new "green jobs" will be in the fields of construction and engineering, which are largely dominated by men.
So what's a girl to do? The piece mentions that efforts to attract women to these fields have been largely unsuccessful. This article raising a number of interesting questions, mainly, is it fair to say that there are "women's professions" and "men's professions?" Should the government be responsible for approaching job creation from this sexist view and try to create jobs in "male" and "female" professions equally? In my opinion, the answer is no. But should the government consider spreading out opportunities and implement a range of plans to generate new jobs that will effect a broader range of the job market? Absolutely, but that's not just to benefit women, it's to benefit every worker who doesn't own a hard hat or a drafting table.
So what's a girl to do? The piece mentions that efforts to attract women to these fields have been largely unsuccessful. This article raising a number of interesting questions, mainly, is it fair to say that there are "women's professions" and "men's professions?" Should the government be responsible for approaching job creation from this sexist view and try to create jobs in "male" and "female" professions equally? In my opinion, the answer is no. But should the government consider spreading out opportunities and implement a range of plans to generate new jobs that will effect a broader range of the job market? Absolutely, but that's not just to benefit women, it's to benefit every worker who doesn't own a hard hat or a drafting table.
Sunday, December 7, 2008
Frank Rick dissents
Liberal columnist Frank Rich, a longtime cheerleader for Obama both during the primaries and in the general election becomes one of the first writers to openly criticize the potential pitfalls of Obama's new cabinet appointments could possibly have.
He discusses a book written by David Halberstam about the Kennedy administration called "Best and Brightest," a title that was meant to be taken as ironic and details how Kennedy's picks, which were highly praised by the press at the time, would lead both Kennedy and his predecessor, Lyndon Johnson, into a disastrous and prolonged conflict in Vietnam.
The article is definitely worth the read and shows how a "valedictorocracy" a term coinced by Rich's colleague David Brooks in an article we linked to earlier, could have a possibility for danger down the road.
It also shows that Obama's biggest criticisms in the future may come more from the left wing than the right.
He discusses a book written by David Halberstam about the Kennedy administration called "Best and Brightest," a title that was meant to be taken as ironic and details how Kennedy's picks, which were highly praised by the press at the time, would lead both Kennedy and his predecessor, Lyndon Johnson, into a disastrous and prolonged conflict in Vietnam.
The article is definitely worth the read and shows how a "valedictorocracy" a term coinced by Rich's colleague David Brooks in an article we linked to earlier, could have a possibility for danger down the road.
It also shows that Obama's biggest criticisms in the future may come more from the left wing than the right.
Saturday, December 6, 2008
Bill Ayers writes an op-ed in the NYTimes
Read it here.
According to him, he's not such a bad guy after all... but why would anyone trust what a domestic terrorist has to say?
According to him, he's not such a bad guy after all... but why would anyone trust what a domestic terrorist has to say?
Friday, December 5, 2008
L vs J on education, part trois
I don't see Obama's election time support from teacher's unions as a major incentive for Obama to pick a Secretary of Education with conventional views. Particularly in light of what is happening in the auto industry, I see the power of big unions further falling out of favor with the American public. Mind you, a majority of the people in Detroit no less, support allowing the Big Three to fail. If anyone other than David Brooks cares about Obama's pick for Secretary of Education, will the same argument be made that going against the teacher's unions for the good of our children is the same as forcing the auto unions to make concessions for the good of our economy?
Obama and education cont.
Some of the pundits (including David Brooks, as linked below in Laura'a post) are speculating that whoever Obama picks for Secretary Of Education will show whether he's truly dedicated to education reform, or whether he will allow the teacher's unions -- which unanimously supported him during the general election -- to have more of a say in how to govern education reform in America.
Obama is under tremendous pressure from many of the big unions that gave his campaign millions of dollars for mailers and get out the vote activites and organized it's members, to show an acknowledgement to that support with high government appointments in his administration.
So far, nearly all of Obama's choices for the posts within his administration have been safe picks, intellectuals, Democratic Party heavyweights, moderates and pragmatists. Education may simply be no different.
Certainly s safe, union driven pick won't generate any huge amount of bad press, (David Brooks may be a little mad though) but it won't cause his white house very much grief and could keep a core and powerful constituency happy.
Secretary of Education is generally seen as a low post on the totem pole of cabinet picks, and most individuals in this role have wielded little true power over the direction of the education system in America, mostly due to polarizing fights in both congress and more locally on the right direction of education in America.
Obama had pledged throughout the campaign that he wanted American schools to be "competitive" with other schools throughout the world, and pledged to make the American education system "first class." However, Obama has backed off on what he calls "heated campaign rhetoric" before and this may be an opportunity for him to make another safe pick, keep a constituency happy, and focus more on the big picture of the crumbling American economy.
However, Obama has proven to be unpredictible before, and appointing a known reformer with more left-leaning credentials could show the country that he is focused on making education reform in America a top issue, and would also be keeping to a campaign theme that special interests would not control his white house.
Obama is under tremendous pressure from many of the big unions that gave his campaign millions of dollars for mailers and get out the vote activites and organized it's members, to show an acknowledgement to that support with high government appointments in his administration.
So far, nearly all of Obama's choices for the posts within his administration have been safe picks, intellectuals, Democratic Party heavyweights, moderates and pragmatists. Education may simply be no different.
Certainly s safe, union driven pick won't generate any huge amount of bad press, (David Brooks may be a little mad though) but it won't cause his white house very much grief and could keep a core and powerful constituency happy.
Secretary of Education is generally seen as a low post on the totem pole of cabinet picks, and most individuals in this role have wielded little true power over the direction of the education system in America, mostly due to polarizing fights in both congress and more locally on the right direction of education in America.
Obama had pledged throughout the campaign that he wanted American schools to be "competitive" with other schools throughout the world, and pledged to make the American education system "first class." However, Obama has backed off on what he calls "heated campaign rhetoric" before and this may be an opportunity for him to make another safe pick, keep a constituency happy, and focus more on the big picture of the crumbling American economy.
However, Obama has proven to be unpredictible before, and appointing a known reformer with more left-leaning credentials could show the country that he is focused on making education reform in America a top issue, and would also be keeping to a campaign theme that special interests would not control his white house.
Obama and Education
David Brooks wrote an interesting op-ed piece today on how Obama's choice for Secretary of Education will force Obama to pick a side on the education debate. Throughout the campaign he seemed to have one foot in the reform camp (pro-charter schools, merit pay for teachers, etc) and one foot in the old guard camp (teacher's unions, smaller class sizes, increasing funding for current programs).
There is currently a consensus that our nation's education system isn't working. The old guard will say that their ideas would work if they just had more money while reformers will say that we've got to make big changes to the current system. My bet is that Obama's heart is really on more of the reformer side, especially since there has been success with charter schools and other alternatives in his home state of Illinois. I think spent some time siding with teacher's unions during the election only because they supported him, but now that he's been elected their loyalty to him won't buy them much sway.
There is currently a consensus that our nation's education system isn't working. The old guard will say that their ideas would work if they just had more money while reformers will say that we've got to make big changes to the current system. My bet is that Obama's heart is really on more of the reformer side, especially since there has been success with charter schools and other alternatives in his home state of Illinois. I think spent some time siding with teacher's unions during the election only because they supported him, but now that he's been elected their loyalty to him won't buy them much sway.
Thursday, December 4, 2008
Obama speaking in Cairo cont...
The announcement today that Barack Obama wants to give a major foreign policy speech from a major muslim capitol is big news. If Obama reaches out to Muslims I think it will take some of the wind out of the sails of Muslim extremist groups (after all, Al Qaida did say that a win for John McCain would help them with recruiting). Having lived in the Muslim nation of Indonesia during his childhood, I think Obama is perfectly suited for the job of calling out to the Muslim world and saying that there are some things that East and West can both agree on, the same way he evoked a spirit of common values between Democrats and Republicans during the election.
Bring back the beard Bill Richardson!
Seriously though, I would really be happy if we returned to an age of American politics where facial hair wasn't a disqualification for the highest office in the land, and was in fact encouraged.
All it takes is one prominent politician that rocks the beard with no shame, and looks good while doing it and those days will be back and better than ever!
All it takes is one prominent politician that rocks the beard with no shame, and looks good while doing it and those days will be back and better than ever!
Obama to speak in Cairo?
The NY Times has speculated that Obama will be possibly making a historic speech in an "unnamed Islamic capital," most likely Cairo, Egypt within the first 100 days of his administration.
This would be a bold move, and possibly the first time since 9/11 that a major western leader has made such strides to try and address the rift between the western world, and that of muslim-majority nations.
Security would be massive, no matter what, and what if he fails? It would be a pretty big smear on Obama if within the first 100 days of his administration he delivers a huge speech with a completely worldwide audience -- targeted at people with whom the US has somewhat chilly relations -- and falls flat on his face.
It would have the possibility of being a Reaganesque move towards reconciliation, or a Bushian move towards deeper hostility.
This would be a bold move, and possibly the first time since 9/11 that a major western leader has made such strides to try and address the rift between the western world, and that of muslim-majority nations.
Security would be massive, no matter what, and what if he fails? It would be a pretty big smear on Obama if within the first 100 days of his administration he delivers a huge speech with a completely worldwide audience -- targeted at people with whom the US has somewhat chilly relations -- and falls flat on his face.
It would have the possibility of being a Reaganesque move towards reconciliation, or a Bushian move towards deeper hostility.
Chris Matthews for senate?
Oh God.
here we go.
You can read about it here
It would be like Al Franken times 10, and we saw how well he's doing right now.
Arlen Specter, the current seat holder, a Republican, is pretty popular in Pennsylvania, and who knows what climate the Democrats will be facing in 2010?
At least he won't be jamming up cable TV anymore.
here we go.
You can read about it here
It would be like Al Franken times 10, and we saw how well he's doing right now.
Arlen Specter, the current seat holder, a Republican, is pretty popular in Pennsylvania, and who knows what climate the Democrats will be facing in 2010?
At least he won't be jamming up cable TV anymore.
GOP leadership continue Obama honeymoon
Well the inauguration is still 47 days away, but exactly one month after November's election, the GOP leadership doesn't have enough nice things to say about the way Obama is handling the transition, or about most of the appointments he's made to his cabinet.
Jonathan Martin, the prolific conservative writer for Politico, now blogless has a great read on this new development from within the echelons of senior Republican leadership. These Republicans definitely got the memo that bipartisanship is in, and people that spent days on-message throughout the campaign hurling line after line of opposition against Obama and The Democratic Party, pretty much calling him a socialist, a terrorist sympathizer, and a spineless line cutter are now trying to rebrand themselves in the spirit of a post election kumbaya.
The clock is ticking though, on if and when, the cease fire is called off and both sides return to the trenches.
Jonathan Martin, the prolific conservative writer for Politico, now blogless has a great read on this new development from within the echelons of senior Republican leadership. These Republicans definitely got the memo that bipartisanship is in, and people that spent days on-message throughout the campaign hurling line after line of opposition against Obama and The Democratic Party, pretty much calling him a socialist, a terrorist sympathizer, and a spineless line cutter are now trying to rebrand themselves in the spirit of a post election kumbaya.
The clock is ticking though, on if and when, the cease fire is called off and both sides return to the trenches.
Monday, December 1, 2008
The economy sucks
3,400 Washington Mutual employees were told they would be losing their jobs today in Seattle. It's a pretty scary time across the country and right here in my own backyard. In spite of these tough times, people seem to be optimistic about the future of the country - or at least I am.
The day after the election I was talking to a friend who had been heavily involved in the Obama campaign. She said after Obama won that she couldn't wait to do more. She wanted to be asked to do something more for her community and her country right away. When she first said this, I have to admit I didn't totally get what she was saying. But now I think I kinda do.
The Obama campaign did an incredible job mobilizing people across the country during the election season, but I hope that he will ask Americans to do even more and I hope that he will call upon us as a nation soon. I know the president-elect is busy planning his transition, but I just feel a little left out. I drank to kool-aid, got all riled up about getting involved, and now I have nothing to do.
So, President Obama, if you're reading this, please give me a job that doesn't involve getting spammed with email messages asking for donations for your transition planning..
I'm here and I'm waiting.
The day after the election I was talking to a friend who had been heavily involved in the Obama campaign. She said after Obama won that she couldn't wait to do more. She wanted to be asked to do something more for her community and her country right away. When she first said this, I have to admit I didn't totally get what she was saying. But now I think I kinda do.
The Obama campaign did an incredible job mobilizing people across the country during the election season, but I hope that he will ask Americans to do even more and I hope that he will call upon us as a nation soon. I know the president-elect is busy planning his transition, but I just feel a little left out. I drank to kool-aid, got all riled up about getting involved, and now I have nothing to do.
So, President Obama, if you're reading this, please give me a job that doesn't involve getting spammed with email messages asking for donations for your transition planning..
I'm here and I'm waiting.
The war cabinet
The seminal piece of post-election cabinet analysis hoopla has to be today's story by ace Politico wordsmith's Jim Vandehei and (a personal favorite) Mike Allen.
The article lays out 5 points that can be immediately extrapolated by this morning's press conference where Obama laid out the last major wing of his future White House cabinet.
The points basically are that Obama is an intellectual who cares more about academic credentials and competency than loyalty, he doesn't mind taking big risks, he prefers persuasion to force, he isn't as disdainful of Washington insiders as some of his campaign rhetoric may suggest, and he doesn't mind bending a few campaign promises to fit a political environment.
All of these points can pretty much sum up Obama in a nutshell, and are qualities that he has displayed over and over again, throughout the campaign and elsewhere. But the analysis in this article is superb.
The article lays out 5 points that can be immediately extrapolated by this morning's press conference where Obama laid out the last major wing of his future White House cabinet.
The points basically are that Obama is an intellectual who cares more about academic credentials and competency than loyalty, he doesn't mind taking big risks, he prefers persuasion to force, he isn't as disdainful of Washington insiders as some of his campaign rhetoric may suggest, and he doesn't mind bending a few campaign promises to fit a political environment.
All of these points can pretty much sum up Obama in a nutshell, and are qualities that he has displayed over and over again, throughout the campaign and elsewhere. But the analysis in this article is superb.
Hopeful?
Atlantic writer Robert Kaplan seems to think that Obama's honeymoon may bleed into the intellectual community and ponders whether we may be on the brink of a worldwide kumbaya moment. Believe it or not, he also actually gives George Bush some credit where it is due.
It's a great read.
I'm a tad bit more skeptical than Mr. Kaplan, but it's good to see good old fashioned idealism rooted in smart analysis still has a place in print journalism these days.
It's a great read.
I'm a tad bit more skeptical than Mr. Kaplan, but it's good to see good old fashioned idealism rooted in smart analysis still has a place in print journalism these days.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
