Faith or Doubt -- Obama's Base Second Guessing

I'm going on a pertinent tangent:

International news coverage indicates a major 'media buzz' about this 'potential conflict of interest' ("CoI") that 'the Clintons have', and how the press is all over Bill to explain what he's going to do, as to his professional engagements, while Hillary (if nominated&accepting) becomes Sec'y of State?

Excuse me?

How is this anything but another great example of media bias in the US press?

There's already been twenty times as much coverage on this issue, in three days, as there was in 2000/2001, when Bush the Elder, via James Baker III (aka The Most Dangerous Man in America) and Scalia, got his son into the White House, while a senior official in Carlyle Group (with the Bin Ladens)... thus in a position to sell more Death Toys (contracts worth Millions, Billions?) to the US military, and abroad, as a totally inacceptable, perfect CoI!

If, in fact, you want a legal definition of CoI, Bush-Bush is the best:

conflict of interest
n. a situation in which a person has a duty to more than one person or organization, but cannot do justice to the actual or potentially adverse interests of both parties. This includes when an individual's personal interests or concerns are inconsistent with the best for a customer, or when a public official's personal interests are contrary to his/her loyalty to public business. An attorney, an accountant, a business adviser or realtor cannot represent two parties in a dispute and must avoid even the appearance of conflict. He/she may not join with a client in business without making full disclosure of his/her potential conflicts, he/she must avoid commingling funds with the client, and never, never take a position adverse to the customer.
http://dictionary.law.com/default2.asp?typed=Conflict+of+Interest&type=1&submit1.x=67&submit1.y=14&submit1=Look+up

I think Obama has just won 'the prize' and is now finding what it really is 'behind Door N° Three',

A satirical French publication noted some irony, last week:
"The WORST job in America, given to a black guy."

(Don't flame me please. They were highly admirative of US voters for 'overcoming racial history', and admiring his competence in campaigning, and adoring 'America returning to its senses', etc. ... think of it more as if David Letterman had said it! that would be the 'right context')

All in all: Obama, as are we all, is finding out daily that we haven't found the bottom of the RepubliCULT destruction of America; Bush is firing whistleblowers in Agencies everywhere, and replacing them with RepubliCULT shills... the damage to come makes Jan. 20 the only hope we may have...

Zm

crystelZENmud.blogspot.com

"We do not inherit the planet from our parents, we borrow it from our children" St. Exupéry

Why can't centrists get it that the liberal agenda is not a personal, selfish agenda? What we're talking about is peace, human rights, civil rights, justice. So much of politics is geared for the narrowest of self interest. And now with the economic crisis, even fewer will turn their attention to the big picture.

For a perfect summary of the big picture, download the Nov. 21 Democracynow.org broadcast in which Amy Goodman interviews Bishop Desmond Tutu.

Tutu is as delighted as are we all that we're done with Bush and on to our black President and Hope. Then he goes on in the course of the interview to summarize what progressives (the mainstream in more mature countries) want:

Terrorists tried in the International Court, instead of brainless bombing of countries where they may or may not be "smoked out."

An end to the agony that is Gaza, i.e. restraints on Israel's merciless aggression.
Tutu says this in itself would drastically alter our image in the Muslim world and remove the reason for so much animus against us.

An end to political prisons, torture, renditions, and all the crimes against humanity wrought by the Bush Administration.

Apologies and reparations to the Iraqis.

So what do we get from Obama? Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State? That choice is an outrage, a slap in the face, an evil wind bearing foul odors of backdoor deals. Is this the only way Obama could be elected? Is Obama so desperately beholden to the Clintons?

Hillary ran a disgusting, stinking, ugly, shrill campaign. The last thing I would call her is diplomatic. I see belligerence, ruthlessness, amorality. She voted for the war then blamed that abominable judgment on "bad intelligence". Nonsense. That claim, if it is to be believed, makes her either utterly stupid or utterly corrupt. I certainly don't have all the information she gets, but I knew the Iraq invasion was unjustified.

Hillary claims to be a child advocate, but she voted in support of cluster bombs which are especially noxious weapons that have killed and maimed thousands of children.She was caught in numerous lies of convenience and self-justification during her campaign.

We have witnessed eight years of killing and aggression and war and torture. Change should be change. I do not want a "centrist" government which is far right by any civilized standards.I want a government that understands peace and international cooperation.I wish we could have Dennis Kucinich or Russ Feingold leading us. Why is basic humanity so hard for most politicans and the public to comprehend? Must they all look tough and bomb a few helpless countries to prove it?

My dread is that we'll have more of the same ugly foreign policy, but cloaked with new rhetoric, and perhaps progress on other fronts such as alternative energy. The Obama years will look better than the Bush years, and they will indeed be better in many important ways.

But why throw our foreign diplomacy to the dogs?

Some of us can laugh. Jon Stewart's Nov. 18 "Obama's Team of Rivals" is hilarious satire on the emerging Cabinet.

But the reality isn't funny at all.
I could accept Hillary as Secretary of Health and Human Services. But by putting her where she is, Obama tells me peace is not a priority, and I begin to wonder how committed he is to human rights.In other words, by making this choice, he brings himself into serious question.

As I keep writing to his transition website: please, please, prove me wrong.

It's way too early to say whether Obama has integrity or progressive values. His past track record doesn't speak well of him, but to give him the benefit of the doubt for now, let's call it pragmatism designed to keep him viable pending the election.

As Obama takes power away from the Terrible Tyro of Connecticut/Texas, it will quickly become evident who is benefiting from the actions of the Obama administration. If it isn't the people of this nation, then Heaven help the man. The people will be calling for his head, and returning to the Republicans as the focus of their political expression.

Obama displayed amazing gravitas throughout the campaign from day one to Election Day. No matter how vicious the attacks against him got he was never aggravated. He stayed calm. He is a very intelligent man and he is determined to be a good president. He is appointing who he feels is the most qualified for these posts.

And you know what I trust the man, because of how steady he was during the campaign even during the debate about the bailout when McCain was flailing all over the place like a fish out of water. It is ironic in a way McCain talked about having a steady hand on the tiller, but it was Obama who actually had the steady hand, while McCain appeared to abandon ship as his campaign sunk around him, courtesy Sarah Palin. Obama ran a great campaign from day one, with brilliant tactics and strategy, few leaks, and many other things including a great campaign finance team.

And he reminds me of Lincoln frequently. He is not the most experienced leader but he is extremely intelligent. He is intelligent enough to appoint people who can advise him the best. He is also Lincolnesque with some of his picks. Like Lincoln he has picked former rivals to be in his administration.

Secretary of State: While I'm not a Hilary fan and while I do think that Bill Richardson should have gotten the post (although depend on what news source you read he still has a shot). Bill Clinton is still respected in the world (unlike another soon to be expresident), and reminds the world of the days when the world actually liked the US. She is a capable and intelligent woman and will do a good job. This is kind of reminiscent of Lincoln picked Seward to be his Secretary of State.

Secretary of the Treasury: While I don't know much about Tim Geithner. I'll trust Obama and his team on this. He could have picked better but I'm cool with this.

Attorney General: Eric Holder seems to a well qualified reformer. He was born to a granddaughter and an immigrant from Barbados in Queens. He attended Columbia University and interned for the United States Attorney and the NAACP. He was worked for the Department of Justice for three decades. After graduation from law school he was a trial attorney in the DOJs Office of Public Integrity. There he assisted in the prosecution of Democrat Congressman John Jenrette, who was involved in the Abscam scandal. In 1988 Reagan appointed him to serve on the bench as a Judge of the Superior Court of the District of Columbia. In 1993 he was appointed US Attorney for DC, where he oversaw the conclusion of the case against Dan Rostenkowski. In 1997 Clinton appointed him Deputy Attorney General. He has criticized the Bush policy on torture and the warrantless wire tapping policy calling them “disrespect for the rule of law…not only wrong it is destructive in our struggle against terrorism” He is the reform we need after Ashcroft, Gonzales, and Mukasey.

Commerce Secretary: My own governor Bill Richardson. While I still hope he gets State I’ll be satisfied with him here. He has kept New Mexico from suffering too terribly from the recession while creating jobs, a tax credit for solar energy (think about that on a national scale!), eliminated the sales tax on food (very awesome. Trust me), rural jobs tax credit (our rural areas are suffering badly right now). He’s kept taxes low on working folks here in NM, and he has done a phenomenal job at protecting Medicaid and Medicare from the claws of the Bushiviks. All in all he will be a great Commerce Secretary.

Health and Human Services: I can’t really say much for against Daschle here. But I’ll trust Obama on this one.

Chief of Staff: I know quite a few folks here don’t like Rahm, but I do. 1) He gave us our majority in the House by actually fighting the Republicans. 2). He is a tough talking SOB Chicago Jew, who is missing part of his middle finger, and who majored in ballet at Sarah Lawrence. He is going to be Obama’s pitbull. And he will get the House (and probably the Senate) to do what Obama wants them to do.

Well that’s my two cents

New Mexico Dem aka Wolf Scott-Cohen

Anyone commenting here and complaining about Obama's cabinet choices so far is welcome
to make other suggestions. I haven't heard any yet.

And it's not Rubin and not Summers at Treasury. Whether Geithner will bring new ideas and
start out untainted with the present Wall Street scandals (he's already at the Fed in NYC)
is yet to be seen.

Remember
1. These are not permanent appointments. If Obama doesn't like the job they're doing he
can ask for their resignations.

2. They work for him and not him for them. So far we have no reason to fear that Obama
is selecting people to whom he owes something.

Choosing Clinton for State might be a way to defang the Clintons a bit.

If any of us really know better we should be running for office.

Take pleasure in the dwindling number of days in the Bush administration. The various
paranoid fantasies about their stealing the election or allowing another terrorist
attack as a way to declare a state of emergency or some such have not come to pass.

Happy Thanksgiving folks.

Colleen Clark
Cambridge, MA

Look, I've attended nearly every Iowa Caucus since 1976. And the record turnout this year definitely was not an endorsement for a third Clinton administration. Had it been Hillary Clinton would be our president-elect or, worse yet, we'd be talking about president-elect McCain!

Personally, I caucused for John Edwards because he spoke for the union members of the United States. I really wanted to caucus for Dennis Kucinich because his positions, on nearly everything, were closer to mine than any of the others. But I knew in my precinct, cheek-by-jowl with a Bridgestone/Firestone plant, he wouldn't be viable so I went with my second choice.

Most of the caucus goers for Edwards, and those for Hillary Clinton, I'd seen before. We were old hands at this Iowa Caucus stuff. But the Barack Obama supporters were mostly young, including my neighbors, and this was the first time they ever caucused, let alone registered to vote. And they were fired up.

So with the inauguration less than 60 days away, will those same young people who trudged through the snow and cold to attend their first Iowa Caucus feel as fired up for President Obama after four years of a "Triangulating Bill" Clinton administration redux? Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State, Larry Summers at Treasury, Rahm Emanuel and Eric Holder for Attorney general? This is change?

I'm sorry, Christine Bowman, but do you really think this rogues gallery will truly be ...willing to consider new ideas[?] I ain't holding my breath on that one.

We can only hope that president-elect Barack Obama, technology and Internet savvy, will read a few blogs and discussion boards, such as this, that are critical of his cabinet choices to date; give them six months to a year, and if we, the people of the United State of America, are still unhappy with his cabinet, and the drift of the ship of state, he'll have the guts to fire them and change course.

Obama was not elected to be chief saint.
And if he tried to please each one of us he'd go mad before an hour was up.

If he just appoints a bunch of neophytes to the cabinet we'll be in a big mess in no time
flat. Why do Obama supporters believe they/we know better than he does?
If Clinton is the Secretary of State it will be up to Obama to ensure that she speaks for
him.

Have a nice Thanksgiving dinner. Enjoy your family and friends.
Give it a rest for a few days.

Colleen Clark
Cambridge, MA

While Obama got 52% of the popular vote and enjoys a 68% positive rating, and Democrats control the House and may get a fillibuster-proof Senate, a VERY significant portion of the country is not convinced that conservatism is dead, or should be.

Obama will not make the mistake Clinton did of blowing his post-inauguration mandate on something like Gays in the Military. There are things that need to be addressed before DOMA is overturned. Like an economy in tatters and an administration that has been politisized beyond belief.

Of course he picks members of Bill Clinton's administration; they know how government works (unlike Palin,) so they will know how to meke it work better. Obama still sets the agenda and the tone, and the tone is calm and capable.

And calm and capable is what the economy needs, because the credit crunch and volatile stock market are the result of uncertainty. To convince Congress and the public of the need for a massive stimulus, with a dramatic shift toward a sustainable energy policy, Obama has to stay close to the center on other issues. If he manages to stop the ship of the economy from capsizing, he will have the credibility to change the course of the nation. Rome wasn't built in a day, and building America for the 21st Century will not be instantaneous.

The rightwing fearmongers are trying to discredit the Democrat victory with claims of vote fraud, media bias and ObamaMania. If America is still standing 2 years from now, and people feel we're on the right track, look for a fillibuster-proof Senate without kowtowing to Lie-berman.

I'd like that.