The makeup of Obama's leadership team, so far isn't as progressive as some would like

[bigtree]

. . . including my own partisan sensibilities.

But, the folks he's chosen, so far, will likely not be seen by the republicans as shrinking violets.

from the NYT: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/18/us/politics/18memo.html?pagewanted=print

After running a campaign with an almost military-like cool and discipline, President-elect Barack Obama is now assembling a staff whose members are known for their combativeness.

His chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, is an aggressive, take-no-prisoners politician known for his willingness to butt heads with adversaries. Mr. Obama’s top liaison to Congress, Phil Schiliro, is a skilled political infighter. His press secretary, Robert Gibbs, is no shrinking violet, as one of the few who can boast of shouting down Sean Hannity of Fox News on Mr. Hannity’s own show.

And then there’s the consideration that Mr. Obama is giving to Lawrence H. Summers, the outspoken former Harvard president, as Treasury secretary, and to Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton as secretary of state, a move so bold that it has sent the Washington press corps into overdrive.

Some kind of shift was inevitable in the transition from politics to governing, but by surrounding himself with forceful personalities, Mr. Obama may also be preparing himself and his administration for real battles, both at home and abroad.

It's true that republicans believe that anyone to the left of Lieberman is 'extreme.' And the center that Mr. Obama seems to be tacking to has been the denizen of the right throughout the republican's recent monopoly in government.

But, I can see enough confrontation with the obstructive forces on the right shaping up in his leadership choices to at least inch forward with the change he promised and hold the ground for future progress. That potential of aggressiveness from the new administration may well be the only encouragement that progressive minded observers have to hang onto, but it's been clear for some time that Mr. Obama wanted to assume a more pragmatic air than a purely confrontational one.

The hope is that, out of our insistence, progressive change will occur behind the wisdom and commitment of the ultimate head of the new administration - complimented by those folks he chooses to carry all of that through the legislative process. Mr. Obama has proven himself wiser than me, at least, in getting our party this far. I can only hope that wisdom continues to produce the change we all want and expect.

[Miss Chybil]

1. K & R nt

[MadHound]

2. So far, it's about what I expected

I am disappointed in the Hillary pick, however I could live with that if Obama gave some sort of nod to the left, say Kucinich for Secretary of Health and Human Services. After all, the man has been right on the issues all along, he knows this field, and it would give some recognition to the left, something which has been sorely lacking.

[bigtree]

4. I'm still waiting for that kind of appointment

. . . which I think would actually represent the clear change promised more than the pragmatic choices so far.

But, it's clear that this is the direction the majority of the party voted for in elevating Mr. Obama over the rest of the Democratic choices and into the presidency.

[cali]

26. kucinich isn't the best qualified candidate for HHS.

And Obama will not appoint him to anything.

[Swamp Rat]

3. Obama's 'Castling his King'

No matter what, he's certainly better than the alternative: a pretzeldent who plays 52 Card Pick-up, and Caribou Barbie playing McCraps.

[bigtree]

9. ha!

He's only got one shot at it, then

[1]

5. who here saw obama as a progressive???

obama is not a progressive.

change will occur. within the construct of the machine that president elect obama must maneuver. he is building a team to ensure that.

this is not going to be a "right fucking now!" situation.

change takes what time it takes.

relax...

[bigtree]

10. relax?

Politicians have the luxury of time for relaxing. I'm not a politician.

[1]

14. no you are not. but they are. and unfortunately they get to decide when shit happens...

that is our system of government. a representational republic.

so live it, or live with with it.

your only two choices...

[bigtree]

19. they decide, sure

. . . but it is our activism which sometimes compels them to act on our behalf and in out interest.

The notion that I should have to just 'live with it' completely disregards the importance of exercising that influence to the fullest.

[stevenleser]

6. Not to mention there is this thing called "A horrific economic crisis disaster catastrophe..."

That is going to overshadow everything else. Ideology is going to have to take a back seat for everyone no matter where on the political aisle you sit. This thing with the economy is nowhere near as bad as it is going to get.

[bigtree]

12. thing is,

the right-wing republicans in the way of progressive change haven't shown any evidence at all that they'll 'put ideology in the back seat,' not even on the economy.

Their last effort wasn't a progressive, bottom-up economic solution. Congress, collectively, gave a slush fund to the Bush administration to feather their benefactors' golden parachutes. In view of that top-down transfer of wealth, it will take a progressive stance to ensure that those folks who make up the lower 90% on the economic ladder receive a direct benefit from future 'rescues.'

[scarletwoman]

7. I never understood why people thought Obama was a "progressive".

There was never anything I heard him say, or saw him do that didn't reaffirm that he intended to operate strictly within establishment parameters. Do a better job of things, sure, but he was never going to challenge the basic assumptions of the status quo.

sw

[1]

16. i know. it is what he has to work with, it is how things get done...

there is a system in place.

obama didn't invent this system. he sure as hell can't change it much. i am sure he knows how to work it for the betterment of us all. i'm sure he will.

obama will effect the changes he can within the system that gets to effect changes.



why are so many confused by this?



obama is going to be the president. he doesn't get to rewrite the rules to his personal thoughts and desires.

it doesn't, nor has it ever worked that way...

[unkachuck]

8. yeah....

....where's a Bernie Sanders? where's a Dennis Kucinich? where's a Howard Dean? are Union leaders or the head of the AFL-CIO on the panel of economic advisors?

....has someone been riding on a progressive bandwagon while playing a conservative tune? enough of the Clinton re-treads....

[stevenleser]

11. You folks make me laugh. One or two appoinments you don't like and you are shouting DINO at the top

... of your lungs. You're jumping the gun on jumping the gun.

[bigtree]

13. what's really funny

. . . are the voices shouting down dissent as if the mere questioning of the new administration was some sort of anathema to democracy instead of the integral element that our participation and activism has been in producing even this measure of change in this election.

[1]

15. no not at all. but you have to rethink this idea of yours that this is a democracy...

it it not.

it has never been...

[bigtree]

20. it is a democracy, in the sense that our participation is crucial

I would agree that our government hasn't always functioned like one, but the essence of a democracy is contained in the striving and effort we make to compel our government to work as one. It's still an ideal, to be sure, but that organic nature of our government in America holds the promise that it will improve with our vigilance and participation. I refuse to be cynical about our role as citizens.

[AndrewP]

21. Well said.

I believe in activism at all times. We have no off season.

[stevenleser]

27. It IS anathema to Democracy, and it is you who is doing the shouting down

But, of course, you dont see that.

[Pastiche423]

17. I get it now!

Change = republican lite cabinet w/a Dem pres.

:eyes:

[1]

18. and what exactly is your vision? if i might ask... n/t.

[madokie]

22. I see no problem with any of it

I voted for and I trust Mr. Obama with my future and my grandchildren's. As far as I can see he is doing exactly what I would like to see him do.

Anyways I just wanted to say that :-)
peace :fistbump:

[bigtree]

23. he's doing a fine job

He's not going to be all things to all of us . . . I understand that.

I trust him to make prudent decisions, many times getting it just right. But, I don't really believe that I'll always feel he's 'doing exactly what I would like to see him do.' That would really be something.

[madokie]

24. Well take that with a grain of salt

my point is/was that I am comfortable with what he's doing. Yes, no one can be everything to everyone.

[bigtree]

25. understood

Me, I'm looking out for my slice of pie. I like pie.

[madokie]

29. Yes I like pie

as long as its not pie in the sky thinking :hi:

[stevenleser]

28. Actually, he isn't, yet...

as the job isn't yet his, and he isn't yet able to take any action on policies yet.

I think that continually needs to be pointed out to many here.