Recent political events discussion kept, hopefully, civil

[Flybrick]

I applaud a pragmatic approach and wish the incoming President well along those lines.

I am both surprised by his extensive selection of so many Clinton-era personnel and the lack of dismay expressed here by the Obama supporters.

Having run on hope and change, I expected many, many more outside the Beltway selections as a strategic plan to bring that change to the government. There are lots of smart, capable people out there who aren't one of the Borg, using Daschle as an example of that collective.

Of course, those outsiders don't know the ways of DC, so perhaps that's Obama's thinking as well. Personally, I would like to see more outsiders selected and brought in.

For my second surprise, perhaps I shouldn't have been.

[Miss Informed]

Charismatic outsiders are the best!

['Joe' the 'Plumber']

Charismatic outsiders are the best!

Amen, sister!

(Hey--I need a job if you got one that doesn't need licensing...)

[Joe Sixpack]

Charismatic outsiders are the best!

Amen, sister!

(Hey--I need a job if you got one that doesn't need licensing...)

Would you please go away?

[Yahoo Groups Plumber]

Charismatic outsiders are the best!

Amen, sister!

(Hey--I need a job if you got one that doesn't need licensing...)

Would you please go away?

He is giving all of us plumbers a bad name. I'll bet he doesn't even show his buttcrack or take 5 day weekends....

[Flybrick]

Plumbing aside, are the Merry Men, et al, saying that Washington has been working? Put aside which Administration, are you really saying it works even reasonably efficiently and productively?

Wow, I missed that part of our country's history for the past 20-ish years...

[MarleysGh0st]

Plumbing aside, are the Merry Men, et al, saying that Washington has been working? Put aside which Administration, are you really saying it works even reasonably efficiently and productively?

Wow, I missed that part of our country's history for the past 20-ish years...

I haven't heard anyone deny that the country has a bunch of serious problems now. But it's naive to think you can assemble a team without any Washington experience to fix them. Would you like to propose such a team?

Those smart fellows from Wall Street, perhaps?

[minimetoo26]

Plumbing aside, are the Merry Men, et al, saying that Washington has been working? Put aside which Administration, are you really saying it works even reasonably efficiently and productively?

Wow, I missed that part of our country's history for the past 20-ish years...

I haven't heard anyone deny that the country has a bunch of serious problems now. But it's naive to think you can assemble a team without any Washington experience to fix them. Would you like to propose such a team?

Those smart fellows from Wall Street, perhaps?

Heck of a job THAT lot did!

[_TPTB_]

Plumbing aside, are the Merry Men, et al, saying that Washington has been working? Put aside which Administration, are you really saying it works even reasonably efficiently and productively?

Wow, I missed that part of our country's history for the past 20-ish years...

I haven't heard anyone deny that the country has a bunch of serious problems now. But it's naive to think you can assemble a team without any Washington experience to fix them. Would you like to propose such a team?

Those smart fellows from Wall Street, perhaps?

How about TV executives?

[Flybrick]

Marley, I'm not connected with all the smart, capable people in America, nor do I have a staff or Transition Team to do so. I would think Obama's team would.

The rumor about Warren Buffett was a good example. I don't believe he's one of the Wall Street failures to which you refer.

Of course, there's also the catch that those smart, outside DC people would NEVER want to subject themselves to the intense, embarrassingly intimate process and press that accompanies any such nomination and job.

Again, any incoming Administration should get the team he/she wishes, he/she won the election, so they deserve the team to execute their political vision that is desired. In this case, I am very surprised at the team's origins.

[minimetoo26]

I'm just going to just maybe wait until they actually take office and see what happens. Can't hurt to give folks a chance to fail on their own merits and not presuppositions.

[Rexer25]

I'm just going to just maybe wait until they actually take office and see what happens. Can't hurt to give folks a chance to fail on their own merits and not presuppositions.

Then what will all the talk radio shows do? Duh...

[ne1410s]

There are thousands of people leaving when the Obama team arrives. Somehow they must arrange their resumes to reflect their government service without mentioning the eight year lapse in their good judgment, oversight, and their willingness to ignore the Constitution. Surely they can't all use the "I'm a victim of terrorism, too" like Alberto Gonzales has done. Maybe they can say "We were just following orders" that always works doesn't it?

[MarleysGh0st]

The rumor about Warren Buffett was a good example. I don't believe he's one of the Wall Street failures to which you refer.

No, he's got better sense than the many CEOs who got us into this financial meltdown. But Mr. Buffett is 78 years old; he may not want to take on a job like Secretary of the Treasury. I do hope he'll continue to be an adviser to the Obama administration.

Incidentally, Berkshire Hathaway lost 26% if its value last year, so while Buffett may have been on the record warning us about these derivatives and so forth, he wasn't able to entirely shield his company from the market crash, either.

[Flybrick]

ne, are actually stating (and therefore thinking) that everyone who served in government during the Bush Administration is a criminal or showed a lack of good judgment?

Again, we wonder why we get the government we get?

[ne1410s]

fly:

everyone who served in government during the Bush Administration is a criminal or showed a lack of good judgment?

A little of the former a lot of the latter...

[earendel]

fly:

everyone who served in government during the Bush Administration is a criminal or showed a lack of good judgment?

A little of the former a lot of the latter...

Um...excuse me, but I am serving in government under the Bush Administration. I'm not sure that shows a lack of good judgment and I'm certainly not a criminal.

[Flybrick]

ear, me too. Both in, and now, out of (so to speak) uniform.


Guess that oath to carry out the lawful orders is subject to individual tastes...

[MarleysGh0st]

Flybrick, your question had an implied criticism of Clinton administration officials, so tennis dude responded with a criticism of the Bush administration. One that went too far.

But let me try responding to your question with a military one.

Suppose a general leads his army into a disastrous campaign. He is replaced with a new commander. Is it necessary for that new general to replace all of his staff and subordinates, or is it possible for him to implement a new strategy with (most/some) of those old subordinates still in place?

[Flybrick]

Marley, my opening post was not intended to be derogatory to former Clinton Administration personnel except for Hillary. I am not, never will be able to be anything but contemptous (sp?) regarding her.

I could not have been more surprised by her selection for SecState.

Regarding your military analogy question: depends. It has often happened both ways. A famous example of NOT canning everyone involved with a defeat is ADM Chester Nimitz taking over the Pacific Fleet command following the Pearl Harbor attack.

Assuming command in late December aboard a submarine, because anything larger was sunk or at sea, he kept the staff of ADM Kimmel. One of those officers kept was CDR Joseph Rochefort (sp?), who was his intelligence officer and who had been making great progress in breaking the Japanese Naval codes used. The Battle of Midway some six months later and its successful outcome was largely through the results of Rochefort's team learning of the Japanese intentions and giving Nimitz the information to counter and ultimately defeat the Japanese.

An example of the other wholesale cleaning house was after the US loss at Kasserine Pass in North Africa. Patton replaced Major General Freyendahl (sp?) and his entire staff.

I don't expect Obama to keep Bush's staff. I expect any President to have the team he/she wants in place. I expect the Senate to confirm those appointees unless there is a legitimate, non-political reason not to.

I did not expect Obama to rely so heavily on Clinton retreads. I don't attack him for that. I don't fault him for that.

I am surprised by it.

edited to add: I was also surprised by the lack of surprise here on the bored by those that supported Obama. An observation, not an attack.

[MarleysGh0st]

Marley, my opening post was not intended to be derogatory to former Clinton Administration personnel except for Hillary. I am not, never will be able to be anything but contemptous (sp?) regarding her.

...

I don't expect Obama to keep Bush's staff. I expect any President to have the team he/she wants in place. I expect the Senate to confirm those appointees unless there is a legitimate, non-political reason not to.

I did not expect Obama to rely so heavily on Clinton retreads. I don't attack him for that. I don't fault him for that.

I am surprised by it.

I didn't see any specific reference to Hillary in your first post of this thread. I did find the phrase "Clinton retreads" which you repeat here. Plural. A specific reference to the number of appointments going to veterans of the previous Democratic administration.

I assume you're not surprised that, in a civilian administration, there are essentially two separate general staffs, one Republican and one Democratic (with the exception of the occasional bipartisan appointment). As others have pointed out, the Clinton administration is the only one the Democrats have from which to find experienced appointments, unless they find some who were around in the Carter administration.

I interpret your surprise as a criticism, that the selection of experienced veterans of previous administrations immediately voids Obama's campaign promise for change. I asked for the military example to show that it is possible (taking into account particular individuals and circumstances) for a new commander to effect change with the help of experienced subordinates.

edited to add: I was also surprised by the lack of surprise here on the bored by those that supported Obama. An observation, not an attack.

Which has already been addressed.

[Flybrick]

"Retreads" is insulting?

Since when?

I guess I could have written "former Clinton Administration officials asked to take positions within the incoming Obama Administration" but I thought that would be too long. Retreads was my attempt to shorten the term but keep the meaning.

I assume you're not surprised that, in a civilian administration, there are essentially two separate general staffs, one Republican and one Democratic (with the exception of the occasional bipartisan appointment).

I am VERY surprised by this. For the Administration, there is the Executive Branch. Period. I am unaware of any party-controlled/sponsered/or otherwise designated "General Staff" within the civilian administration.

Were you referring to the Congressional staffs? If so, then yes. If not, I would love to learn more.

As I hope to keep my job come Jan 20th, I'd also like to know which team I'm playing for. Otherwise, I have to assume it's for the President - albeit many, many, many times removed - and just keep trying to do my best.

[MarleysGh0st]

"Retreads" is insulting?

Did I use the word "insulting"? I said "criticism," specifically "implied criticism."

I assume you're not surprised that, in a civilian administration**, there are essentially two separate general staffs, one Republican and one Democratic (with the exception of the occasional bipartisan appointment).

I am VERY surprised by this. For the Administration, there is the Executive Branch. Period. I am unaware of any party-controlled/sponsered/or otherwise designated "General Staff" within the civilian administration.

OK, "General Staff" was a metaphor. But are you seriously surprised that Republican presidents appoint (mostly) Republicans to positions in their administrations while Democratic presidents appoint (mostly) Democrats?* Does this not tend to create two separate sets of experienced personnel?


*This does not apply to career civil service or military personnel.

**And I see I added to the confusion with a grammatical error. I was trying to refer to multiple administrations, over the years, some of which draw from the Blue team, some from the Red.

[andrewjackson]

fly:

everyone who served in government during the Bush Administration is a criminal or showed a lack of good judgment?

A little of the former a lot of the latter...

Um...excuse me, but I am serving in government under the Bush Administration. I'm not sure that shows a lack of good judgment and I'm certainly not a criminal.

I'm trying to figure out if I'm included in this or not. I'm not an Executive branch guy but I do often demonstrate a lack of good judgment. Innocent until proven guilty on the other option.

[Flybrick]

Ok, 'retread' was not meant as an implied criticism in either the opening or subsequent posts.

It was meant illustrate the examples of those selected and to ask why the number of former Clinton Administration officials being asked into the incoming Administration.

Of course I expect any Administration to pick its appointment leadership from its political party. I've no problem with that.

I've no problem, as stated repeatedly, that Obama is picking former Clinton Administration officials for his team. I am surprised as those picks don't reflect, in my opinion, 'change.'

I was interested in the Obama supporters opinions on the picks as using former Clinton Administration officials does not seem to bolster the promise of change. Apparently, it's ok with the majority of those supporters who frequent the bored either due to a response on the topic or lack thereof, so I have an answer.