So you're thrilled that change is coming to Washington and want to be part of it. You're willing to give up your present job -- even take a cut in pay -- just to get a top level job with the Obama Administration.

You may want to think twice. The New York Times reports that Obama's 7 page questionnaire is the most extensive and intrusive ever. You can view the 63 question form here (pdf). How many did you get through before you said, "Okaaay, that's it for me?" and put it out of your mind? [More...]

David Brooks looks at a divided Republican Party and sees two factions: the Traditionalists and the Reformers. The Traditionalists include Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity, Grover Norquist (Americans for Tax Reform), Tony Perkins (Family Research Council), and Leonard Leo (Federalist Society). The Reformers are people like Peggy Noonan and David Frum and (at the moderate end, he says) David Brooks. The Traditionalists “insult the sensibilities of the educated class and the entire East and West Coasts.” The Reformers take global warming seriously and don’t hate Hispanics.

Perhaps that classification is useful for Brooks’ purpose (which is apparently to announce Brooks’ alignment with an elite class of Republican Reformers), but the current Republican rift isn’t simply between the conservative intelligentsia and the Palin-powered base in real America. To hold power, or at least remain competitive, Republicans since the Age of Reagan relied on a sometimes overlapping, sometimes conflicting alliance of (1) Wall Street/K Street interests; (2) neocons and Federalist Society zealots; (3) the religious right; and (4) traditional conservatives. Groups with money funded attacks on the Democratic opposition while the religious right, if properly motivated, could be counted on to get out the vote and win close elections.

[more ...]

The latest -- "[Obama] is [not] beyond criticism." Good to know.

Now a consideration of Obama's selection of John Brennan to head his transition team on intelligence matters is in order. As I wrote, this is a matter of concern. As Glenn Greenwald wrote via Balloon Juice:

It simply is noteworthy of comment and cause for concern -- though far from conclusive about what Obama will do -- that Obama's transition chief for intelligence policy, John Brennan, was an ardent supporter of torture and one of the most emphatic advocates of FISA expansions and telecom immunity. It would be foolish in the extreme to ignore that and to just adopt the attitude that we should all wait quietly with our hands politely folded for the new President to unveil his decisions before deciding that we should speak up or do anything.

Time to comment and show some concern about this I think.

By Big Tent Democrat, speaking for me only

The Republican Party's latest gripe involves legislation drafted by, of all people, John McCain.

Republican National Committee Chairman Robert M. "Mike" Duncan said Wednesday that he wants the courts to eliminate restrictions on coordinated spending by national parties and federal candidates and to permit the national organizations to raise money for state parties.

Duncan said he planned to file suits Thursday in federal courts in Washington D.C. and in Louisiana. His goal, he said was to "strengthen the Republican Party and bring a more level playing field to campaign finance."

Duncan complains that the RNC's inability to coordinate with its candidates causes "results where candidates are often upset with the message that is going out." When the Party has to guess at the candidate's message (or when, as in McCain's case, the candidate doesn't speak for the campaign), it's easy to see how a conflict could arise. The remedy: nominate candidates who have a clear message.

I posted it in the Open Thread but I think it is worthy of its own post - Greenwald on John Brennan:

It simply is noteworthy of comment and cause for concern -- though far from conclusive about what Obama will do -- that Obama's transition chief for intelligence policy, John Brennan, was an ardent supporter of torture and one of the most emphatic advocates of FISA expansions and telecom immunity. It would be foolish in the extreme to ignore that and to just adopt the attitude that we should all wait quietly with our hands politely folded for the new President to unveil his decisions before deciding that we should speak up or do anything.

Speaking for me only

Don't they know they are supposed to leave Barack alone? Labor did not get the memo:

At a private meeting tomorrow in Washington, D.C., the most powerful and prominent leaders of the labor movement are planning to finalize the details of a major public campaign to push for what labor is hoping to get from the incoming Obama administration and the new Congress.

How dare they plan to pressure the President-elect? It is just plain wrong to ask for action on issues you care about from the people you helped elect. Ridicule is in order.

By Big Tent Democrat, speaking for me only

Believe it or not, beyond the blog pi**ing contests, John Brennan's potential role in an Obama Administration matters a lot. Digby explains why:

On torture, there can be no more blurring of definitions. . . . The CIA needs to know up front that Obama will not have their back if they engage in torture --- and that the torture legal framework under Bush is no longer operative in any way. There really is no other choice on this and I expect that he will do it. He knows very well that his foreign policy will be in complete shambles the minute it is leaked --- and it will be --- that the Obama administration has sanctioned torture, either through commission or omission. His great opportunity across the world to prove that America has changed will be lost.

If this is concern trolling, then we should all be concern trolls.

By Big Tent Democrat, speaking for me only

Boy, was I ever wrong about Baucus on health care. Steve M., you were right. Baucus proposes:

Baucus of Montana, chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, said in a health-care blueprint released today that only a mandate could ensure people didn't wait until they were ill to buy health insurance, forcing up the price for everyone. The 89-page proposal revives a debate from the Democratic presidential primaries about how to overhaul the U.S. health- care system. Obama supported requiring coverage only for children, saying adults would buy coverage voluntarily if it were affordable. Senator Hillary Clinton of New York said insurance must be mandated for everyone.

[More...]

I never cared for Obama's (and Edwards') phony attacks on lobbyists. But the Cult was quite enthused about it. I wonder what they think about this:

President-elect Barack Obama, who vowed during his campaign that lobbyists "won't find a job in my White House," said through a spokesman yesterday that he would allow lobbyists on his transition team as long as they work on issues unrelated to their earlier jobs. Obama's transition chief laid out ethics rules - which also bar transition staff from lobbying the administration for one year if they become lobbyists later - and portrayed them as the strictest ever for a transfer of presidential power.

[More...]

Remember all those missing emails that the Bush administration claims an inability to find -- even though their preservation is required by the Presidential Records Act? Bush and his cronies were hoping to slink quietly out of the White House, leaving the emails in a state of permanent deletion. A ruling today in a lawsuit filed by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics and the National Security Archives might make that more difficult for the departing regime.

U.S. District Judge Henry Kennedy today denied the administration's request to dismiss the lawsuit.

Meredith Fuchs, the National Security Archive's general counsel, said that because of the ruling, a court order directing the White House to preserve 65,000 computer backup tapes remains in place.

[more ...]

Here's an interesting Republican take on what the GOP should do now:

Now, what about those whom Obama and his supporters vanquished? What the Republican party badly needs is a Night of the Long Knives [Link supplied].

All righty then. I wonder if Deroy Murdock would welcome Joe Lieberman to the Republican Party?

By Big Tent Democrat, speaking for me only

It is hardly worth mentioning President Bush any longer (when you awaken from a nightmare, do you really want to frighten yourself again by recalling its details?), but it is worth noting that our ambitious outgoing president just set another record. In the view of CNN, Bush is officially "the most unpopular president since approval ratings were first sought more than six decades ago."

Seventy-six percent of those questioned in a CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey released Monday disapprove of how President Bush is handling his job. That's an all-time high in CNN polling and in Gallup polling dating back to World War II.

"No other president's disapproval rating has gone higher than 70 percent. Bush has managed to do that three times so far this year," says CNN polling director Keating Holland. "That means that Bush is now more unpopular than Richard Nixon was when he resigned from office during Watergate with a 66 percent disapproval rating."

Good work, Mr. President. Would someone remember to give him a nice commemorative plaque on his way out the door?