home

Cabinet News

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Other Politics
Posted on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 04:33:44 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Hillary says yes to State. Geithner to be tapped for Treasury. Richardson to get Commerce.

Gators rule! Just sayin'

One last thing, I can't help but laugh at the teeth gnashing in some quarters on the fact that Barack Obama is - it turns out, a mainstream Democrat. In March, I wrote:

For the record . . . And I imagine no one believes me, I really DO believe Obama is the preferable nominee because he is a Media Darling and there is not a dime's worth of difference on the issues between them. I am not a believer in the "experience" factor. I think Obama is a much superior politician. I think his campaign team seems to be better.

My problems are the same as always - I do not like his Unity Schtick and I have serious concerns that progressives will give him a free pass. I also believe Hillary is a good Democrat and I deplore the incredibly unfair treatment she has received from the Media and the blogs.

I think events are bearing out that I was right.

By Big Tent Democrat, speaking for me only

< Time to Repeal Rockefeller Drug Laws | Friday Night Open Thread >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Cabinet News | 131 comments (131 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    It would be funny... (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 04:39:44 PM EST
    ...if the Gators managed to lose to the Citadel tomorrow.  

    Heck, why are they even playing the Citadel for crying out loud.  Couldn't get Florida International?  

    Heh (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 04:47:20 PM EST
    Let me say thanks to the Hawkeyes one more time.

    Parent
    LOL (none / 0) (#43)
    by Pepe on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 06:37:52 PM EST
    The Citadel!!!

    Nothing like scheduling an out of conference game with a POWERHOUSE /snark. Or  more likely it is  padding your record with a pushover.

    The Citadel! Now that is a ballsy move by them big bad Gators. LOL.

    Parent

    What was he thinking? (none / 0) (#93)
    by Amiss on Sat Nov 22, 2008 at 12:05:06 AM EST
    GAINESVILLE, Fla. -- Florida backup quarterback Cameron Newton was charged with stealing another student's laptop computer after being arrested Friday. Newton was suspended from the team, spokesman Steve McClain said, and was being held in the Alachua County jail. He has been charged with felony counts of burglary, larceny and obstructing justice.

    He was Tebow's backup.
    LINK

    And on a much lighter note:

    University of Florida quarterback Tim Tebow, whose remarkable humanitarian efforts have captivated college football fans nationwide, has been chosen for the Disney Spirit Award given annually to college football's most inspirational figure.

    Well deserved, imho.

    and not to be left out:

    University of Florida junior running back/wide receiver Percy Harvin (Virginia Beach, Va.) has been named as the Week 12 AT&T All-America Player of the Week, it was announced on Friday.

    LINK

    Parent

    Oh, and the markets apparently... (5.00 / 3) (#4)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 04:49:21 PM EST
    ...like this Geithner guy:  

    Wall Street, desperate for something to cheer about, sent stocks soaring today on news reports that President-elect Barack Obama has selected Timothy Geithner as Treasury secretary.

    http://tinyurl.com/5nt8ag

    Parent

    Uh-oh.... (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by kdog on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 05:38:07 PM EST
    that can't be good if the money-changers dig him.

    Parent
    The guy worked for (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by Pepe on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 06:29:17 PM EST
    Henry Kissinger, the IMF, and the World Bank - just for starters.

    I read where he has been deeply involved in the bailout too, however one wants to take that.

    Parent

    Very involved (5.00 / 3) (#69)
    by standingup on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 09:03:00 PM EST
    in the bailout.  A couple of good articles for background:

    The Man Who Saved (or Got Suckered by) Wall Street

    and

    In Crucible of Crisis, Paulson, Bernanke, Geithner Forge a Committee of Three

    I know there could be worse choices.  It would be great, but probably too much to ask, to have someone independent of Wall Street and the folks who have had a hand in the fiasco the bailout has been so far.

    Parent

    Not crazy about your use ... (5.00 / 2) (#42)
    by Robot Porter on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 06:34:34 PM EST
    of the term "money changers" but other than that I agree with your point.

    Wall Street happy.  The rest of us should run for cover.

    Parent

    I wonder whether most people (none / 0) (#130)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Sat Nov 22, 2008 at 11:39:39 PM EST
    are aware that the term "money-changers" has anti-semitic connotations.

    Parent
    Not at all clear (5.00 / 3) (#30)
    by gyrfalcon on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 06:02:28 PM EST
    that was a reaction to Geithner.  We've had almost all our big swings, both up and down, practically alternating on a day-by-day basis, in the last hour of trading.  The big drops have been ridiculous, and there are smart buyers out there waiting to snap up solid stocks at bargain prices, which they typically do at the end of the day.

    There is also considerable relief that Obama is finally getting ready to announce action with his economic team picks.  Seems likely reaction to Geithner individually was a pretty small part of the mix of factors that sent the Dow up.


    Parent

    I hear good things about Geithner (5.00 / 4) (#2)
    by andgarden on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 04:41:44 PM EST
    And while I'm glad they found somewhere low profile to stash Richardson, Commerce does run the census, so I really hope he doesn't screw that up.

    Did you notice (5.00 / 2) (#5)
    by NYShooter on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 04:50:41 PM EST
    the pictures of him on tv today? I don't know who his PR person is, but I would suggest the "Christopher Hitchens" look does not inspire confidence.

    Parent
    Richardson, I mean (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by NYShooter on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 04:51:19 PM EST


    Parent
    I don't think that needed to be clarified ;) (5.00 / 4) (#8)
    by nycstray on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 04:55:58 PM EST


    Parent
    Or Hitchens either (5.00 / 1) (#97)
    by ruffian on Sat Nov 22, 2008 at 05:49:07 AM EST


    Parent
    You suggesting he has a booze problem? (none / 0) (#9)
    by andgarden on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 04:59:06 PM EST
    because that's not good for anyone. ..

    Parent
    I'm hoping he means (none / 0) (#12)
    by oldpro on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 05:06:03 PM EST
    that 'rumpled, slept-in-these-clothes-and-need-a-shave' look...SOP for Richardson.

    And what's with that HAIR?  Sigh...

    Parent

    BINGO! (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by NYShooter on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 05:38:27 PM EST


    Parent
    Gotcha (none / 0) (#19)
    by andgarden on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 05:40:46 PM EST


    Parent
    Giuliani is Nosferatu (5.00 / 2) (#122)
    by squeaky on Sat Nov 22, 2008 at 12:07:10 PM EST


    Parent
    OMG! (none / 0) (#94)
    by Amiss on Sat Nov 22, 2008 at 12:13:05 AM EST
    The resemblence to Stefano is uncanny!

    Parent
    He looks like (none / 0) (#121)
    by NYShooter on Sat Nov 22, 2008 at 12:01:04 PM EST
    the guy who speaks to your relatives from "beyond."

    "Now Stephie, what was the nick-name Uncle Mortimer had for you when were a little girl?"

    Parent

    Commerce does a lot more (none / 0) (#36)
    by Pepe on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 06:20:42 PM EST
    than take care of the census. Commerce is instrumental in job development which considering the times I wouldn't call that a "low profile..stash" position, would you?

    And just what did Richardson screw up? I just love reading broad statements like yours with no examples of fact.

    Seems like Richardson bashing is quite in vogue lately. Some even talking about his appearance which is pretty sad when you think of it.

    Parent

    Pepe loves him some Richardson (5.00 / 2) (#38)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 06:24:48 PM EST


    Parent
    There are far more deserving (none / 0) (#50)
    by Pepe on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 06:53:40 PM EST
    people in politics to bash than Richardson. But seeing how you seem to be leading the charge against Richardson one wonders what kind of wild hair you have for him. Maybe none. Maybe he is just your Name Calling Victim du jour for over a week now. Classy.

    Parent
    My question is.... (5.00 / 2) (#67)
    by NYShooter on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 08:57:12 PM EST
    did he, or did he not, betray Hillary Clinton?

    If he did, he's a transparent opportunist, or a Judas. Take your pick.

    If he didn't, I haven't heard a meaningful attempt by him to dismiss the allegation.

    Obviously, The Clintons thought they could count on him.

    Parent

    My question is: did or did (none / 0) (#91)
    by oculus on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 11:36:06 PM EST
    not an MLB team extend an offer to Richardson?

    Parent
    OK Let's go with one of your (none / 0) (#118)
    by Pepe on Sat Nov 22, 2008 at 10:44:30 AM EST
    "Take your picks". Either one is fine for discussion.

    Now my question is how many others 'betrayed' Clinton? How many other of her so called allies both White and Black supported Clinton and then switched to Obama? A bunch is the answer.

    So why name call Richardson and not the others? Because BTD told you to do it? Why call Richardson a fool when anyone knows he is no fool. By definition of the word he is no fool. He may not be a great TV personality or even a dynamic pubic personality - but a fool he is not and it is foolish to say he is.

    Think what you will about Richardson not supporting Clinton, I have my thoughts as a Clinton supporter, but it you are going to bash him and be consistent then you better line all the others up in front of the firing squad too.

    Parent

    I say... (none / 0) (#123)
    by NYShooter on Sat Nov 22, 2008 at 12:08:59 PM EST
    "send'm to the wall in groups of four" lol

    But the fact that he has much company is hardly satisfying.

    My question was, what was his explanation for his change of heart? did he say he likes them both, but Obama more? Or did he use the canard (like so many others) that he was aghast at the "tone" of Clinton's campaign?

    I really don't know. It does make a difference.

    Parent

    It's a stash (5.00 / 4) (#78)
    by BrassTacks on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 10:01:17 PM EST
    Richardson dumped the Clintons like a bad habit to throw himself on the Obama bandwagon.  I guarantee that he didn't do it hoping to be Secretary of Commerce.  He thought he would be Secretary of State as his reward for throwing the Clintons under the bus.  I am so glad to see his disloyalty not rewarded.  He got what he deserved, a very low level cabinet post.  No one in Washington pays any attention to the Sec of Commerce.  Can anyone name the current Commerce secretary?  Or who held that position under Clinton?  Of course not.  

    Parent
    It wasn't so much that he chose to support (5.00 / 2) (#108)
    by andrys on Sat Nov 22, 2008 at 10:12:41 AM EST
    Obama, something the Clintons would have to get over, but it was his telling every single microphone he could find, how badly Hillary took it - with that wan, self-satisfied smile of his.

      That was unforgiveable.  What kind of grown-up acts like that.  It was a private conversation and I guess he just needed to build himself up.  In that, he failed the test for even the most basic diplomacy.

    Parent

    Ron Brown was first (none / 0) (#90)
    by caseyOR on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 11:06:39 PM EST
    Clinton Sec. of Commerce. He died in a plane crash in Bosnia. William Daley, son and brother of Chicago mayors, was the second Clinton Sec. of Commerce.

    Parent
    If you think (none / 0) (#119)
    by Pepe on Sat Nov 22, 2008 at 11:11:52 AM EST
    the Secretary of Commerce is not an important position in this economy then you have no idea what commerce even is. Is it high profile like SoS? No of course not, it never has been. Neither is Secretary of the Interior. But high profile doesn't equate to importance.

    Would Al Gore consider SoI low profile and unimportant? Would you consider SoI unimportant just because it is not high profile? Well neither is SoC if you know anything about business or the economy, or the creation of jobs.

    BTD admitted that he doesn't even know what the SoC even does. I suspect you don't either. I suspect that you don't have any idea how many of the various Secretaries actually have to work with each other because their areas of responsibility actually overlap in many areas.

    Your goal here is to belittle Richardson, a man I would guess who is much more accomplished than most here on this blog. But you know what, when it comes to Obama keeping his promise to create JOBS guess who one of his main Point men is going to be? Secretary of Commerce. Jobs! Not very important huh? Low profile. A stash. <rolls eyes>

    Parent

    Sorry Bill, didn't mean to strike a nerve, (none / 0) (#131)
    by BrassTacks on Sun Nov 23, 2008 at 02:05:33 AM EST
    I've spent most of my younger life living and working in DC.  I know exactly how little attention anyone pays the secretary of Commerce.  It's very rare that anyone outside the Beltway can name him.

    Parent
    Short list of Richardson's portfolio (none / 0) (#58)
    by wurman on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 07:39:44 PM EST
    International trade (duh!)

    Promote progressive domestic business policies and growth (rules & regs)

    Improve comprehension and uses of the physical environment and oceanic life (NOAA)

    Ensure effective use and growth of the Nation's scientific and technical resources (stem cell research, anyone?)

    Assist states, communities, and individuals with economic progress (revenue sharing to keep the downstream governments functioning)

    No pizzaz, but a lot of nuts & bolts.

    Parent

    I agree he looks good on paper (5.00 / 2) (#98)
    by ruffian on Sat Nov 22, 2008 at 05:53:53 AM EST
    But he does not demonstrate those smarts in realtime. BTD's description of him as a dolt the other day is exactly how he comes across.

    And I came to that conclusion during the debates over a year ago, long before he betrayed Clinton.  Decent guy, just not enough intellectual firepower.

    Parent

    Clinton Announcement (5.00 / 6) (#10)
    by squeaky on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 05:02:05 PM EST
    Obviously her accepting the job caused the stock market to soar.  

    IMO, it was Geithner (5.00 / 3) (#20)
    by byteb on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 05:43:18 PM EST
    I watched the Dow tick upward as the news came out.

    Either way, I'm glad for any slight upturn in the Dow.

    Parent

    Don't be silly (5.00 / 3) (#23)
    by WS on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 05:48:41 PM EST
    The Dow's rise was clearly Hillary's doing.  She's so smart :).    

    Parent
    That, of course : ) (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by NYShooter on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 06:04:13 PM EST
    and, as my venture cap. bros. told me, short covering before the weekend.

    But, I'm with you: She can part the seas, walk on water....making the Dow rise was a finger snap.....lol

    Parent

    Just for the record (5.00 / 3) (#107)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Nov 22, 2008 at 10:08:46 AM EST
    Your stock market and my stock market should not be soaring or tanking so easily over new cabinet political moves.  This is an indication that our current stock market is little more than a casino and has no basis in reality and hasn't for quite some time on the tangible health of our companies and our economy.  I am not impressed with a stock market that responds to the 'National Equirer'.

    Parent
    Kidding (none / 0) (#112)
    by squeaky on Sat Nov 22, 2008 at 10:25:01 AM EST
    It always makes me laugh when I read about why the stock market pundits claim the stock market has plunged or soared.  Of course the idiots claim it was because of the appointment of Tim Geithner as secretary of treasury. I thought I would chime in for fun.

    And yes a large portion of the stock market is just like a casino.

    Parent

    Sorry I sounded like I was baggin on ya (none / 0) (#115)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Nov 22, 2008 at 10:30:13 AM EST
    and I do want our market to soar.  It makes me sad though when I read comments on other blogs about the market responding to such things and they are cast in a glowing positive light.

    Parent
    Nah (none / 0) (#117)
    by squeaky on Sat Nov 22, 2008 at 10:39:45 AM EST
    You sounded exactly as I feel most of the time when I read or hear about why the market has moved. Everyone eats it up as if it were gospel.

    Parent
    Nope (none / 0) (#79)
    by BrassTacks on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 10:02:42 PM EST
    The market continued to tank until Sec of Treasury as announced.  Everyone already knew about Hillary, it was Treasury that reassured Wal Street  

    Parent
    They just can't help themselves (5.00 / 13) (#11)
    by sj on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 05:04:17 PM EST
    From the NY Times

    She was particularly upset, they said, at the reception she felt she received when she returned from the campaign trail and sought a more significant leadership role in the expanding Democratic majority.

    "They" have to do their best to make her look petulant when she has never been anything but gracious.  

    Emphasis on (5.00 / 9) (#22)
    by NYShooter on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 05:45:13 PM EST
    "have to."

    My father, America's Ghandi, always used to say, "forgive them."

    I swear CDS is incurable. Even when these afflicted people die, their lips will continue to move in perpetuity, mumbling, "what does she `really' want?"


    Parent

    CDS: Incurable Dis-ease (5.00 / 2) (#75)
    by Brookhaven on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 09:56:55 PM EST
    I swear CDS is incurable. Even when these afflicted people die, their lips will continue to move in perpetuity, mumbling, "what does she `really' want?"

    LMAO

    Best and funniest comment about those afflicted with CDS I've read since this recent horrific breakout.  

    Parent

    You know, as a (5.00 / 7) (#96)
    by NYShooter on Sat Nov 22, 2008 at 05:15:21 AM EST
    natural born contrarian, I've tried to break away from BTD, and his "CDS" meme. "Exxageration," I said; "overused," "enuff already," I cried.

    But, son-of-a-gun, these muthas not only won't stop, they can't stop.

    When Madame Secretary, Clinton announces an iron clad, binding peace treaty between the Palestinians and the Israellis:

    a. John King, CNN, "...word is she only did it to get on the evening news ahead of Obama."
    b. C. Matthews, MSNBC..."...first, the kitchen sink, now a peace treaty; she really will do anything to keep her name in the limelight."
    c. Andrea Mitchel, NBC..."My sources tell me it wasn't her idea; remember the picture of Obama in Arab garb the Clinton's planted?"

    Oh, how I wish I was kidding.

    Parent

    so funny (5.00 / 1) (#99)
    by ruffian on Sat Nov 22, 2008 at 06:01:29 AM EST
    Love c.

    Just hope Hillary does not help them by saying 'Sure the president wanted this, but it took a Secretary of State to get it done. '

    I differ with you only in that I agree with BTD all the way on this. It is evident in almost every story about her.  Note they always go right to an emotional assessment, as in the story quoted - 'she was upset'.  Not that she intellectually 'realized she was not in a power position in the Senate' - something obvious to many of us even here at the end of the primaries.

    Parent

    emotion vs, hard-headed thinking (5.00 / 2) (#101)
    by noholib on Sat Nov 22, 2008 at 06:46:47 AM EST
    Hillary Clinton is obviously brilliant -- and so much smarter than most of us. Maybe that is frightening and disorienting to many  - so they treat her with all the old "emotional woman" and Lady Macbeth stereotypes.  And pantsuits to boot -what to do with those?!

    The press is so much more comfortable with a younger woman like Sarah Palin, who is conventionally attractive and who knows it and uses her looks to appeal - by winking and all her other tricks.  And she wears dresses, skirts, and high heels - so all is cool.  Moreover, trying to parse her grammatically-challenged sentences (as in the Couric interview) fits very well into the stereotype of the pretty, empty-headed woman. When some initially praised her as "tough," it was because of her pit-bull imagery and her defiant facial gestures.  It was not because of the "toughness" of her mind.

    When Hillary Clinton shows toughmindedness based on intellect, analysis, and clear forceful expression, some find it too much to take.

    It will be a pleasure to hear the brilliance, clarity and grace of Hillary Clinton speaking on the world stage for our country.

    Parent

    Me too (none / 0) (#124)
    by NYShooter on Sat Nov 22, 2008 at 12:17:03 PM EST
    "I differ with you only in that I agree with BTD.."

    maybe you missed it; I tried to fight it, failed, now a convert :)

    Parent

    Much has been said (5.00 / 6) (#16)
    by hairspray on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 05:28:03 PM EST
    by the Clinton haters how Obama can control Hillary by nominating her as SOS. On a larger note, I wonder at whether or not she can finish the job Bill tried so desperately to seal, the middle-east peace process. That would certainly bode well for the middle east and the peace our country needs so desperately. As to whether or not she will do a stellar job, I am reminded of Madeline Albright speaking repeatedly about knowing from personal experience about HRC's abilities saying  that Hillary would be exceptional as the president. Now I am sure she would say the same about SOS.

    Does anyone know who Obama (none / 0) (#61)
    by BackFromOhio on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 08:03:38 PM EST
    is looking at for NSA and DoD (other than Gates)?

    Parent
    Jim Jones for NSA was what I read (none / 0) (#109)
    by andrys on Sat Nov 22, 2008 at 10:17:16 AM EST


    Parent
    I guess Wes Clark is still under (none / 0) (#126)
    by hairspray on Sat Nov 22, 2008 at 12:59:36 PM EST
    the bus.

    Parent
    Hillary and I (5.00 / 2) (#24)
    by lilburro on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 05:50:05 PM EST
    had a conversation about SoS in my dreams this morning.  No, I am not kidding.  :(  Kinda sad isn't it?

    That aside, it will be interesting to see what she and Obama cook up for foreign policy.  Remember her nuclear umbrella idea?  That was a late goodie.  Hopefully the two of them together will bring a lot of imagination to our FP.  I look forward to the interviews with Hillary about this position once she accepts.

    Exciting!  And no Summers.

    Summers is there... (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by NYShooter on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 05:58:14 PM EST
    ...as the "future" Treasury Secretary.

    As to Hillary, Obama should take Warren Buffet's 'secret' to success; "find a good manager.....then leave him/her alone."  

    Parent

    I heard that Summers would be ... (5.00 / 1) (#48)
    by santarita on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 06:45:32 PM EST
    tapped to replace Bernanke's term is up in two years.  

    Parent
    Could be.... (none / 0) (#68)
    by NYShooter on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 09:01:08 PM EST
    ...the comments I heard were that he's in a "holding pattern" for something big down the road.

    Chairman....Fed.....pretty big, I'd say.

    Parent

    My mother (5.00 / 4) (#32)
    by gyrfalcon on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 06:06:38 PM EST
    dreamed about Dick Cheney chasing her around the woods with a hatchet.  Your dream sounds nicer.  What did she say about Iran, just curiously? ;-)


    Parent
    Wow (5.00 / 2) (#41)
    by lilburro on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 06:33:39 PM EST
    I am so glad I've never dreamt about him.  What did your mom ever do to Cheney???

    No discussions on Iran.  Will have to prepare a list of questions for review before I go to sleep next time.  ;)

    Parent

    I dreamed that Bill Clinton (2.00 / 1) (#85)
    by BrassTacks on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 10:16:43 PM EST
    and I went out to nightclub where he ignored me to talk to every other woman in the place.  

    I know how Hillary has felt throughout their marriage.  

    Parent

    Thank you, Maureen Dowd. (5.00 / 9) (#89)
    by Radiowalla on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 10:29:07 PM EST


    Parent
    Oh my! (none / 0) (#127)
    by NYShooter on Sat Nov 22, 2008 at 01:01:41 PM EST
    We're very sorry to have to inform you that the CDS Emergency Response Unit (ERU) is currently over burdened, Try to get stabilized and someone will be there to assist you asap.

    Parent
    What did (none / 0) (#65)
    by WS on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 08:47:24 PM EST
    Dream Hillary say to you?  

    Was she as smart as real Hillary?  Does she inhabit two worlds ... OMG

    Parent

    Dream Hillary told me (none / 0) (#74)
    by lilburro on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 09:37:06 PM EST
    everything you read about her is true...and she intends to run in 2012...!!  

    Parent
    Against her boss? Don't think so (none / 0) (#81)
    by BrassTacks on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 10:09:48 PM EST
    But no doubt she's n track for 2016.

    Parent
    sweet dreams (none / 0) (#102)
    by noholib on Sat Nov 22, 2008 at 06:48:17 AM EST
    You must really care.  More sweet dreams to you!

    Parent
    Always agreed with that point of view (5.00 / 3) (#26)
    by joanneleon on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 05:58:08 PM EST
    in fact I found Obama to be to the right of Clinton, if anything.

    I am surprised though, that so many former Clinton people are on his transition team and will be involved with his administration, after he went out of his way to avoid crediting the Clinton administration for any positive effects on the country.  It just seems a bit odd now.

    Wonder what people (5.00 / 2) (#53)
    by Fabian on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 07:07:15 PM EST
    Obama was avoiding riling with the no mention of the "C" word.  Was it The Public?  Or maybe someone(s) closer to him.

    CDS is, after all, an intractable condition.  There are some bright, educated people who should be able to separate spoon fed narratives from reality but don't.

    Parent

    Many, many former Clinton (5.00 / 1) (#80)
    by oculus on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 10:08:18 PM EST
    adminstration people were consultants to or endorsers of Obama before June.  

    Parent
    No Kidding (4.25 / 4) (#47)
    by Pepe on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 06:44:52 PM EST
    That is why I always contended that Obama was both a Master of Political Destruction and a Hypocrite to boot. Issues my a**.

    Behold a Chicago politician as many have said.

    Parent

    And the Obamas choose Sidwell Friends (5.00 / 2) (#28)
    by lilburro on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 05:58:21 PM EST
    The Fightin' Quakers!

    Does anyone remember the outcry (5.00 / 6) (#76)
    by Radiowalla on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 09:56:57 PM EST
    when the Clintons enrolled Chelsea in Sidwell Friends?

    It will be interesting to observe the reaction of the Village Scribes to the Obama family's decision.  Will they require smelling salts as before?

    Parent

    That's what I was wondering, (5.00 / 2) (#82)
    by oculus on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 10:09:56 PM EST
    as the Obamas chose between two top flight private schools.  Don't expect any back lash this time.  Partially because of the children's ethnic background.

    Parent
    Yup. (5.00 / 2) (#88)
    by Radiowalla on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 10:27:17 PM EST


    Parent
    Good choice. (none / 0) (#33)
    by oldpro on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 06:07:19 PM EST


    Parent
    teh cute: (5.00 / 4) (#35)
    by lilburro on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 06:14:25 PM EST
    They will also be joining the grandchildren of Vice President Elect Joe Biden. In fact, Malia had told her parents she wanted to attend Sidwell because of her friendship with one of the grandchildren, according to sources familiar with the decision.

    Aw.

    Parent

    I think ... (5.00 / 4) (#34)
    by The Poster Formerly Known as cookiebear on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 06:10:00 PM EST
    Obama is doing exactly what needs to be done right now. Things are falling apart in so many sectors, many people are very freaked out, and he's simply handling it and taking care of business and not making Bold Leaps and - erm - Audacious Decisions.

    He's taking care of business, something that hasn't been done for how many years now?

    I'm glad Hillary's accepted. Although admittedly not just because I think she'll be great, but because it is rather delicious watching people's heads explode. :D

    The article on Hilly (5.00 / 8) (#37)
    by blogtopus on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 06:24:31 PM EST
    Still insists on propagating that they are still fighting each other, that Hillary is still bitter about not being President, yadda yadda.

    These jokers will NEVER. GROW. UP. I'm glad we have the internet to bite at their ankles and/or jugulars from time to time.

    For real irony (5.00 / 2) (#52)
    by Fabian on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 07:02:06 PM EST
    Both Hillary and Barack were Junior Senators not so long ago and Clinton was senior to Obama.

    This whole thing has only been going on for about a year, less actually since Hillary threw her support to Obama at the DNC.  If you look closely, there really hasn't been any evidence of any "rivalry" or hard feelings.  Mostly there's been a concerted effort to avoid feeding the bloodthirsty media.

    I wonder if there's some identifiable point in time when a recursive media cycle comes into being like "Obama and Hillary can't get along.".  It exists because the media insists it is so, yet they never produce actual evidence to support it.  Absent any facts, such a thing should be dismissed as mere rumor, yet it is not.  We aren't talking some Brooksian fictional composite of middle class Americans.  We are talking about two very real, very public people.

    And yet, I see the latest Bradgelina news on the tabloid headlines and think that even though those stories may be largely speculation, they do have some verifiable substance.

    I suppose if I got into the media's (Brooksian composite fictional) face about pushing rumors and speculation as they were factual and relevant, I'd be told that was what "the public" wants.

    Parent

    huh? (none / 0) (#70)
    by NYShooter on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 09:05:18 PM EST
    "...they do have some verifiable substance."

    Like?


    Parent

    Another safe appoitment (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by koshembos on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 06:32:29 PM EST
    Geithner is a safe appointment and not a daring one. Since he is not well known in public it is possible that he is a great choice, but he never dealt with large issues before.

    Richardson to commerce is a cheap pay back for treason against the Clintons. He cannot do much damage or good in Commerce.

    There alway was a huge difference between Obama's and Hillary's policies: labor, health care, blue collar workers, etc. BTD opinion was and is wrong on this account.

    Geithner is NY Fed Pres and has a good... (5.00 / 2) (#46)
    by santarita on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 06:43:31 PM EST
    resume.  He worked closely with Paulson and Bernanke on the bailout.  Wall Street loves him (except for Jim Cramer).  Obama has made a good choice even if it was not a particularly bold move.  Obama seems to be surrounding himself with some of the best and brightest.

    Parent
    Geithner also (none / 0) (#62)
    by BackFromOhio on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 08:08:42 PM EST
    worked under Larry Summners, and Summers will probably be involved as a White House advisor.

    Parent
    "except for Jim Cramer" (none / 0) (#71)
    by NYShooter on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 09:07:20 PM EST
    THAT'S the reason for the 500 point jump.

    Parent
    I like do like the visual (5.00 / 1) (#56)
    by Democratic Cat on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 07:21:47 PM EST
    of Obama at a cabinet meeting with Biden on one side, Hillary on the other, and Richardson somewhere down at the end of the table next to the Secretary of Agriculture.

    Parent
    Don't be dissing the Sec of Ag (5.00 / 3) (#57)
    by The Poster Formerly Known as cookiebear on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 07:36:17 PM EST
    Some of us actually listen to that stuff more than ... than ... than the stuff all the other ones are blathering about.

    Parent
    Geithner's never dealt with large issues? (none / 0) (#44)
    by gyrfalcon on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 06:38:40 PM EST
    Er...


    Parent
    Disagree with you (none / 0) (#45)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 06:39:37 PM EST
    except on health care.

    Parent
    Besides tattling on the private call with Hillary, (none / 0) (#111)
    by andrys on Sat Nov 22, 2008 at 10:23:09 AM EST
    I would think Richardson lost even more points with Obama when he announced he didn't know why he was supporting Obama, that there was just something about him, look at the crowds!

      That was just so transparent.

    Parent

    "Kos seeks therapy" may be the headline (5.00 / 3) (#49)
    by ThatOneVoter on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 06:49:17 PM EST
    tomorrow.

    I wish he would. (5.00 / 1) (#77)
    by Radiowalla on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 09:58:23 PM EST


    Parent
    Doubt it (none / 0) (#54)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 07:11:01 PM EST
    Kos is ok with it I am pretty sure.

    Parent
    Not getting a good feeling on ... (5.00 / 3) (#51)
    by Robot Porter on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 06:58:14 PM EST
    any bold progressive agenda in the offing.

    Meanwhile I think the big story in six months will be how the bailout money was a big joke, going to people who didn't need it, going to a lot of cronies, etc..

    This Is The Most Opportune Time for ... (5.00 / 3) (#55)
    by santarita on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 07:17:34 PM EST
    bold progressive changes.  The country is reeling economically.  It is clear that the pet theories of the Republicans have brought the country pretty much to its knees.  Perhaps the Shock Doctrine articulated by Naomi Klein can be modified to allow for good changes to happen during times of turmoil.  

    I'm hoping that Obama comes out of the gate with Universal Health Coverage.  The Insurance Industry has already said that it would back that reform.  

    Parent

    in six months? (5.00 / 3) (#72)
    by NYShooter on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 09:16:22 PM EST
    I think it's pretty much accepted fact that it was a mega flim-flam on Paulsen's part. Paulsen stealing from us, to give to his past, and future, friends is no big surprise.

    That people like Dodd and Frank tripped over themselves squealing, "me too," was downright sickening.

    When Dodd was later asked why the banks tightened their credit standards even further, were planning to use the money to pay out in dividends, consolidate and grow their powere even more by buying other banks, and just plain hoarding it, he replyed, (now get your barf bag ready) "if that's true, we're going to hold hearings."

    ooooooh

    Parent

    What a difference a few weeks makes (5.00 / 3) (#100)
    by Dr Molly on Sat Nov 22, 2008 at 06:09:37 AM EST
    A few weeks ago, your comment (which I totally agree with) would have been excoriated here by other commenters screaming at you that the bailout HAS TO HAPPEN, ELSE WE WILL ALL GO DOWN IN FLAMES, AND YOU'RE JUST TOO STUPID TO UNDERSTAND HOW THE ECONOMY WORKS.

    Parent
    So true ... (none / 0) (#103)
    by Robot Porter on Sat Nov 22, 2008 at 07:43:53 AM EST
    there were a few voices of reason here on this issue.

    ::: raises hand:::

    But very few.  Most were offering the nonsense you suggest.

    Parent

    It is hard to be reasonable (5.00 / 1) (#110)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Nov 22, 2008 at 10:19:40 AM EST
    when everything is falling like a house of cards.  I was raised by a man who taught me that markets are cyclic and to be prepared to make my moves on the next upward or downward cycles.  He did a good job but I live my financial life far different from every single woman I know.  I saw this coming, I was preparing for it because we are going to be making some financial investment moves next year.  Who else was raised though to become so financially detached and always in witness mode?  I tried to tell friends for the past two years to not make any unneeded large purchases and pay everything off so you can make some large purchases and be highly credit worthy two years from now.  I was called crazy and a pessimist.  It was human nature for everyone to want to stop the bleeding but people like Paulson KNEW the bailout wouldn't do that.  He did play everyone but I can't blame the people he gamed,  most people would not believe and could not afford to believe that the bailout didn't have that power until it was proven to them.

    Parent
    Yeah, sadly, you're so right.... (5.00 / 2) (#125)
    by NYShooter on Sat Nov 22, 2008 at 12:56:37 PM EST
    but what I don't get is the attitude by our Democratic reps, "o.k, he scammed us this time, we'll be more careful next time.".....$700,000,000,000!!!B..B..BILLION!!

    So now, they're going to show us they mean business by dangling millions of people's jobs in the auto industry over the abyss. Billions for Billionaires....eh, sh*t happens, a tiny fraction of that amount for blue collar workers...."Hey, we're not going to waste the hard working American Taxpayer's hard earned dollars."

    Would you excuse me please? I feel something rising in my esophogus.

    Parent

    Agree (5.00 / 1) (#129)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Nov 22, 2008 at 07:24:32 PM EST
    They seem a tad lazy about getting to the real points and rationals that we must get to as quickly as possible.  Okay, you want to spank CEOs...that's fine spank away...but can we save what needs to be?  I'm fine with axing management but we need real solutions for the industry and workers.  They are offering bridge loans if the companies come forth with plans they can back.  I'm okay with that as well and not impressed with what the CEO's decided to bring first to D.C., which was their hands out.  Whole thing is a mess.

    Parent
    Tracy, I told people too ... (5.00 / 1) (#128)
    by Robot Porter on Sat Nov 22, 2008 at 04:50:17 PM EST
    every thought I was a loon.  

    When I said the market would drop into the 8,000 range, they laughed and laughed.

    Parent

    Same ol' Chicago politics? (none / 0) (#83)
    by BrassTacks on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 10:13:05 PM EST
    Yeah, that's how it's looking to me too.  Nothing new here, nothing to see, let's move along now.

    Parent
    What people don't seem to realize (5.00 / 6) (#63)
    by ChrisO on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 08:36:25 PM EST
    is that anyone of influence in the Democratic Party had some connection to the Clinton administration. It was the only game in town for eight years. Describing all of them as "Clinton people" is just silly. Obama's good friend and fellow goundbreaking AA politician, Deval Patrick, ran the Civil Rights Division for Clinton. That's why I always thought it was so silly, albeit predictable, that everyone who worked in the Clinton admin and supported Obama was portrayed as a "defector" from Hillary.

    Apparently a lot of Obama supporters would prefer that his entire administration be totally inexperienced at running things in Washington.

    Yes, but it's hard to argue that he's the CHANGE (5.00 / 1) (#86)
    by BrassTacks on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 10:18:41 PM EST
    President.  

    Where's the Beef?  Where's the change?  

    I love the idea of another Clinton term, but I do not think that's what most people voted for.  

    Parent

    Paul Begala says what Obama really meant (none / 0) (#104)
    by Burned on Sat Nov 22, 2008 at 09:19:18 AM EST
    Last night on Larry King with John King hosting. They were wondering what change Obama was bringing by hiring a bunch of used Clinton people and other Washington insiders. Paul said it was change from the last eight years of Bush.
    Which it will be, thankfully.
    I'm pretty sure that's not what people chose to believe Obama meant by change.

    Parent
    Most of those people were (5.00 / 3) (#113)
    by andrys on Sat Nov 22, 2008 at 10:26:31 AM EST
    too young to even remember the Clinton years and just bought the Republican garbage about the Clintons and seemed to enjoy regurgitating it. It was "cool" to do so.  Still is.

    Parent
    I remember that before the primaries (none / 0) (#116)
    by andrys on Sat Nov 22, 2008 at 10:30:18 AM EST
    most of us longed for a return to the long-ago Clinton admin years.  That IS change.  

      Besides, Obama is doing a mix of experienced people for the areas that require that right now -- if only to calm the rest of the world and the money markets -- and other brainy people who were mainly supportive of his own promises (which is mainly what he had to offer, plus a calmer personality and some brains).

    Parent

    Holder, pardons non issues (5.00 / 6) (#64)
    by Stellaaa on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 08:38:15 PM EST
    The Republicans have reached moronic levels about this issue.  They keep talking about these pardons, when any day now, the dead duck walking is gonna make some pardon announcements that will make our heads spin.  Go figure.  

    Nice turn of phrase, Stellaaa; (5.00 / 6) (#84)
    by oculus on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 10:13:52 PM EST
    "dead duck walking."

    Parent
    Yes, not the best time to bring up bad pardons (none / 0) (#66)
    by blogtopus on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 08:48:12 PM EST
    But if they want to fire away with that, all the better.

    Parent
    Yeah, (none / 0) (#73)
    by NYShooter on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 09:24:10 PM EST
    there's a reason the founders gave a Pres. unlimited authority to pardon; obviously many would be unpopular.

    What scares the crap out of me is Holder's view on drugs, even buying into, and selling the nonsense about pot. Since a disproportionate number of AA's are in prison with pot related convictions, I would like to hear what the scuttlebut is in the AA community regarding Holder.

    Parent

    Most people have never heard of him (none / 0) (#87)
    by BrassTacks on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 10:19:31 PM EST


    Parent
    Re Brennan: Huff Post (5.00 / 1) (#92)
    by oculus on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 11:40:30 PM EST
    is acknowledging his faults. Better late than never, I guess.

    Kissing A Gator (none / 0) (#7)
    by squeaky on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 04:54:16 PM EST
    No, that's a crock.

    Extra ... Extra ... (none / 0) (#13)
    by feet on earth on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 05:07:00 PM EST
    Three of the Dem Presidential Contenders got cabinet jobs

    Let's find jobs for the other presidential contenders.  

    Chris Dodd:

    John Edwards:

    Dennis Kucinich:

    Any guess?

    Obviously, Kucinich for (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by jes on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 05:11:46 PM EST
    head of the Department of Peace. But seriously, as MB has been saying for a week, can't we have a real lefty in this team?

    Parent
    No. And also, no. (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by oldpro on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 05:59:13 PM EST


    Parent
    Let's see (5.00 / 6) (#15)
    by TheRealFrank on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 05:16:32 PM EST
    Kuchinich: extraterrestrial affairs
    Edwards: extramarital affairs
    Dodd: I'm drawing a blank

    And I have no idea about that to do with Gravel either.


    Parent

    Gravel for... (none / 0) (#21)
    by kdog on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 05:43:43 PM EST
    Secretary of Liberty Preservation and Expansion...we could use one of those.  And he seemed the most down with liberty amongst the also-rans.

    Parent
    Easy (5.00 / 5) (#25)
    by NYShooter on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 05:54:29 PM EST
    Chris Dodd: The Prof. Irwin Cory Dept. of Disingenuous, Duplicitous Outrage

    John Edwards: The Elmer Gantry Seat on Speaking Loudly while Fondling a Stick

    Dennis Kucinich: The Alfred E. Neumann Dept. of What, you don't believe me?

    Parent

    I don't think Sen. Clinton said yes. (none / 0) (#60)
    by wurman on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 07:46:02 PM EST
    NYTimes, source cited above:
    Mrs. Clinton's spokesman, Philippe Reines, issued a statement Friday afternoon cautioning that the nomination was not final. "We're still in discussions, which are very much on track," Mr. Reines said. "Any reports beyond that are premature."

    Is that a definite "maybe"? or . . . ?

    Obama's cheerleaders and the right-wing transition (none / 0) (#95)
    by Andreas on Sat Nov 22, 2008 at 12:28:28 AM EST
    The WSWS writes:

    What is taking shape is a government that represents continuity with the last eight years far more than change. Its personnel and the policies with which they are identified spell a continuation of wars of aggression abroad and domestic policies that defend the interests of America's financial elite at the expense of the broad mass of working people.

    The conditions are being created in which illusions fostered by Obama's rhetoric about "hope" and "change" will be dashed and a period of tumultuous struggles, driven by the economic crisis, will inevitably arise.

    Of course, there are illusions and there are illusions. Millions of American working people went to the polls November 4 and voted for Obama with the aim of putting an end to two criminal wars and to express their anger over policies at home that have led to unprecedented social inequality and the deepest economic crisis since the Great Depression.

    Then there are those who make a political profession out of deluding themselves and fostering illusions among others in order to support the Democratic Party and the profit system which it defends.

    Obama's "left" cheerleaders and the right-wing transition

    I don't know if I should stroke you (none / 0) (#105)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Nov 22, 2008 at 09:59:19 AM EST
    but in fairness I guess I have to.  I really am overly fond of your internet persona.  From your clear concise voice on the Iraq War to CDS, I probably would have thrown the computer in the lake and sworn hatred for the Democratic Party if it wasn't for your voice.

    P.S. Who's gnashing teeth (none / 0) (#106)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Nov 22, 2008 at 10:00:19 AM EST
    Since I'm relieved I don't read around much these days.

    Parent
    Okay, I read around on some of the (none / 0) (#114)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Nov 22, 2008 at 10:26:41 AM EST
    old CDS sites and all I can say is some guys still think a strong smart woman is going to steal their manhood.  How stupid!  But please continue to be afraid of us so we can be assured of marginalizing or even phasing out your DNA in the gene pool.

    Parent
    Compounding stupidity (none / 0) (#120)
    by MyLeftMind on Sat Nov 22, 2008 at 11:12:49 AM EST
    Heck, we're not phasing out the bad genes, look at who's breeding the most in our country.  

    Parent
    most voters too young to remember 8 to 12 (none / 0) (#132)
    by BrassTacks on Sun Nov 23, 2008 at 02:11:05 AM EST
    Years ago?  Really?  

    Cabinet News | 131 comments (131 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment