Obama's Cabinet

TheTodd · Post by **TheTodd** » Thu Nov 06, 2008 7:10 pm

While I don't know Rahm, cause I don't care as much as others do, it sounds like this guy would be good for Obama to have on staff. Sounds like he has some sack and knows how the system in DC works. Obama will need some people like this or he'll never get past 1st base.

During his original 2002 campaign, Emanuel "indicated his support of President Bush's position on Iraq, but said he believed the president needed to better articulate his position to the American people". Inspired by his pediatrician father, one of the major goals he spoke of during the race was "to help make health care affordable and available for all Americans".

I agree with his comments on Iraq and I notice he doesn't say universal health care. He just said it should be affordable and available to all Americans, and I do agree with that.

slideman67 · Post by **slideman67** » Thu Nov 06, 2008 8:00 pm

I just read an article saying RFK Jr might be EPA Chief. That would be another great pick - an EPA Chief who actually gave a shit about the environment.

annarborgator · Post by **annarborgator** » Thu Nov 06, 2008 10:04 pm

i don't see why rohm would not indicate change. policy decisions come from the top, obama will dictate what the policy direction is and people like rohm will carry them out.

instead of asking rhetorical questions or critcize the pick, suggest who would be better, or give a profile of an ideal candidate. better yet, define what the position of chief of staff would do in your ideal administration.

only after we have an understanding of the position we can discuss the pros and cons of various candidate.

Wait, I thought Obama was gonna reach across the aisle and get rid of the partisan bullshit that bogs this country down? From what I've heard Emanuel is one of the biggest assholes around who browbeats people into bending to his will. That sounds like the OLD beltway of doing things to me. It doesn't sound thoughtful, reasonable or just. I guess if his politics lined up more with my views I would like him more? I dunno man, mainstream politics confuse the fuck out of me. I wish I could even begin to tell you the things that matter that are hidden by all the distractions.

Sorry, I wrote the earlier posts forgetting that "change" for OBAMA folks just means "not the last 8 years". So short-sighted. *sigh* It's like they don't even realize that American politics has been fucked up for at least 100 years. Oh well.

radbag · Post by **radbag** » Fri Nov 07, 2008 8:05 am

john kerry is being considered for secretary of state.

don't you have to be liked to be the secretary of state?

radbag · Post by **radbag** » Fri Nov 07, 2008 8:06 am

arnold for energy secretary? token republican who governs the most liberal state in the union.

Tipmoose · Post by **Tipmoose** » Fri Nov 07, 2008 8:13 am

john kerry is being considered for secretary of state.

don't you have to be liked to be the secretary of state?

Alexander Haig
Henry Kissinger
Madeline Albright

I would say...emphatically...no.

DocZaius · Post by **DocZaius** » Fri Nov 07, 2008 8:37 am

Al Haig was a dick, but Kissinger had mad negotiating skills. And I thought Maddy Albright was well-liked by the furriners, even though I didn't really like her.

Curious story about Albright, courtesy of my wife:

SecState is protected not by Secret Service members, but by members of State's own security service, the Bureau of Diplomatic Security. Anyway, Albright picked her own security staff and they were all good-looking, virile young men. I don't think there were rumors of her sleeping with any of them (who would sleep with that old hag, anyway?), but it was interesting that she picked them based on looks.

AdGator02 · Post by **AdGator02** » Fri Nov 07, 2008 9:35 am

that's funny, Doc. Go Maddy!

wasn't Hagel mentioned for a possible cabinet seat?

bluegrassg8r · Post by **bluegrassg8r** » Fri Nov 07, 2008 12:18 pm

Urap, if Obama isn't picking people who can work across the aisle then what am I supposed to think about the endless promises of bipartisanship? Emanuel is a total asshole, yes, he gets shit done, but how in the fucking world can you see that as fulfilling the promise of change?
Since when did a ramrod for CoS mean bipartisan?

annarborgator · Post by **annarborgator** » Fri Nov 07, 2008 1:57 pm

The only quality of "change" the Obama folks care about is that he wasn't hired by bush, bg. He's not going to change the decades of fucked up nonsense that goes on in Washington on a daily basis regardless of which party is governing.

I had been confused about that until I had an epiphany yesterday.

urapnes · Post by **urapnes** » Fri Nov 07, 2008 2:55 pm

Urap, if Obama isn't picking people who can work across the aisle then what am I supposed to think about the endless promises of bipartisanship? Emanuel is a total asshole, yes, he gets shit done, but how in the fucking world can you see that as fulfilling the promise of change?
Since when did a ramrod for CoS mean bipartisan?

again, the chief of staff is NOT a bipartisan position. The chief of staff's job is to make what the president wants happen. rohm has a history of getting shit done. that's his job.

what would you all think about richardson as sec of state?

annarborgator · Post by **annarborgator** » Fri Nov 07, 2008 3:12 pm

Richardson would be establishment, not change.

urapnes · Post by **urapnes** » Fri Nov 07, 2008 3:23 pm

how would richardson not be change from what we have now?

policy means change, not personnel. equate it to football; ron zook was fired, urban meyer came in and changed the philosophy of the team. same personnel, different philosophy. that was a change. urban meyer didn't need to come in and cut every player to show change. urban and his philosophies were the change just like obama and his policies are the change.

DocZaius · Post by **DocZaius** » Fri Nov 07, 2008 3:28 pm

again, the chief of staff is NOT a bipartisan position. The chief of staff's job is to make what the president wants happen. rohm has a history of getting shit done. that's his job.

For some reason, I foresee this argument being used to justify every one of Obama's appointees.

Let's try it out, shall we?

"again, the Secretary of Defense is NOT a bipartisan position. The Secretary of Defense's job is to make what the president wants happen. Sean Penn has a history of getting shit done. that's his job."

"again, the Secretary of Education is NOT a bipartisan position. The Secretary of Education's job is to make what the president wants happen. William Ayers has a history of getting shit done. that's his job."

"again, the Secretary of HUD is NOT a bipartisan position. The Secretary of HUD's job is to make what the president wants happen. Franklin Raines has a history of getting shit done. that's his job."

I could do this all day.

annarborgator · Post by **annarborgator** » Fri Nov 07, 2008 3:36 pm

how would richardson not be change from what we have now?

policy means change, not personnel. equate it to football; ron zook was fired, urban meyer came in and changed the philosophy of the team. same personnel, different philosophy. that was a change. urban meyer didn't need to come in and cut every player to show change. urban and his philosophies were the change just like obama and his policies are the change.

As US ambassador to the UN he helped give away more American sovereignty....a steady practice of our leaders for nearly the last 100 years. As energy secretary his agency allowed nuclear secrets to be stolen and Richardson had to be drug by his toes to testify about it. That sounds like the SAME OLD Washington games, dood.

annarborgator · Post by **annarborgator** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 12:57 pm

Just noticed Emanuel also served on the BOD of freddie mac for 13 months during the scandal where the company defrauded millions of people. LMMFAO this gets better and better.

annarborgator · Post by **annarborgator** » Sun Nov 09, 2008 5:50 pm

And the hits keep coming...was just reading about how much of a warmonger Emanuel is. Interesting stuff. Seems he helped defeat anti-war democrats in 2006 when he controlled the party's purse strings.

I hope Afghanistan doesn't become Obama's Iraq.

TTBHG · Post by **TTBHG** » Sun Nov 09, 2008 8:57 pm

And the hits keep coming...was just reading about how much of a warmonger Emanuel is. Interesting stuff. Seems he helped defeat anti-war democrats in 2006 when he controlled the party's purse strings.

I hope Afghanistan doesn't become Obama's Iraq.

Are we sure he is't a closet Republican like Lieberman?

G8rMom7 · Post by **G8rMom7** » Sun Nov 09, 2008 10:55 pm

I just had to say...Doc, you really need your own TV show...radio show at least! You would be a hit, fo sho! :lmao:

And I don't know a whole lot about RFK, Jr. but I certainly hope he isn't one of the many Nantucket sound people whining about the windmills out in the ocean obstructing their views...that would not bode well for a Sec of Energy if that were to be the case.

DocZaius · Post by **DocZaius** » Mon Nov 10, 2008 7:54 am

^^RFK, Jr. is one of those mercury-causes-autism nut cases.

annarborgator · Post by **annarborgator** » Fri Nov 21, 2008 9:13 pm

And it's Geithner! LMMFAO I "hope" this is the kind of "change" y'all Obamabots can believe in. Check his res....he's 100% establishment, 100% power elite.

slideman67 · Post by **slideman67** » Fri Nov 21, 2008 9:21 pm

A - Anything that is the opposite of what Bush would do is change for the better.

B - You need to have people who know how to get shit done to get change.

I think Obama's choices so far have been brilliant.

annarborgator · Post by **annarborgator** » Fri Nov 21, 2008 9:27 pm

You kill me slide. Of COURSE you think he's been brilliant so far. How could be be anything other than perfect?

AdGator02 · Post by **AdGator02** » Sat Nov 22, 2008 8:40 am

I like Geithner more than keeping Paulson or choosing another Clinton rerun. I do not like Hillary C for Sec. of State. You agree with that pick, Slide? She's got similar views to him on just about everything *aside* from foreign policy. He doesn't have enough challenges already?

radbag · Post by **radbag** » Sat Nov 22, 2008 9:48 am

i think paulson's very capable but his ability to communicate his play has been horrendous....the delivery goes a long way in instilling confidence and paulson's not done that.

here's to hoping geithner can.