Obama receives good early reviews, tinged with concern about ‘change’
Dante Chinni
Posted: 11.20.2008 / 9:05 AM PST
The Obama administration has just begun to take shape over the past two-plus weeks, but already the nightly talk-show critiques have begun.
The tea-leaf reading has covered topics ranging from the selection of Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D) as President-elect Obama’s chief of staff to the role Mr. Obama played in the Senate Democrats’ reconciliation with Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I). Thus far, most of the reviews have been solid as Washington wise men (and women) have credited Obama with a fairly smooth transition.
On the whole in our Patchwork Nation communities, there is wide support for the nascent Obama administration. But initial moves of the White House in waiting have also raised a few notes of caution. Most of those concerns are coming from people who are worried that too many familiar names from the Clinton administration are being floated for the Obama Cabinet.
“After reading more in the press, and hearing from both Dems and Republicans here, I don’t think I am the only one who is wondering how Obama is going to maintain his image and message of change by filling so many important positions with former Clinton people,” wrote Donald King, a Patchwork Nation blogger who lives in Sioux Center, Iowa – our rural “Tractor Country” community.
In Hopkinsville, Ky. (our “Military Bastion” located near Fort Campbell), Mayor Dan Kemp (D) also sees a few concerns. “Keeping too many ‘Clinton people’ would not instill confidence from the 47% who did not vote for him,” he wrote in an e-mail.
Both of those communities (and community types) are pretty conservative overall and voted for Sen. John McCain in the presidential election. But we heard similar concerns from other communities including our more left-leaning locales – such as Ann Arbor, Mich., our collegiate “Campus and Careers” community, where one person wrote of his worry about Clinton “shackles.”
The Clinton people our correspondents speak of include Mr. Emanuel; Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D), who is apparently being considered for secretary of State; and Eric Holder, who reportedly was offered the slot of attorney general.
Why is there a Clinton stigma among our respondents? Primarily two reasons.
First, as Mr. King noted, many of our correspondents believe that “change,” the watchword of the 2008 election, is going to be more difficult in an administration full of people from the last Democratic White House.
Second, almost all our correspondents, liberal and conservative, said it is key that Obama try to remain above partisanship. For many people, the talk of the Clinton administration harks back to partisan bickering and the impeachment hearings.
Most of our respondents, however, see only warning signs in the news they are hearing. Looking at the larger picture, they seem supportive of Obama’s earliest efforts. The only people who seem unhappy with the president-elect thus far are those who did not support him to begin with – and who could be very difficult for him to ever win over.
Of course, it’s still extremely early.
The cabinet may be the focus of the news right now, but it is only part of what an Obama administration will be. The man in the Oval Office will make the big decisions – the decisions that will ultimately win or lose support with the public.
Regardless of whether the team the president-elect assembles is full of old hands or new faces, the real test will be how that team works for him and how it works together.
November 20th, 2008 at 9:50 am PST
Why can’t people just quiet down and hope for change? Obama will be bring change, and I know that it will just be wonderful. I cried for joy when he was elected, and feel shivers every time I see him on a magazine cover. As a proud American man, I’m 100% behind Obama and all the hope he represents and change he reaches for. How exciting and historic.
November 20th, 2008 at 10:01 am PST
The President is entitled to have the administration he desires. Quietly and quickly approve his nominees for his Cabinet, etc. Save your opposition for when it matters.
If the only objection people have to Mr. Holder serving as Attorney General is he is from the Clinton administration and/or his slight role in the Marc Rich pardon, they should question him with respect and restraint and then then they should unanimously approve his nomination.
More at: http://lazarusreport.blogtownhall.com/
November 20th, 2008 at 10:07 am PST
Change? But which way. I ask people to go back and read up on The great Depression. Why do you think he is hiring experiance people. Maybe because he doesnt have a clue on what to do
[Admin: Readers don't think this comment adds to the discussion.]
November 20th, 2008 at 10:15 am PST
so you question people respectfully and then vote for them unanimously. Why bother with the guestions? Is everybody who posts here a moron? Just wondering.
November 20th, 2008 at 10:17 am PST
This is not a big problem but an inevitable result of Obama and his campaign style. Obama doesn’t have any qualified, close associates and his campaign stirred up over-the-top vilification of everybody else.
November 20th, 2008 at 10:19 am PST
I don’t think we should assume that the most effective change agents are those with no experience of Washington politics. If the people Obama is choosing share his commitment to change, which I assume is a major selection factor, then their experience in Washington is what may allow them to actually effect change. I think we tend toward a mythic view of change as effected by “outsiders” who actually have no clue about how Washington operates and without the relationships necessary to make it happen.
November 20th, 2008 at 10:19 am PST
I say give him time and let’s see what direction he takes us.
In my mind, however, the criticism is proving itself justified, as Obama was waving the banner of bringing in Washington outsiders, and promoting change from the top down. So far, looking at his choices, he seems to be doing the opposite, choosing people as entrenched in Washington as exist.
Who knows, maybe he will teach old dogs new tricks, but that isn’t what history suggests will happen.
Next election take note, and look to the independents for the change flag. The two party system requires that both Democrats and Republicans resist the fundamental change that may be required to put our Nation on a different, hopefully better, course.
November 20th, 2008 at 10:20 am PST
I volunteered, gave money to and phone banked for Obama. His appointments deeply trouble me. His appointment of Dennis Ross and Hillary Clinton virtually guarantee the failure of any Israeli/Palestinian peace process. While this may seem like s small issue, it is at the core of much of the Middle East conflict. Reading Ross’ own book and the various documents on the Camp David talks it was he who was the single most significant factor in sabotaging previous accords. Clinton already has flaunted her disregard for the U.N. by openly brushing aside various U.N. resolutions (like George Bush she apparently believes we are above the law).
But it isn’t just his appointees but the continued escalation of the war in Afghanistan, the continued war on drugs in Colombia, calling the Revolutionary Guard ‘terrorist’, his basic ok to Blackwater - all of these positions are not what most of us like to hear from the ‘Change’ candidate.
None of this has to do with partisanship but is merely an indication in which direction his policy is going to move. At this point I am left with less and less hope that we will see anything but business as usual emerge.
November 20th, 2008 at 10:20 am PST
If we never allow any changes to take place? How will we ever know if Mr.Obama will actually help our country instead of hurting it any worse than what it already is.I am 100% for Obama so let the man prove to the world that he has come into place to do a major change the we need.
November 20th, 2008 at 10:40 am PST
I think the readers & writers who quibble about “where’s the change?” aren’t seeing the whole stage. I want change and I believe Obama will bring it from the top, in his approach to problems and his plans. They will be HIS plans after all, with the staff and cabinet as executors. In our bipartisan legislative-style government, effecting change means having people who know how to get things done, i.e., who are “experienced.” George Bush stumbled early by packing his staff with Texans — remember, he was a governor with no national or international experience — and it hampered his effectiveness.
Why are there no quibblers about the lack of “change” in the military? Do people really believe that Obama can change the course or timetable of our Iraq deployment with the same generals and military advisers who got us/keep us there? Of course we have that hope/belief that he will because we have a system of civilian control of the military and he will make changes — his changes — with the generals’ advice. The same will hold for nonmilitary matters.
The chief sets the tone; sets the agenda; sets the course. In Obama we have, perhaps, the most intelligent and people-savvy president ever. If we are confident he will bring change, then we must allow him the room and resources to do it. There are a tiny, tiny few people who can bring “change” to a system without “experience.” I will suffer the risk of “experience” for the promise of “change.”
November 20th, 2008 at 10:54 am PST
While I’ll admit that filling his cabinet with political veterans from the Clinton era stinks of “more of the same,” it is important to note that Obama is not being an idiot by surrounding himself with inexperienced people at a time of such turmoil. If he filled his cabinet with people as fresh to Washington politics as he is, everyone would be condemning him for how inexperienced his whole administration is and the message of “change” that would be promised by an infusion of new blood would be drowned out by the fear-monger media’s cries of doom. He’s damned if he goes either way so the best he can do is take the middle road.
I never really believed he, or anyone else for that matter, would be able to change the way Washington operates (the clique will always be the clique), all I wanted was change from Bush’s neo-con policies, which is assured by the simple fact that Obama is a democrat.
Anyway, Obama isn’t even in office yet. Give him a chance to do something (and actually pick his cabinet members) before crying foul.
November 20th, 2008 at 10:58 am PST
Change happens from the top down just like the trickle down effect. It will be business as always with any party. What I am afraid of is him making the wrong decision that sends us into another depression. our market goes through cycles to clean out the companies that do not produce or that are not competitive. it is some thing that is bigger then government. with the wrong decision it can be amplified.
November 20th, 2008 at 11:43 am PST
I’m just curious - normally you’d want people to surround you that are qualified and experienced correct? Not just some Joe Plumber off the street to be Secretary of Defense - I would think. And aren’t the best and brightest usually appointed to near top positions in any administration anyway? So out of the past four administrations, dating back to 1980! - how many qualified, experienced and intelligent people does Obama have to chose from that are also like minded (Democratic)? Well, let’s see - W Bush, Clinton, H W Bush, and Reagan. My guess is that since Clinton’s administration was the ONLY democratic administration in the past 28 years, MOST of his appointments will probably be from that administration. Some people need to relax. Were the Cowboys a good team because of Troy Aikman or was Troy Aikman a good player because of the Cowboys? Would the Cowboys gone to any Superbowls with Ryan Leaf as their quarterback? Let Obama do his job and his team will follow.
November 20th, 2008 at 12:06 pm PST
DD says: “If I were you I would look at Iran’s nuclear fuel, Somali pirates, and the worst stock market in the history of a presidential victory”
All those things happened during the Bush Administration. Doesn’t he get any share of the blame, or at least the responsibility, for these events? The stock market has been declining steadily ever since late 2007–did anyone know Obama would be elected President back then?
I’m amazed how some folks look at all the disasters that have occurred during the Bush Administration–and then scramble to blame them on anyone else but Bush.
When Truman said, “The buck stops here,” he wasn’t referring to President-elect Eisenhower.
November 20th, 2008 at 12:26 pm PST
Do not blame Obama for what he has to do. This is out of any president controll. The economy will dictate what he has to do not the other way around. I voted for Mcain and I feel sorry for Obama. He has some real hard choices in front of him. One is government debt. ( SSI, Medicare. medicad, and all the other government programs) As the economy shrinks so do they. You can only increase taxes so much before it starts effecting our economy. Our government debt will out pace our economy as it stands now. So he has some real hard choices to make. The worst thing the president can hear now is the govt. bond rating has been reduce to junk. Not Iran has nucs. or we lost the war in Iraq. So quit blaming people and start thinking about what YOU can do to help.
November 20th, 2008 at 1:27 pm PST
What am I missing here? The Bush administration is going away, and an Obama administration is taking shape. So far, not a single carryover from the Bush administration.
Is this not change?
The president sets the tone of the administration, and the president is Obama, not Bush, not Clinton.
Is this not change?
November 20th, 2008 at 2:23 pm PST
People are making way too much of this. Who you pick for your transition team typically will also have helped previous presidents with their transitions. This experience is quite important. Unfortunately, the last administration was Jimmy Carter and most of those folks are way too old now. Realistically, change requires people with experience being involved as well. It doesn’t mean it won’t happen, it just means it will be a slightly less glorified process than some had hoped for.
November 20th, 2008 at 2:39 pm PST
first off the only change is that new people will be getting the the under the table money, its all about the money and if you cried because he won you will also cry when you see what a jr senator with a crapy voting record does with our economy, this mess was created by me and you mixed in with 26 years of greedy politicions all of our wealth was financed on the back of home loans and now it is time to pay the credit card debt.obama nor anyother politician can fix it. it wi;ll correct itself
November 20th, 2008 at 3:23 pm PST
You cried and you get the shivers whenever you see a picture of Barack Hussein Obama, Mr. Bob? Well you are certainly not the only one in the history of the world who has been swept off your feet by a politician. Quite a few Germans reacted the same way when Hitler came to power.
November 20th, 2008 at 3:55 pm PST
Ah, the inevitable Hitler reference…
November 20th, 2008 at 4:18 pm PST
When people shiver and cry, something creepy is going on.
November 20th, 2008 at 5:30 pm PST
Lol Ryan, it was indeed inevitable. Soon there will be a “socialist/marxist” post. I’m surprised nobody has made fun of Obama singing happy birthday to Biden and giving him cupcakes.
November 20th, 2008 at 7:17 pm PST
Seems like the slippery slope is getting a little steeper with each decision. Unfortunately, there is no choice but to wait and see.
November 20th, 2008 at 8:55 pm PST
What makes you think “the man in the oval office” will be making the decisions? This is a man who has never voted against his party. I think it will be more like Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid who will be making the decisions!
Along with every liberal special interest group. Just look at the automaker bail out plan. Suddenly Democrats WANT to give money to big business? What happend to “Main Street, not Wall Street”?
Or is this, in fact, a Autoworkers Union Bail Out? Now THAT would make sense for Democrats. Time to pay for the votes!
November 21st, 2008 at 12:17 am PST
I don’t think its unreasonable for people to feel emotional about a breakdown in the racial inequality that has kept old white guys in the oval office for the entire history of a country founded on the premise of equality of all men, especially when that premise excluded blacks as equals for 94 years (disregarding the prejudice that continues even now). Putting Barack Obama on a pedestal might be wrong but crying about the vindication of generations of persecuted blacks that his election to the presidency represents is not.
Not to attack Marylyn’s specific example of Hitler (which is an overused though convenient means of comparison), but there are usually warning signs for dangerous leaders. Case-in-point, Barack Obama wrote “The Audacity of Hope” and Hitler wrote “Mein Kampf.”
November 21st, 2008 at 9:13 am PST
First, I really am afraid of what the Obama Whitehouse and strong Democratic house and Senate will do. However, if how he ran his meticulously managed and targeted campaign is any indication of how **** govern, **** be able to effectively get things done, that he sets out to do. These things he learned through watching others and via his training as an ‘organizer’.
His teams have worked in previously unorthodox or occult [hidden] manners, previously unseen in political aspirants. I suspect similar operations to be directed toward this future activities.
Don’t try to model him after those he surrounds himself with, they are simply tools used to perform his job. Henry Ford was once asked how he, with little education or knowledge of mechanics, was able to excell in his field - it was by surrounding himself with people that knew how things worked and employ them strategically in their areas of expertise.
Change will come. Positive or negative, only history and God will be able to judge.
November 21st, 2008 at 10:54 am PST
Doesn’t seem like much change to me - so far Obama’s “rumored” selections to cabinet positions look like a reincarnation of the Clinton era and political rewards. The people and the ideas are from the 1992-2000 era. We’ve gone from Bush-I to Clinton to Bush-II and now to Clinton-II. That sequence has produced the dire condition the country finds itself in today economically, domestically, and internationally. We need real change…..but haven’t seen any yet.
November 24th, 2008 at 11:46 pm PST
Of course, give him time.. is what all the big “O” dreamers say. But not much, as not much should be given .
December 27th, 2008 at 7:34 pm PST
December 27th, 2008 at 8:51 pm PST
January 6th, 2009 at 8:23 am PST
January 6th, 2009 at 9:30 am PST