Sources: Obama picks Daschle to head HHS

Source




Another DC insider.....

Where is the change that Obama promised? Because I was almost sure he was talking about changing how things were done in DC and who did them. It looks like now, all that is changing is the party that occupies the White House.

I know the man needs experienced people to help him out in his new administration, but there are more people in this country with experience than ousted former Senators and former Clinton administration folks.

This just keeps getting funnier and funnier!

Change = Lobbyists and Clintonistas

Yes indeed. Where is the 'change'? No where. Obama is severely inexperienced and so he brings in all the lobbyists and those who are 'part of the problem' (as he said)

And there is another thread about him bringing in Eric Holder - of PARDONGATE fame! (got the pardon for Marc Rich and those two weather underground terrorists)

No change. No hope. No unity.

one word: cronyism

reply to post by FlyersFan

---

From the same article....




For all I know, Daschle may be a great "Health Czar" (why does that title scare me???), but wouldn't it benefit Obama to appoint some fresh faces?

So far, his transition seems to carry the title of "Recycled" instead of "Change".

JMO....

Obama kept saying more of the same for the next 4 years and people really thought he was talking about what a McCain Presidency would look like. Guess now they know what he really meant. It is no surprise that Obama has a lot of political paybacks to return for his election win. Obama should just form a line and yell out NEXT.

Personally I'd rather see the Clinton administration in the White House again and that scares conservatives.

Quite frankly, they have no room to complain as the right has driven this country to the breaking point.

This is the governmental equivalent of "Load from Last Saved Game" when we actually had a surplus and the federal debt was actually decreasing.

So BushCo needs to get their cone hats out, and sit silently in the corner. Also, notes should be taken. This will all be on the test.

I'm pretty sure his idea of "Change" stems from changes to the way we are governed and the various ways that government can help the people.

I fail to see how people keep linking it to every other thing than what it was meant to convey. He's going to "change" the White House dog too but I'm doubting that's the change he was speaking of. Should he have filled his cabinet and all high posts with complete unknowns? Would that have made you feel better?

He never promised to have an "all-new" cabinet. I don't know where people got that idea either. This is pretty much exactly what I expected.

I have always liked Daschle. Great choice! It's so exciting to see a new cabinet coming together!

I am surprised actually... I kinda thought he would have offered that one to Hillary and Bill Richardson Sec. of State.

But like my signature says......

Once again... to all the blind people. The change is in POLICY not necessarily in personalities.

reply to post by HunkaHunka

---

He didn't run on policy change alone; every politician not an incumbant runs on "policy change".

He ran on the premise (mainly) of changing how things are done and who does them.

My point (to the blind) is that you can't change all that much if you have the same old people and politicians in place to write and direct policy.

Actually, You can. It depends on who is leading.


Ever see a classroom of kids go from one mode of behavior to another when the leadership of the class changes?

That's because it doesn't have to do with as much with the pieces that make up the machine, but the engine which drives them.

Change will occur through policy and directives and how Obama handles funding etc. The personalities don't have to change, because they won't be executing their own ideas, but the ideas of BHO.

Come on now, I know you studied this in PoliSci. It's 101.




[edit on 19-11-2008 by HunkaHunka]

I don't think people are talking about personalities. Hillary is Hillary. Maybe it is more about philosophy. The people Obama are appointing have a preset concept of how things should be ran. Granted, maybe things went perfect for them during the Clinton years based on the situation at that time. That doesn't mean those preset concepts will work based on our current situation. For some reason Rumsfield and Cheney come into mind. I feel that they were trying to play the same game they played in previous administrations hoping for the same results. A type of tunnel vision.

In addition, Obama never fully defined what he meant by change. Therefore, change is left to an individual's interpretation. And I for one fully expected to see some fresh young faces with fresh new ideas running around Washington.

yeah that's great but irrelevent.


The people being appointed will have to execute BHO's policy. It matters not what their preconcieved notions of how things should be ran are.

What matters is the man in charge.

Remember, they all serve at the pleasure of the President.

[edit on 19-11-2008 by HunkaHunka]

I would rather this be an all new way to interfere with and damage my life than just a repeat of all the damage and interference I put up with under Clintons reign of terror. I seriously do not want to live through that again. Such a long and terrible 8 (8+ if you count Clintons policies that extended his rule) years for me. I wish I could delete them from memory.

reply to post by HunkaHunka

---

Fine and dandy.

But does BHO know anything about how to run a military operation? Guess somebody is going to have to suggest a list of preset concepts for him to choose from. The thing is that there is no way Obama or any other President can be aware of what every agency is doing at any given time. You have to rely on the advice of the people you appoint. And these people will suggest their way. Yes, Obama could change it to his way. However, if Obama lacks experience, like military operations, then he just might have to settle for somebody's else way.

To your point though, I believe that's why he is leaving gates in charge of the pentagon.

So with military operations taken care of... what else should we worry about?

The only one's who know how to run a military operation are the generals... McCain was just a squadron leader... that didn't qualify him to run one either... NO civilian president has the knowledge to do that unless like Eisenhauer or Grant they did... Lincoln certainly didn't... he just knew the right questions to ask and that is more important in the grand scheme than knowing what a division does and so on.