November 21, 2008
-
Obama and Change
It is being reported that Hillary Clinton has been offered the position of Secretary of State by President-elect Obama and that she will accept the offer. Here is the link: Link
On the news this morning they were talking about how President-elect Obama is bringing in a bunch of people from the Clinton presidency years. They were asking if Obama could call it change if he was bringing the same political insiders in to this inner circle.
Would you prefer that Obama bring in all new people or some people with previous experience?
Comments (95)
I don’t think it’s very wise. He’s not just going to get Hillary, he’s going to get Bill as well.
YES!!!!! Hillary is a fab choice!
hi dan
previous experience is important. great choice, obama!
I never believed his ideology of change; I am simply not surprised at the Clinton administration making a return under Obama.
That being said, considering his lack of any experience in an executive position, I am glad that he is choosing people as his advisers and cabinet that have experience in the White House.
I think it’s important to have a good mix of new ideas and old. Just the same, sometimes just because a person has “less experience” does not mean that they aren’t knowledgable (sp?) enough to do the job better than someone who has been doing it for years. On the same hand that works the other way around too.
Am I surprised he chose Hilary to throw into the mix? Not at all, seeing as he needs a woman with power and that people already respect to help him out.
Uh…
@MadisonLinh - Hi Maddie!
you can’t have change w/old washington insiders. another disappointment from obama.
I don’t think it’s impossible to implement a change in policy while being advised by people with lots of experience. I’m glad he’s picking knowledgeable people.
I’m kind of iffy on this one. I thought he didn’t choose her for vice for the sole reason that he didn’t want Bill as the tag-along. But I guess he wants to work with her – just at a distance. Understandable. Intelligent democrats must stand together one way or another.
People are arguing that he’s not changing anything, but I beg to differ. The best times in America were when Bill was the president. Why not do something to help change it back to the way it was before Bush ruined everything (:
Lack of experience is what everyone was bitching about when he was elected … so of course he’s going to bring in experienced people. I think it’s a smart move!
I guess some people were really naive enough to believe the change thing
Well, given the choice between bringing in old Clintonites or more corrupt Chicago politicians like himself…eep!
I was under the impression before that Obama/Clinton would be a power team.
But upon further thought, I don’t think much of the idea that we may have Obama/Clinton/McCain all in powerful positions. They all ran for the same office, you know?
I voted for one over the others *why*? If they all wind up in high levels of government?
I think it’s best with insiders and people with experience assuming they have the RIGHT experience and he’s there to CHANGE CORRUPT POLICIES not change everything altogether
Um hello? He’s not bringing the same people to do the same things to continue the same policy… Would you rather him pick hobos off the street? Only a Republican would whine about someone not having experience then complain when he hires on people that do.
I don’t care who he brings into his administration as long as things get better, of which I have many doubts.
I’m impressed. It seems he is picking some of the best minds out there and assembling serious firepower…
I think both new and oldies would be good.
@somethinglikeavintagelove - I agree. I’d rather have a man screw an intern than screw the country lol, yes I know that was in poor taste
@Bobby - lol yea and look at how much ‘experience’ the Bush Administration had
I think a lot of people are scared of change because either way we’re probably going to fail but I’d rather have a shot with the unkown than be knowingly screwed over for another 4 years
@IHearTheOcean - lol – not at all. And I actually think that was an intersesting way to put it. Never thought about it that way.
You don’t bring change to anything without bringing in fresh ideas and you don’t bring in fresh ideas by consulting the same people who have always been consulted. Thus the only way to bring in change is to bring in outsiders. But then again, nothing that Obama proposed during his campaign is even remotely worthy of being called change. What he was proposing is just keeping the same destination of socialism and fascism that our government has had for 60+ years. It has been a long road with few presidents who have chosen to take a scenic detour rather than the expressway but they have all had the same destination in mind.
My husband said he had money when the Clintons were in office.. so if that is the change he’s bringing, then bring it Obama..
I definitely don’t want him bringing back a Clinton. Should be interesting though.
@BarelyJen - Agreeeeeeeed!
- – -
I agree with Hillary for Secretary of State. Obama is simply surrounding himself by who he feels are the most intelligent people who share his common views. What is wrong with that? Blah. The way I see it is no matter what Obama does the right wing is going to tear his decisions apart in a negative fashion.
@trunthepaige - I guess some people were really naive enough to believe the change thing
“Change” comes in policy and not staff decisions.
Transitioning into the Presidency is a big and unique task. It makes sense for President-elect Obama to hire the people experienced and equipped for the job. If not former Clinton staff, who else does he have to turn to? The 70, 80 year-old staffers from the Carter administration?!
change doesn’t come in minor details, it comes with the results we get, and I have more confidence in experience
experience.
I think things will be better than they were for the past 8 years.
Heck, he could run the office with one hand up his butt, and one thumb
up his nose and it would be an improvment.
@huginn - I suppose if you think change means the same people doing it the same way his party has always done it you be very happy. To everyone else, get used to everything that he does, is just a rehash of ether 1978 or 1998. Same old stuff, with a new pitch man saying the words
@IHearTheOcean -
i agree!
@generasianx - you can’t have change w/old washington insiders. another disappointment from obama.
Just like you can’t fly a Boeing 747 with pilots, you can’t run the Presidency without staffers without the know-how’s.
How about a mixture of both, new people but also people who have some experience with this.
I don’t really know what I want to think anymore.
Obama kept talking about change change change and it seems his White House Cabinet will look exactly like the Clinton White House.
@trunthepaige - I suppose if you think change means the same people doing it the same way his party has always done it you be very happy.
You suppose incorrectly.
If President-elect Obama wants a smooth and successful transition to the White House, he’d need people with experience. Running the Presidency is a unique and challenging task. It only so happens that the only staffers with the prerequisite experience is from the Clinton White House. “Change” or “no change,” there is no way to work around this.
The only serious measure of “change” will be the policy positions and advocacies of the Obama administrations. Having some former Clinton staffers and secretaries won’t magically change bipartisan policies to partisan policies.
To everyone else, get used to everything that he does, is just a rehash of ether 1978 or 1998. Same old stuff, with a new pitch man saying the words
We don’t know that yet. I know you’re eager, but President-elect Obama has yet to take office.
(And get your history straight. Clinton = ’92. ’88 was G.HW. Bush)
@huginn - you might look again 98 not 88
@mrcolorful - You don’t bring change to anything without bringing in fresh ideas and you don’t bring in fresh ideas by consulting the same people who have always been consulted.
Do you have any ida what you’re talking about?
Sure– both Obama and Biden’s chief-of-staffs were from the Clinton White house, but staffers are little more than glorified secretaries. Nearly all of the cabinet appointees were uninvolved in the decision-making of the Clinton Administration.
Thus the only way to bring in change is to bring in outsiders.
Tell me: What the fuck does this even mean?
@trunthepaige - Nice of you to hip and hop over the rebuttal points of my comment.
@Bobby - Not bringing in the same old people? The Other Clinton? Rahm Emanuel? James Steinberg? Eric Holder? Lawrence Summers? Looks like recycled Clinton staff to me. I’ll take my chances on the hobos, thanks.
If you voted for “change”, you may have just been duped.
@DirtyAndShaken - Then justify: How would the mere presence of former-Clinton White House staffers impact President-Elect Obama’s policy decisions?
Just because you’re bringing people in with experience in the field, does not mean that you aren’t going to bring a change. Look at the things that Obama wants to do with America and compare that to what America HAS been doing in the past. He wants to make a change and it’s rather ridiculous that people think he’s not going to make a change just because his advisors have more experience in how to get things done. We have to remember, that these people are advisors. They aren’t the president, they speak to the president. Another thing people have to realize is that just because Obama is president and he wants to make a change, that does not mean that CONGRESS wants to make a change. There is more to legislature than the executive branch… such as the LEGISLATIVE branch. Senators and Representatives DO actually make a difference. Why do people forget this?
@mrcolorful - You’re so right. America is JUST like Nazi Germany and Italy in the same time period. We’re EXACTLY like that. We’re so fascist it’s ridiculous.
@bluehappyass - You’re right, because for the past 8 years the administration has had both hands up it’s nose AND it’s head up it’s ass.
@trunthepaige - Yeah… because the Democratic party of 2008 is exactly like it was in 1978… and all members of a party are all mindless drones that follow some sort of law instead of what they believe in…. You’re so right.
@huginn - To be fair, she did have it right with the 98. While she may have disregarded everything else that was right with your post, she did get you on that one wrong (even though what you said was right) comment. Hmmm.
@DirtyAndShaken - Yeah, because Clinton did so terrible. Oh wait… The worst thing that I can think of that he did was get a blowjob from an ugly intern.
@huginn - Um, a President’s cabinet is his advisers and assistants who help him make decisions and run the government, right? They don’t have a ‘mere’
presence, they are his ‘right hand people’. That isn’t going to influence his policy decisions?
@DirtyAndShaken - Dude, “staffers’ doesn’t equal “cabinet members.”
Okay. Since your’e so informed ‘n all, name me Obama’s named or rumored cabinet members that held key roles in President Clinton’s decision-making inner-circle?
@lostintranscension - be fair, she did have it right with the 98. While she may have disregarded everything else that was right with your post, she did get you on that one wrong (even though what you said was right) comment. Hmmm.
I’m puzzled at what the mid-term elections of ’98 has to do with anything. *shrugs*
@huginn - I’m not sure she was talking about the elections, just who was president at the current time. I could be wrong though.
Might I just point out that it was advisors to Clinton who helped Obama start his campaign from the ground up- and obviously, they had the right ideas and it worked. Last time I checked, the economy was definitely on the right track during the Clinton administration, and Obama’s tapping of former Clinton-era members is just smart on his part. He’s tapping people he knows are capable and would be well suited for their positions. Clinton was one of the most experienced of the candidates if you look at her foriegn experience, so of course it make sense to tap her for SoS. I think he’s proving that he doesn’t hold grudges and knows when to let shit go.
And for all the nay-sayers, keep ranting and raving about how this ‘change is crap’- but in 4 years, we’ll see if you can still say as much. Wait and see- it’s all any of us can do. Thankfully I’m a lot more hopeful of a better outcome.
Its okay to be bitter about losing. If you want to live in the 90′s, thats your thing. In fact we had a robust economy in the 90′s so I don’t blame ya. But if you want to rejoin reality 2008, all of these people have prominent careers beyond the Clinton Administration which is what they are being picked. If you don’t see that, ask God for the light.
By change, maybe he means change like from REPUBLICAN to DEMOCRATIC ideas? IDK, don’t really follow politics.
@iamthebella - I agree.
@huginn - Last
I checked, Attorney General, Treasury Secretary and Secretary of State
are Cabinet positions. Those I named in my original comment are being
vetted and considered for Obama’s Cabinet and were either part of
Clinton’s Cabinet, an advisor or a spouse.
Things were better when Clinton was running. The DOW wasn’t losing hundreds of points everyday…the worst terrorist attack didn’t occur…granted, Bush is trying to fix these things, but he’s trying too late. It’s only going to get worse before it gets better and, unfortunately, Obama will be to blame. Even though it isn’t his fault. Restoring things to the way they were when things were good is a good start…and then from there taking us in a different direction is even better.
We need to have faith.
Not surprised.
i like how the president is blamed/credited with the state of the econemy each term, as though trends don’t simply continue
@DirtyAndShaken - Firstly, the best and brightest of the Democrats would have had some association with the Clinton White House. Developing talent usually doesn’t make a concerted effort in avoiding experience and hiding in political backwaters.
So many of the Democrats with ability today, naturally has some connection with the Clinton white house.
Secondly, your argument was that the people named to the Obama cabinet has more than a casual connection to the Clinton White House– that they were involved in Clinton’s decision-making process; and as a result, their naming would introduce the same old policy influences.
The people named so far were not a part of Bill Clinton’s decision-making inner circle. And before you go into your Hillary whine, realize that although Hillary Clinton was the first lady, she was not involved in Bill’s important meetings and decision-making. During the primaries, over 11,000 pages detailing Hillary’s daily schedule was released– and they show that she was somewhere other than in Bill’s critical meeting with advisors.
I reiterate my challenge to you: Name the people named to Obama’s cabinet and explain how these people were critically involved in the decision-making process of the Clinton administration.
Change? That’s all I’m ever gonna have in my pockets no matter who’s in the White House. *sigh*
I didn’t vote for him. This was to be expected. They are all socialists. With a Democrat Congress, we WILL get change. You are NOT going to like it.
People who have experience AND helped America in there time of need not made it worse.
He’s going to need experienced members, and I say that sincerely.
@Defogger - Oh get over it already. It doesn’t matter what good things he does when all you have in your head is negativity. Screw being open minded and positive, eh? Oh, I forgot- that’s not the Republican way.
@Defogger - And we’ll NEVER be a socialist country, so stop with the fear mongering rhetoric already. It’s old, overused and everyone knows it crap anways. Oooh- scary socialist! Booo!
Throwing the word “change” around within a cloud of ambiguity could mean a hundred things to a hundred different people. My reckoning is that a lot of folks want to see an end to ol’ time political corruption, partisanship, pork, and inept policies. New blood or an old guard will neither necessarily bring such “change” to fruition. True leadership might, and that has yet to be tested in our new president-elect. The next few months alone, not simple opinions, will bear this out.
only time will tell. let’s give the guy time to move in and actually do something before we say he’s doing something wrong.
I think he should bring in a mix of both old and new. One thing about Obama that makes this new administration very interesting is that Obama hasn’t necessarily spent enough time in Washington yet to really be “tainted” by old fashioned politics. However, all change is not always good. Some experience will be good in order to know how to handle situations and the history of how protocol occurs, relations with foreign ambassadors, etc.
Bringing in the Clintons will make some people happy–they are liked by many in the US, however they are also not trusted much at all by others.
Personally, I think Hillary is after whatever title she can get, and if that means getting Secretary of State, which makes her close in line for secession of the office of President of the US if God Forbid, those in front of her pass in the line of duty, then she will take it. But, personal feelings aside, it is good to see the former opponents working together for the future business of this country.
@PoetMcChick - honestly, it isn’t all of Bush’s fault either. The terrorist attacks were well in advanced planning before Bush took office, and the DOW falling isn’t necessarily a product of Bush’s administration. There are many other factors to consider, for example: people’s spending habits and responsibility. Also, it takes about 4-8 years after a president leaves office to really see a product of his efforts.
I will say this though, Bush’s efforts of improving education in this country have so far failed miserably and created more problems for educators and students alike.
at least someone in the white house will have some form of experience!
@trunthepaige - why? because he wants to bring in an experienced former Presidential couple with the wifey having brains?
I just think sometimes, the right will say anything to put down Barack before he even sets foot in public office. And that’s wrong.
You might not agree with what he stands for and that’s your God given right. But if things are gonna improve, conservatives have to be willing to give the new President Elect a chance. Support our president.
I also hear he’s working with McCain having productive meetings. Is that also a negative?
If he screws up, then bash him. Sometimes, I think the right would rather our country continue to struggle so they can say, ‘I told ya so.’
@DBF21 - Whatever live your dream. But the disagreement you hear from the right. If you think it even compares to what was thrown at the Bush administration, you’re ignorant or delusional. I have read his promises and plank, and it has not one thing novel or new thing in it.
Can you name a single new idea in it? A real change, not a campaign slogan. Not a rehashed Clinton or Carter idea.
he needs all the experienced help he can get since he is extremely unqualified to be president of the United States of America ! he did lie to us about change. we are sooo screwed .
@trunthepaige - it is what is is. You want to throw out the Clinton Change thing. Fine. I can’t disagree. That was their campaign slogan and at the time it worked.
So, was it redundant? Sure. I think anyone even on our side could see that.
Is he all talk? Right now, yes. Being President is a huge responsibility. It’s about following through on promises. I don’t know how he delivers on all of them. What politician does? The political process isn’t great.
I voted for him. He has some interesting ideas. There’s something about him. He’s a very charismatic person and I feel our country can use a refreshing change.
I don’t know how you can even mention the Bush administration. They made some poor choices.
I hate debating politics because it becomes too personal. I’m not gonna label anyone from the other side anything. Not in my nature.
@trunthepaige - Are there really any new ideas period? The Left has their ideologies and so does the right. Do any of them have any REAL new ideas?
@DBF21 - Politics is not personal at all. You will find yourself far better informed if you learn that. Disagreeing with me is not a personal thing. I don’t take it that way at all. You can be a good guy, a smart guy, and still very wronge in my eyes.
Obama’s ideas are not new ones, they failed under Lindon Johnson and Carter. And Clinton’s most successful polices were Reagan’s ideas.
It would be nice if Obama’s “new ideas” worked on this attempt. But I can see no reason why they will. We will see as he has no excuses
i think mr. obama is a very intelligent man…he knows to keep his friends close but his enemies closer…
@SuperNewman87 - No but the left’s ideas have never worked.
@huginn - that’s not a good analogy, you can fly a Boeing 747 with a new/novice pilot as well as with an old/experience pilot.
@generasianx - that’s not a good analogy, you can fly a Boeing 747 with a new/novice pilot as well as with an old/experience pilot.
Running the White House is a singular job. The mechanisms of the task is to complex and so huge that there will be serious harms with on-the-job training.
The only pilots with any training, in this case, are the staffers from the Clinton administration.
@trunthepaige - We disagree and that’s cool. I do think it can get personal. At the end of the day, all we can do is go about our lives the best we can and hope for the best moving forward.
Hope you enjoy your weekend!
Respectfully,
Derek
LOL..the jokes on the Democrats. What CHANGE is Obama talking about when majority of the OLD Dem. cabinet is materializing again!
that’s kind of an unfair question.
@trunthepaige - Really? Explain.
I’m a conservative moderate, but even I must admit that Clinton and his staff did an incredible job with this country. Obama is very smart to recognize that and bring some of them back. They helped to “fix” this country before, and now, we need it again!
I’m not sure what to think about it but I’m willing to give it a chance because its may be the same administration, but its different times and different situations to handle.
i prefer people with experience. i think we saw what happens when inexperienced people take the reins. Obama himself is the change we need.
He needs all the experience he can get.
cliche as it sounds i think you need a good balance. im not too stoked about the hillary sec of state idea.
Experience is vital for such high-responsibility jobs as this. But, just as important, is ability and good character. So far, by choosing people who are, in essence, the sweepings of the corrupt Clinton Administration, Obama has not only reneged on his loudly avowed “Change” slogan, he has subordinated himself to the Democrat Old Guard. And this two months PRIOR to his inaugeration! What’s additionally ironic is that he’s chosen for his Number One cabinet post the woman who was not only his bitterest rival for power (and still is!) and the one who now commands the Old Guard, but likewise lacks ability, good character AND experience in her new job as well. Of course, Obama himself lacks those factors in HIS new job! God help this country.
New school change doesnt come from old school politicians.
Definitely previous experience.
He will not be able to please all people with whatever decisions he makes. I think experience is great and helpful, but I also am one for starting with a clean slate and NEW ideas and no alliances before you even step into the door.
Hillary Clinton – what on earth was he smoking/drinking? Yikes!! Scary but interesting — kind of like putting metal in a microwave.
I think a mix of old and new would best strike a balance. People doubted his experience and suitability for the presidency before he was elected, and likely will until the day he leaves office, so of course he needs experienced people to make up his cabinet. I’m not saying that the experienced people need to necessarily come from previous administrations, just that they should have good credentials for the posts he appoints them for.
Experienced people…but not necessarily from the Clinton administration.
I would prefer that it not be Hillary, whoever it is.
Buh. Obama, you are disappointing me.