Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Wag the Blog Redux: Is the Obama Cabinet Too Conservative?

In last week's Wag the Blog, we asked you to weigh in on the question of whether President-elect Barack Obama's Cabinet picks were too conservative for a candidate who ran on a progressive agenda.

Earlier that week, Steve Hildebrand -- a key field general in Obama's presidential campaign -- responded aggressively to criticism from the liberal commentariat when he asked that the left dial it back and let Obama make the picks he wanted.

In the time since we wrote the post, Obama has nearly filled out his entire Cabinet -- today naming former former Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack as his pick to head the Agriculture Department and Colorado Sen. Ken Salazar as the new boss of Interior. (Both Vilsack and Salazar are moderates.)

The majority of respondents said they did not believe Obama's cabinet is too conservative although that attitude may have changed with his picks over the past week. The most insightful thoughts -- culled by post.com politics producer Sarah Lovenheim -- are below. The conversation continues in the comments section.

Uniform and Biz-Friendly Choices

"It is not too conservative for me... I am gratified that he has shown respect for the uniformed services with the Jones and Shinseki choices. Keeping Gates is what I hoped he would do. Chu is potentially a blockbuster choice. Richardson at Commerce is the most biz-friendly D Gov in America, and knows the foreign players, as well..." -- mark_in_austin

They're Not Too Conservative; They're Too Conventional

"The problem with the cabinet isn't just that it is too conservative, it is that it is too conventional. We had a chance to vote for experience in both the primary and general elections and we didn't. We voted for change. We could have gotten this cabinet by voting for Clinton - and some of them by voting for McCain. I feel like the country took a risk by voting for someone with such limited experience and we are not getting paid back for it..." --jenn1967

It's Too Early to Tell

Obama and his Cabinet have yet to take their offices; none have made a single decision or policy, thus, it's impossible to judge the political bent of Obama and his cabinet...-- txgall

The Right People, The Wrong Ideas

"It's not that Obama's economic and foreign policy appointments are too conservative, it is that they are people who were wrong on the principle issues of our time: the war and deregulation. An anti-Iraq war conservative like Hagel at defense would be better than Gates; an anti-deregulation economic advisor like Stiglitz or Galbraith would be better than Summers; etc. Obama seems to be rewarding failure and punishing success..." --thurgle

Too Conservative? Some Selections Are Left-Leaning

"While I think it is completely true that Obama's early cabinet picks all reflected a moderate standpoint (with maybe the exception of Holder as the AG), his appointments since his national security team and economic team have all been a series of left of center leaders. Think about his picks for his health care team, his environmental and energy policy teams, and his head of veteran affairs...As a progressive, I am very impressed. " -- thescuspeaks

By Washington Post editors  |  December 17, 2008; 7:00 PM ET
Categories:  Wag The Blog  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: 2010: The Year of the Dynasty?
Next: The Denouement of Howard Dean?

Comments

I don't really understand those who are complaining that Obama's team choices represent no change.

Every person up there is:
1. more than competent as well as qualified
2. used to thinking outside the box
3. noted for results
4. NOT a frat brother or good buddy of Obama's

HOW MUCH MORE CHANGE DO YOU WANT?

The American public hasn't seen any of these characteristics in the crowd of Bush's rabble (well, may be Condoleeza Rice, but she's an exception).

I'm hopeful and getting excited about the future, feelings I haven't had for eight years.

Posted by: sboulaisforfun | December 21, 2008 10:32 PM | Report abuse

Interestingly, this is the only place I've seen nonsense about the Cabinet being too conservative. Perhaps Chris should, occasionally, travel further than Dupont Circle to get opinions. In the real world, it hasn't been raised. I've served many years as an elected Democrat in a small city. My bias tends toward, actually, getting the system to work. It allows me even to work with enemies. And, after an election, governing is very difficult if one tries to be dogmatic.

Some of the appointments are a bit to the right and a bit to the left of me. Most are right about in the center of the Democratic Party. And, some of the more "illiberal liberals" in the Democratic Party may be willing to accept the labeling that the {Thank You Bill Moyers for this one!}Reptillian Right talking heads, such as Limbaugh & Hannity, attempted to hang on our Party. However, it's the Democratic Party. If the illiberal liberal members don't like that, there is a Liberal Party out there for them. Go in Peace.

The only questions we need to be asking are: Can they fix the broken parts fairly quickly? & Can they put aside their own opinions often enough to make the damn thing work? The only two I find worrisome in the appointments are Jackson and Clinton. Neither is in the top slot. And, over the years, their report cards would have read, "Brilliant! But, doesn't play well with the other children." So we'll just have to wait and see. Won't we?

Posted by: JohninConnecticut | December 19, 2008 7:37 AM | Report abuse

I am still behind Obama 100%, but some of the choices are a little odd.Not by party affiliation or schooling, just by each individuals own experience.
Gates by far is possibly the smartest move anyone could have made.Being in the middle of a restructuring and house cleaning from the cRummy years has been quite an undertaking, and replacing him would have been quite a step in the difficult direction.
I do get the idea behind most of his picks, though.If you look at the collaboration of positions and people, he will have a very active and involved staff,not the run of "Yessir's" we've seen in years gone by.And unlike our current administration, I beleive he is hiring the people he knows he wont have to micro-manage to get the new agenda moving and working in the right direction.
Brilliant?? Possibly!!!I think the main campaign pledge was HOPE, and I see a ton of Hopeful intelligence in his staff, lets keep hopeing it will work.

Posted by: mullett | December 18, 2008 9:15 PM | Report abuse

La Hood was a strange pick since he was going to retire anyway. If we have to have Republicans from Congress in the Cabinet why not force the said Republican to make a hard decision between screwing the People over in Congress or in the Cabinet? Either way Republicans are bad for America. We should have thinned their ranks by dragging them out of Congress and putting them in some symbolic post. This whole idea of bipartisanship and reaching across the aisle only works if the other side does the same thing. So far that has not happened. Republicans have tried to tie Obama to Rod Blagoyevich, to make Obama seem like a conventional Chicago pol. This is an outrage, the Republicans shouldn't then be rewarded with a Cabinet appointment!

Posted by: jmr862003 | December 18, 2008 8:15 PM | Report abuse

Nevadaandy - I have always agreed with your posts, but this one bears re-posting:

"Conservative, Moderate, Liberal these terms are irrelevant empty words today.

What matters is that Obama makes the right decisions that puts America back on a path of economic stability and growth, as well as ensuring our national security. That's the problem with Americans - they need to put everyone and every idea into a category and that causes major problems. Why can't we just look at a person and a solution to a problem and make a judgment based on the quality of the person or the idea?"

I find this especially interesting today, when a friend of mine from Denmark asked me why Americans always have to compare people or put them in boxes. And I noticed that I do this - "oh, he looks like so and so" Or - "he doesn't act like he's gay" etc.

Pragmatism is the word of the day. Obama's choices have been pragmatic. Exactly what we need!

Posted by: sheridan1 | December 18, 2008 8:15 PM | Report abuse

Karl Rove's successes will outlast the failures of Bush if Democrats continue to act like Republicans.

Posted by: jpantona | December 18, 2008 7:42 PM | Report abuse

I do think the cabinet is too conservative. In the tradition of the Shock Doctrine, I think it was a good time to leap to the Progressive bent. Oh well. I will be interested to see if he can impose change on a Cabinet that is an echo of the one he replaced. Maybe Karl Rove was more successful than George Bush... he did get his permanent majority if Democrats are going to act like Republicans.

Posted by: jpantona | December 18, 2008 7:39 PM | Report abuse

The only truly foul choice Obama has made is a symbolic one: the selection of Rick Warren for the invocation on January 20. This anti-choice, anti-woman, anti-gay person is *not* whom Obama should be seeking to give his literal blessing on the inauguration.

What do you call a woman who is forced to bear children on someone else's orders, not by choice?

You call her a slave.

What do you call someone who decrees that this adult person shall not marry that adult person because of some physical characteristic?

In 1967, you call them a racist.
In 2008, you call them an anti-gay lout.
On January 20, 2009, you call him Rick Warren.

Heaven only knows what's going to come out of this man's mouth, a man who rejects the full humanity of 10% of the population for their orientation, and 53% of the population for their gender. When saying grace is such a diss, what can we call it but disgrace?

Posted by: ankhorite | December 18, 2008 4:37 PM | Report abuse

"I know we do not receive tee-shirts for being "reduxed", but I never received the tee-shirt I actually won, so I thought I would remind you. The week that I won, I shared victory with AsperGirl - AG, did you ever receive your tee?"

Posted by: mark_in_austin | December 17, 2008 10:16 PM

Hell no, Mark. God knows that's the only reason I've been posting for 12 months! I check the mail every day for my "Fix" t-shirt, and then come away crestfallen.

Posted by: AsperGirl | December 18, 2008 4:34 PM | Report abuse

Trust the True Believers to kick themselves in the collective a$$ after wining an enormous opportunity. We've run out of time to listen to the purists who look endlessly for any failure to maintain ideology above all. These are the folks who gave us Presidents Mondale, Dukakis and Kerry and all they accomplished. I'll take inclusion any day.

Posted by: FlownOver | December 18, 2008 4:22 PM | Report abuse


It's too early to say, but I think Barack Obama has a very good pick in his cabinet.

Posted by: akber_kassam | December 18, 2008 4:05 PM | Report abuse

Now that we have a secretary of transportation, I do believe the only post not filled is Secretary of Labor. That ought to tell you something. Those of us that voted for change had better keep Obama's feet to the fire or this administration will be "Bush Light" before we know it. Too many so-called "moderates" in this cabinet and nobody to speak up for the little guy. Guess who will be left in an "undisclosed secret location" when Obama does his first State of the Union speech. My guess is it will be the yet to be named secretary of labor.

Posted by: Opa2 | December 18, 2008 3:13 PM | Report abuse


"So, I operate a limousine service in Denver. During the DNC, I moved around a number of delegates. At one point, I was moving a New York senator. He had a brief encounter with Obama. I was standing 10 feet away. And, Obama tells this senator, "If we win, the white man will never recover!" Are you kidding me?!?!?!?!

Posted by: hyperduc1100s "

Right, he tells a white Senator the white man will never recover. Geez, if your going to lie, at least tell a believable lie.....like you actually drive a cab or, you know where Denver is.

Posted by: Thatsnuts | December 18, 2008 2:33 PM | Report abuse

As a Hillary Clinton supporter, I really like most of his cabinet choices except Richardson the Judas! :) Ha, ha.

Yes, this is the type of cabinet Hillary would have picked and she's in one of the top posts so, I'm satisfied.

To the loony left of the left I say to you.
You've been PUNKED!

Posted by: myopinion3 | December 18, 2008 2:31 PM | Report abuse

The cabinet was a disaster the second he chose Rahm Emanuel

Posted by: torro67 | December 18, 2008 2:08 PM | Report abuse

I'm from the Denver area, and I've actually met Ken Salazar a couple of times. I'm a little disappointed with him being picked, nit because I think he won't be a good steward of the country's natural resources, but because I was really looking forward to him doing more in the senate, where I think he belongs, representing Colorado. Hearing now that Hinckenlooper is being looked at for the replacement, I'm a little more worried, because I've also met him a couple times. He's doing a good job for the city of Denver, and I think that we need him in the mayoral role. Granted, it's not as shiny and special as US Senator, but I think it's better for Denver. In sum, I feel like Colorado's got a whole new challenge of getting good leadership and good representation for -=our=- interests, and managing the issues of our urban locale. I thought we had exactly this, but I don't know how long it'll take to evaluate and make-ready other office-holders that I'll feel as good about trusting.

Posted by: ninjagin | December 18, 2008 2:02 PM | Report abuse

"Obama is slowly coming around to the "right" way of thinking!"

This is the exact way he's thought all along, anyone who was truly paying attention, reading his books, and listening to his speeches going back to the 1990s would have understood that. Both sides, for their own purposes, ignored that during the campaign.

Posted by: kreuz_missile | December 18, 2008 1:50 PM | Report abuse

Straightline wrote:


Now as President Elect Obama is finally beginning to see the world as it really is and not the moon-bat fantasy world! Maybe he never was really an uber liberal.....

With Gates and Lahood (unfortunately from Illinois) and top it off Rick Warren givin the invocation?. Knock me over with a feather...maybe he really is reaching out to All Americans and not just the loony left as they hoped.

Obama is slowly coming around to the "right" way of thinking!

Posted by: Straightline | December 18, 2008 1:09 PM | Report abuse

I think Obama understands that most voters are middle of the road politically. He is trying to appeal to the vast majority of voters and is trying to isolate the far right of the Republican Party by getting afew moderate Repubs to vote with the Democrats in the Senate. Obama also understands that the Blue Dog Democrats wield cosiderable power on Capital hill and compromise will be necessary! Obama's cabinet picks reflect these realities. The left must be patient and understand that they will get some things they want but they do not have the power to get all that they want.

Posted by: eskieville | December 18, 2008 1:09 PM | Report abuse

I agree with teddi_ohio, Conservative, Moderate, Liberal these terms are irrelevant empty words today.

What matters is that Obama makes the right decisions that puts America back on a path of economic stability and growth, as well as ensuring our national security. That's the problem with Americans - they need to put everyone and every idea into a category and that causes major problems. Why can't we just look at a person and a solution to a problem and make a judgment based on the quality of the person or the idea?

Seems like Obama is taking an interdisciplinary approach to solving our problems. There are things that each agency does that can impact the work of other agencies and by working together all the agencies can help to rebuild our economy and ensure our national security. Obama promised change and we are seeing it in how these cabinet agencies will be working together and not competing against each other. Obama has a thoughtful and pragmatic approach of solving problems and this is a refreshing change from past, and one that is sorely needed in these troubling times.

Posted by: Nevadaandy | December 18, 2008 12:07 PM | Report abuse

McCain was wrong, and Obama's picks prove it. He acutely comprehends the difference between strategy and tactics. You are watching a masterful tactician at work implementing a truly bold strategy.

Posted by: nodebris | December 18, 2008 11:59 AM | Report abuse

But appointing Slazar gets one of the "Gang of 14" out of the senate, and allows Ritter to appoint someone without that record (and thus the freedom to be more supportive of Obama's agenda) and more progressive that would still be a strong candidate in 2010, like Perlmutter or Hickenlooper. It's not just about the cabinet, it's about savvy politics all around (same goes for Lahood in Illinois- remving a possible candidate for statewide office and putting a moderate congressional seat in play). Look at the big picture, not just their narrow roles in the Cabinet.

Posted by: kreuz_missile | December 18, 2008 11:06 AM | Report abuse

fr3dmars writes
"Up until Salazar and Vilsack... I thought he'd done fairly well. "


I agree. I'm skeptical about Salazar and disappointed in the Vilsack pick.

Posted by: bsimon1 | December 18, 2008 10:49 AM | Report abuse

37th and 0's a troll, period. Giving him/her any attention only helps to give him/her a forum. Ignore 37th and 0 (other than his/her supporters, and even in that it's possible to do them as well), 37th and 0 will become frustrated and leave.

Posted by: SGall23241 | December 18, 2008 10:45 AM | Report abuse

Obama cannot and will not manage every decision that his subordinates make.

But ultimately, policy flows from the Oval Office out to the Cabinet agencies, whether it is specific or so vague that a Secretary feels empowered to do whatever he or she pleases.

Many of the FAA's employees feel like Ray LaHood's appointment constitutes a betrayal of labor, but I don't see it that way - yet. It makes sense to choose a Republican with whom Barack Obama and Rahm Emanuel are friendly, a Republican who will have to defend Democratic policies and requests for funding to a naturally skeptical Senate minority. If Obama's speeches concerning infrastructure hold true, he will be the most requested presence before the Senate over the next four years, other than maybe Steven Chu.

And in the meanwhile, if Obama indicates that his FAA Administrator should tear up the work rules they imposed with a loophole two years ago, and bargain in good faith, I doubt Ray LaHood will obstruct him.

It's easy to forget that he hasn't taken office yet. All my fellow Obama voters should wait until they have reason to complain.

Posted by: jthompsonxfaa | December 18, 2008 9:28 AM | Report abuse

It's been out there for months, crackpots:

http://fightthesmears.com/articles/5/birthcertificate

Posted by: kreuz_missile | December 18, 2008 8:46 AM | Report abuse

37thandORulesForever, I posted this yesterday, with shockingly no response-

So, at 9 mos pregnant, Obama's mother boarded a plane, flew halfway around the world to give birth in a third world country, immediately flew back to the US, and posted a fake birth announcement in the Honolulu newspaper on the off chance that that child would one day run for President? C'mon. Lumnping this charge in with the others you consistently make here just takes away from the credibility of other statements by moving you into tin foil hat territory.

Here's an idea, how about you find Obama's mother's passport with the stamp showing that she went to Kenya, or the airline information for the flights. You know, actual evidence something happened, rather than asking to disprove an idiotic hypothesis. You've got the birth certificate, you've got the newspaper announcement, and you've got zero evidence he either renounced his citizenship or was naturalized in any other country other than a few farfetched what ifs.

Now back to the thread at hand. No, it isn't too conservative, and anyone who thinks it is wasn't paying attention during the campaign. Republicans made Obama out to be a radical, and some on the far left hoped in his remarks that he was, but the Change Obama consistently talked about was a break from the bitter partisanship of the past and bringing people with different ideas together for the common good. He promised to put Republicans in the cabinet (multiple, note), he has. He made clear he would never act in spite towards those with opposing views, he has not. His cabinet selections have been all about competence first (name one on that cabinet who isn't more than qualified for the position), diversity of opinion second, diversity of background third, ensuring all of America is represented and has a stake in the administration. It's exactly what he set out from the beginning of his campaign to do, and it's what we should hope for in any administration.

Posted by: kreuz_missile | December 18, 2008 8:40 AM | Report abuse

I think the whole of his administration will tell whether he is left-leaning more than any one individual pick.

BUT, he was elected and now expects everyone to recognize him as our leader. He is not just the leader of the liberals who originally "found" and elevated him.

If he expects to be effective he will seek out views from all sides and move forward from there.

Posted by: RedBird27 | December 18, 2008 8:23 AM | Report abuse

Chris Cillizza - You wrote "... whether President-elect Barack Obama's Cabinet picks were too conservative for a candidate who ran on a progressive agenda."

What a Joke. Obama ran on Hope and Change. For most of the 2 years he stayed away as far as possible from his Liberal Extremist Roots. As you call "progressive". The Fact is if Obama would have run entirely under a "progressive" Liberal Extremist agenda, he wouldn't have had a chance. The fact that you even mention Conservative with the bunch of screaming whining Liberal extremists that are in key positions is a Joke. If you or your blog readers think that there is anything to conservative about this Adminstration, you have to be straight up Communists. A Communist would think that a Socialist was to Conservative.

Posted by: ignoranceisbliss | December 18, 2008 8:10 AM | Report abuse

So,is the Sleazy Chicago Con Artitst Fake
Messiah Affirmative Action President Elect
Barack Hussein Obama the best this poor new
Third World Country,that the Democrat Controlled Congress and Democratic Party can come up with for President of the US?

If,so then we are in deep trouble in deed as Obama's election only goes to prove that
PT Barnum was right about "there is a sucker born every minute" and oh boy did
the American people ever become a big bunch
of suckers that fell for Obama's Chicago
con job and mistakenly think that this totally incompetent,no accomplishment,no
experience,phony sleazy Chicago politican
thug will wave his magic wand and read a
few words from his magic teleprompter and
so they can all go prostate theirselves at
Obama feet and worship their new God will
save them. What a joke!

Posted by: sherrykay2008 | December 18, 2008 7:54 AM | Report abuse

"If there is no problem, why doesn't he just produce the documenation? 37th and 0"

37th, we have had this discussion before. Please tell me what court of law has demanded the President Elect turn over such documentation that YOU think necessary. No, let me answer the question. There is no case of any merit whatsoever brought in any American court challenging the President Elect on this issue. The answer is very simple. The Federal and Hawaii State government have provided all the proof necessary for reasonable people to conclude this isn't an issue with substance.

Why not grace us all with the objective proof you surely must have that shows we have been subjected to a hoax...Now don't go cutting and pasting again as non of that is evidence YOU have developed. Send something real. Otherwise dry up, grow up and get involved in life again.

Posted by: Thatsnuts | December 18, 2008 7:38 AM | Report abuse

Caveat emptor. All during the primary, I wondered what liberals saw in Obama. The Republicans created a great fiction which his supporters apparently believed that he was the most liberal member of the Senate. Anyone who follows politics or views C-SPAN can immediately name ten more liberal senators.

Up to now we are getting Bill Clinton without the sex. The DLC and blue dog democrats will control the new administration.

Let us hope that Obama grows in office.

Posted by: Desertstraw | December 18, 2008 6:33 AM | Report abuse

I don’t find the picks odd at all. Obama picked in some cases people that claimed he was not the best candidate. Now these people have to prove their worth! And now when BUSH’s rule is over, we will have the chance to see what type of leader Obama can be in the White House.
Now the very folks that did not like Bush will have the chance to work under someone they both criticized and align themselves with.
I cannot wait to see how this President will be different from the last.
Bush worked with people he chose and in the end most of them have admitted having great fundamental problems with him and his decisions making.
I think Obama is prepared to lead!

Posted by: vicbennettnet | December 18, 2008 4:23 AM | Report abuse

I would not characterize Barack's choices of key advisers as being "too conservative." However, there definitely have been few progressives or liberals chosen. This does seem odd and contradictory for a candidate who had one of the most liberal voting records in the Senate, campaigned on a mostly progressive domestic agenda and promised significant changes, if elected.

Ronald Reagan had a few very strongly held generally conservative beliefs when he was elected president. Yet most of the key advisers during his first term were moderates. Some conservatives became frustrated with the influence of these centrist advisers upon Reagan and called upon "Reagan to be Reagan." It is too early, yet within a year or two, some progressives may be calling upon Obama to be Obama.

Posted by: Aprogressiveindependent | December 18, 2008 3:43 AM | Report abuse

too white, too male, too straight, too young, too chicago/nyc-centric, and, yes, too conservative.

Posted by: cprach | December 18, 2008 12:46 AM | Report abuse

The telling tale is that Congressman Gryjalas was passed over for Interior in favor of Salazar who is considered "moderate" (read business oriented) when it comes to Interior. Gryjalas was considered too far to the left.He wanted to save the environment first and worry about business later. I guess we will continue to mine for uranium next to the Grand Canyon since Salazar is nothing more than "Bush Light" when it comes to the environment. This guy (Obama) will never be confused with Bush but you wonder about some of the people he has chosen to work for him. Let's see what happens but those of us who wanted change should not expect it to happen without us keeping pushing for it. This whole administration could be sucked up into "saving the economy" and at the end of four years we have nothing but a return to where we were six months ago. Yes the economy is good again but for the rest nothing has changed. That's not what I voted for and I doubt that is what the country voted for.

Posted by: Opa2 | December 18, 2008 12:29 AM | Report abuse

So, I operate a limousine service in Denver. During the DNC, I moved around a number of delegates. At one point, I was moving a New York senator. He had a brief encounter with Obama. I was standing 10 feet away. And, Obama tells this senator, "If we win, the white man will never recover!" Are you kidding me?!?!?!?!

Posted by: hyperduc1100s | December 17, 2008 11:05 PM | Report abuse

AJAX2


What is the big deal about the documentation? Obama has to produce it.


One possibility about the college transcripts:


They could list Obama as a foreign student, perhaps a citizen of Indonesia -


If there is no problem, why doesn't he just produce the documenation?

.


.

.

Posted by: 37thandORulesForever | December 17, 2008 11:00 PM | Report abuse


Join Exploding Demand For Citizenship Documentation

Obama has not and refuses to prove to America that he is eligible as a “natural born citizen,” as required by Article II, Section I of the U.S. Constitution to be President of the United States. Instead Obama has had three law firms (firms, not lawyers) on retainer since the day he was elected to public office and throughout his presidential campaign to make sure that the public does not get access to his birth records in Hawaii or his college transcripts from Occidental College and Harvard.

The question of Obamas' eligibility MUST be pursued because if Obama turns out to be nothing but an usurper acting in the guise of “the President,” Obama will not constitutionally be the “Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States”(see Article II, Section 2, Clause 1). Therefore, he will be entitled to no obedience whatsoever from anyone in those forces. Indeed, for officers or men to follow any of his purported “orders” will constitute a serious breach of military discipline—and in extreme circumstances perhaps even “war crimes.” In addition, no one in any civilian agency in the Executive Branch of the General Government will be required to put into effect any of Obama’s purported “proclamations,”“executive orders,” or “directives.”

To participate, sign the petition here:

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=83116

Posted by: AJAX2 | December 17, 2008 10:51 PM | Report abuse

Conservative, Moderate, Liberal these terms are irrelevant empty words today.

Are Obama's picks free marketers or free market fanatics like the republicans & Bush? That is all that matters in determining if we will have four more years of an elitist, corporate welfare oriented, corporate oligharchy. Is it to much to ask you Chris to state this or have other Washington Post reporters mention this fact about appointee's.

Will we have more corporate run government-corporate partnerships that have so badly subverted our constitutional republic and the power of the people?
Is Obama all smoke and mirrors like the free market republicans-says one thing and does another. Because both political parties put the free market system before the constitution-this is the most important information about a candidate for office. Thank you.

Posted by: teddi_ohio | December 17, 2008 10:20 PM | Report abuse

I know we do not receive tee-shirts for being "reduxed", but I never received the tee-shirt I actually won, so I thought I would remind you. The week that I won, I shared victory with AsperGirl - AG, did you ever receive your tee?

Posted by: mark_in_austin | December 17, 2008 10:16 PM | Report abuse

.

.

.

.


IN the interests of fairness, if the Washington Post is going to put together a classified that only says positive things about Obama, it should have a Counter-Classified which only says negative things about Obama.


What is going on ???


.

.

.

.

Posted by: 37thandORulesForever | December 17, 2008 9:57 PM | Report abuse

Up until Salazar and Vilsack and now LaHood, I thought he'd done fairly well. There's a bloody of mountain of work to do to undone the profound regulatory damage that the Bushoids have threatened the environment with in Interior and Ag - and neither of those nominees has the experience to dig out the skeletons and move forward rationally - VERY BAD choices. LaHood is a conservative hack and will have too much power if Obama goes through with his infrastructure promises.

If the man is showing signs of transition burnout in these choices, he ain't seen nothing yet. I remain hopeful, but concerns are growing.

Posted by: fr3dmars | December 17, 2008 9:03 PM | Report abuse

Ignoring 37's gayly spinning question... CC, please do consider doing a re-redux in about six months. By then, this will be an interesting question...


Posted by: Kili | December 17, 2008 8:22 PM | Report abuse

.

.

.

.


The question should be: Is the Affirmative Action Cabinet the best that can be chosen?


How much is this nation falling short to place the Affirmative Action cabinet in place?

The next question is: Is this cabinet POSTPARTISAN ??? Did Obama chose these people without regard for their party???

The next question is: Is this cabinet POSTRACIAL ??? Did Obama chose his cabinet in a color-blind manner - without regard for the color of one's skin or gender???

These are the standards Obama set for himself. Obama is a complete failure - the handwriting is on the wall.


.

.

.

.

Posted by: 37thandORulesForever | December 17, 2008 7:41 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company