The Note: Obama Leans on Insiders in Choosing Team

He lied>>>>>>>>>>>Pure and simple he lied…Same ole—- say anything to get in office then to hell with the people.No change as of yet and one outsider is NOT change.

Penny Pritzger for Commerce?
Can’t we have a Secretary of Commerce who hasn’t presided over a failed bank and isn’t beholding to the big money Chicago polls? Is this the change or the hope? I have to confess that I am very confused.

It shows how gullible Americans are and how Obama hoodwinked the generation. Younger generation I don’t care because Clinton devised the policies for them to go big, Big house, big cars and No job . No problem. Now younger Obama will drown the good old America.

I’m enough of an Independent (or a Constitutionalist, really, seeing as I believe mostly in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, rather than any major political party) to neither accept nor deny Obama’s current actions as indicating whether or not he really will bring change.
While I do believe strongly in experience-based promotion, I’m not entirely sure what the change Obama proposes is going to be. Admittedly, it does seem a bit bad that he’s looking to D.C. for his help right away… and his voting record, if I understand it correctly, is something like 98% with his party… so you could say the ‘change’ is from Republican to Democrat. I don’t seem to recall him saying what the change he proposed actually was, but I didn’t follow his campaign too closely, so it’s possible I missed it.
My point? The fact that he’s getting D.C. insiders is not proof that he’s not going to change things, but it isn’t a great start, either. But I’m going to wait and see what his first few policies once in office are before I judge him. Maybe he’ll do something useful like fix our meatpacking industry or give rights to people in Guantanamo. He’s certainly good with PR.

Have faith in his choices and pray they are the right ones.
Sorry, Lola. Nothing to see so far but Clinton era reruns and payoffs to insiders. Gee. Who knew? When does the change start? Soon, I hope …. either that or you’d better wake up and smell that burnt coffee.

HE SWINDLED YOU SUCKERS.
SO MUCH FOR CHANGE. BIDEN SHOULD HAVE BEEN THE FIRST CLUE HE WAS JUST TALKING OUT THE SIDE OF HIS MOUTH. BIDEN HAS MORE WASHINGTON GOOD OLD BOY EXPERIENCE THEN McCAIN, OBAMA & PALIN PUT TOGETHER. ENJOY YOUR DECISION SUCKERS AND ENJOY KNOWING YOU WERE PLAYED!!!!!

Now here is a real surprise, those who did not vote for Obama criticizing him before he even takes the oath of office. Whereas those of us who did vote for and support him will give him the time all new Presidents are afforded. Picking someone with a great deal of experience with a change agent at the top is not the same old thing. Many people are very capable of accomplishing whatever needs to be done with the person at the top setting the direction. Let’s wait and see. He is our President for at least the next four years and my bet is that in eight years we will be sorry to see him go.

Oh my God you people really don’t have any insight do you? McCain had an ad about experience.It is somewhat true.There are a lot of problems that need to be fixed and they will be fixed starting in Washington.Now Obama will bring new faces, but are you serious?We need people who actually know what they are doing or would you rather him bring in every one that lives on the Southside of Chicago.The problems our country has is like open heart surgery.Now it is very necessary that the new doctors are involved in the process, but tell me what moron would want all the experienced doctors to leave the room at that critical time? Think!

lola: you don’t get it. These Washington insiders DO NOT KNOW what is expected because they are all part of the good ‘old boys Washington network. This is the point. Obama – in no uncertain terms ran a campaign on “Changing business as usual in Washington”. How can you change business as usual when you have all the same businessmen working for you?
learningisjoy: wake up. Snap out of the trance already and see you that the only difference between him and any other politician is the color of his skin.

Why didn’t we just elect Hillary Clinton and thenn Bill Clinton could have run the show. Obama made us believe he would change, change the tone in Washington – well he had not and he want – all he ever did was stay on message and bash George Bush – if you think about it – he never really said what he would change – and we believed him. Well, we will not believe him in 2012 and will elect change we can believe in. We hope he does elect Hillary – she ran Bill Clinton’s life and she will run Obama’s lie. What about poor Bill Richardson that was called a traitor for endorsing him – I bet he wish he could take back that back.

McInsane: have you lost your McMind? First is trust. How can we trust him to do anything he promised like Moses on the mountain that he would do if he promised to change so, so much and yet it looks like another 4 years for the Clinton administration and the capitol hill gang? Second, do you think he’ll operate in a vacuum? Do you think he has the experience to do that? These people will BE his policies. The “stuff” you refer to should be whats best for America but with so many career politicians in his administration it will just be what’s best for them. McOut.

Don, there has already been huge change. People are hopeful, the world is hopeful, we have an intelligent president who isn’t just out to help his big oil buddies by starting a useless war.
Just because he has SOME of the same people in his cabinet doesn’t mean it’s going to operate the exact same way. Let’s give him a chance.
He’s already said he’s going to close guantanamo, that’s a huge change.
He’s already said he will stop allowing torture, that’s a huge change too.
Don’t worry, there WILL be big changes no matter who he picks in his cabinet.

When are people going to realize, that all this focus on what Pres-Elect Obama’s appointments mean, is just more media hype?
Generally, since Clinton was the only Dem President, in close to 30 years, his pool of talent is where Obama had to look, for experience.
What these appointments say about Obama, is that experience is very important to him, with the mess this Country is in right now.
It doesn’t suggest anything about Obama’s policy decisions, since he’ll be in charge of policy, not his appointees.
It will be their job to implement his policies. He made this clear during his campaign, even when it comes to military affairs… that he’ll take advice from Generals, but as Commander-in-Chief he sets the policy, and goals, and the military implements it.
So, chill. This immediate gratification thing, that everyone wants to know the future before it happens, is crazy.
We’re just going to have to wait, and see what Pres-Elect Obama does.

McInsane: it seems you’ve set the bar pretty low if you feel there has already been “Huge” change. Intelligence is the least we need from our president. Everyone is intelligent. What we need is integrity, character, wisdom and respect for his role and the rule of law. It doesn’t matter what Obama does, folks like you will make – irrational – excusses for him and in 4 years time will be calling for “Change” yet again. He’s already said that is going to …. and? So? What else has he said he’s going to do and not yet done? Don’t get me wrong. I’m not a McCain/Palin supporter. That dynamic duo was a big joke. I just see Obama-man for what he is: another self serving politician who happens to be black.

Apparently a lot of people were right. He doesn’t have the experience to do the job or he wouldn’t be appointing all the same old people that have already run this country into the ground. Liar, liar, pants on fire. Change? Looks like more of the same to me.

Don, I’ll meet you half way and admit that I would prefer less washington insiders.
That being said, he hasn’t finished picking his cabinet. In fact he’s barely started.
I’m not surprised by his choices though. He does need people who know washington and can get things done. Even if his agenda is one of change. Jimmy Carter proved this when he got all outsiders for his cabinet.
Let’s take a step back and see what happens. Give him the first 100 days to see if things are changing.

Okay for those of you that disagree with the choices Obama has made thus far.Would you say that our economy is in bad shape?Would you say that there are problems in health care, education, our standing in the world, our troop presense.Would it be okay to liken the work that needs to be done to all of these issues to open heart surgery.Okay if i can. Now it is fine and necessary that new doctors participate in that critical, delicate and skilled procedure.Answer this.What person in their right mind would not want experienced doctors in the room involved in the process?

TV: I totally agree with your experience scenarios. So, I take it you voted for McCain?
And while we’re talking about experience, how does Pritzker’s experiences with driving a bank into insolvency shore up confidence in the Secretary of Commerce elect?

YOU HIRE THE SAME PEOPLE AND EXPECT A TOTLLY DIFFERNT OUTCOME??????? YOU SAY THEY HAVE EXPERIENCE. YES THEY DO AND THAT EXPERIENCE IS WHAT DETERMINES THE SOLUTIONS THE ARRIVE AT, SO THEIR SOLUTION WILL LOOK THE SAME AS THE DID IN THE PAST. THEY SAID MORE OF BUSH??? HOW ABOUT MORE OF CLINTON?

Jim Cummings, More of Clinton would be a breath of fresh air compared to what we got the past 8 years. However, I believe that we will see some huge changes even compared to the clinton years. Only about 50% of his cabinet so far is from the clinton years and he still has a lot more picks to make.

Forget about cabinet. Pay some goddamnit attention to the economy. This bonehead has generated no confidence whatsoever, tanking the market by 40% since he was elected. Everyone who knows anything about the economy knows this bonehead knows nothing about economy except money giveaways.
Hillary, Pleeeeease, please come out and take the SOS. Even economy is not SOS responsibility, she can still gain confidence for not allowing this bonehead to mess things up.

Yeah McSane. Clinton would be a breath of fresh air. I LOVED all of the scandals. All the lies. The Computers to China. Donations from China. Gore using government resources for donations. Being played the fool by North Korea. 3 terrorist actions on the USA with no action. Passing on Osama. Hillary throwing a lamp at Bill. The recession he handed Bush. I guess it is only fair Bush hands Clinton II a recession too. Let’s see if do nothing Obama will be able to fix it.

Obama will just be a foot note president that nobody will remember in 25 years. He will do nothing and solve nothing. Just sit there and hold a chapter in the pres book. Don’t get me wrong. He’ll be a nice guy, but he will do nothing of value for the country.

I am still waiting for one of you 0bama supporters to explain how Pritzker’s experience with a bank’s insolvency and sub-prime mess make her the best possible selection as the Secretary of Commerce? Is she going to sell what is left of the country to raise money for his next campaign? WAKE UP!!!! He’s paying off his supporters.

During the campaign period a lot of folks doubted Obama’s experience to be the country’s president. Now that he is choosing experienced leaders who can help him ransom the country from the economic crunch,
Posted by: Da cinto | Nov 20, 2008 10:33:08 AM
—————
Are you all morons?! Why didn’t you elect someone who is experience and has the confidence of Wall Street, which, by the way, is not a bad word and which drives the economy and fills in your pocket with cash.

What did all you sore losers expect? Maybe you’d have been happier with the results of this election’s landslide turnout if the president elect’s choices were all Republicans. Or would a cast of never heard of Chicago insiders with no knowledge of how to make things happen in D.C. have made you chuckle knowing the ineffectiveness of such a gambit? That’s part of the change you’re going to see under President Obama: Doing things the right way regardless of what a bunch of pathetic whiners/crybaby finger pointers might try to insinuate. After the last eight horrendous years of GOP control, how many Democrats with executive branch expertise do you expect anybody to come up with, without tapping the last Democratic administration for good and capable people? Face it: executive branch experience from the Carter administration is generally over the hill at this point and those that are being brought on board from Clinton’s administration know that working for President Obama will be a whole different ball game than for President Clinton. At least give him a chance to be the one President that we’re alloted before you start the political name calling and dirt throwing, didn’t the election provide you with more than enough of that already? I say stand behind the people’s choice 100%: Maybe in the next eight years you’ll have sufficient opportunities to find something real to bitch about. gOBAMA!

beebop,
If he wants to pay back his supporters, I have no issue with that. President’s of every party in history have done that.
This difference here is he ran on a campaign of changing the fundemental way Washington works! Opps, does that count as a promise??????
What you people defnding this by saying its not about the people is the ideas do seem to want to admit is these people are going to be going on their own experience! Since Obama has NONE, they will press him to defer to theirs!!! To think otherwise is to be ignorant of how politics really works!

beebop,
I agree, my comment was meant to say this is common place, but he was elected to CHANGE the common place way of doing things in Washington.
If you follow this philosophy of using mostly retreads, how would you EVER get “new blood” in the process and in the end create real change ?

MIKE C:
He had no intention of bringing anything different other than “he wasn’t Hillary.” That was his change. And when that didn’t work, his campaign smeared the Clintons, their legacy and their supporters as RACISTS. And now he’s hiring all of them and supplementing them with the thieves who did his bidding in Chicago. The Chicago thieves are the change. The Clintonistas are the hope. That’s a fact, jack.

McinSane,
You had better pray to what ever God you worship that this totaly inexpereinced guy does not screw things up. Im glad to know that the fact we have not been attacked again since 9/11 means these past years were crappy. Try imagining these past few years if Al Gore had been President. Now there is a TRULY scary thought!

I haven’t heard of one man( except Jesus and even he cried out to God) that was able to fix a multitude of people’s problems in a single action.I voted for Obama because I and obviously over 65 million other people beleived and saw that he has leadership qualities.Will he fix all of this nation’s problems? No.Still I gather he is sincere in his efforts in wanting to make a constructive, productive, positive and long lasting impact on this country that he beleives in. You hateful Americans that are speaking against his actions should open up a bible and read the book of Matthew.This is an old saying.Do you remember it? If you don’t have something nice to say then don’t say anything at all. I mean seriously you must not be happy with yourself if all you do is speak negatively about someone else so frequently.

“I voted for Obama because I and obviously over 65 million other people beleived and saw that he has leadership qualities.”
When I was 6, I beleived in Santa Claus & the Easter Bunny too!
Belief is a good thing, but it should be backed up with viable reasons. Beleif is maintained with viable actions! So far running on a campaign of CHANGE, then appointing cabinet members and other high posts with political paybacks and Clinton retreads in NOT CHANGE to beleive in.
Your telling me that the party that pushed him through to the White House from literally no where, has NO OTHER QUALIFIED PEOPLE besides these cronies ???
As I have stated before, I have no problem with him doing this as long as he be man enough to stand up and state what it is. Obama set the standard by which he is to be judged by his campaign slogan! That is the difference here!

65 million of 300 million people or 21.6% of USA voted for Obama. I’m not seeing a landslide or a major shift in US opinion here.

It does not matter who he picks, all of those opposed to him from the beginning have already made up their minds not to give him a chance.

I would like to know what some of these critics of Obama actually do for a living.I mean do you really have any serious responsibilities at your job?Obama doesn’t get his new job until Jan 20. He is seeking to fill necessary positions with people that can GET THE JOB DONE.I mean I am tired of repeating myself, but obviously some of you have learning disabilities.He knew we needed a new leader to change the tone in Washington.He is doing that.Haven’t you noticed that Hillary’s tone has changed since Obama got the nomination.We didn’t need the same old players with the same tone, but we can use those players with a different tone.Don’t be mistaken and don’t act as if they ever said other wise.The democratic agenda has this at its core.Its goal is to speak to and act on the needs of the middle class and underprivledged in America.Democrats are gonna always find common ground and work together.If Hillary won she would have worked with Obama.They had similar agenda’s and I was never fooled.I just knew that Barack would do it with more tact and humility.They both had the change we needed, but his was the new leader for our generation and the history we needed to make.America has made progress.Listen to McCain’s concession speech and follow his lead.

He has to go to insiders because he has no colleagues of his own. Don’t forget he was in the senate only 100+ days so didn’t get to know anyone or anything.
As far as giving him a chance – when did a Lib ever give President Bush a chance. I’m waiting for bo to crash and burn.

J: 65 million of 300 million people or 21.6% of USA voted for Obama. I’m not seeing a landslide or a major shift in US opinion here.
—————–
A little bit more perspective….
“Landslide” is the term always attributed to an Electoral College win (Obama: 364; McCain: 173).
To your point however, looks like there are 231,229,580 people of voting age in the US, 213,005,467 who are actually eligible to vote (the difference being for a number of reasons, like being in jail, etc.). In all fairness, that needs to be your base number, not 300 million.
Of those, 122,842,626 actually voted (which is 56% of those eligible). This is the highest voter turnout since 1968 (which was a 60.8% turnout back then). It’s simply a fact that 40-55% of the eligible voting population doesn’t vote -kind of a shame, but that’s the way it is, but if you didn’t vote, you don’t get to complain. That’s the rule.
In 2008, essentially 7.9 million more people in the country voted for Barack Obama than John McCain, which is over twice the number that voted Bush back into office in 2004 (which was about 3 million); Gore actually won the popular vote by over 1/2 million votes in 2000.
While it is true that with these adjusted figures, Obama took about 30% of the US population, that’s still in line with all other elections in the past, and actually much better.
I find it funny that you’re really quoting the 21.6% statistic. Interesting that you discount President-elect Obama’s numbers when they compare so favorable to those before him….why are you doing that?

Cathy:
I’m referring to the generally accepted definition of a ‘landslide’ as it relates to political contests. But whatever…it’s not worth quibbling over.
The point is that it’s annoying for people to continually make the case that Obama’s win was no big deal because he didn’t get that big of a majority (which J states), and I’m simply pointing out that comparatively speaking, the majority of the people elected him by a very good margin relative to other elections, that’s all – so it’s a bit disingenous to diss it as being nothing.

cathy is a sore loser just like all the other republicans. They will minimize his win no matter what.