This is Change?

[raysr]

by Jeremy Scahill










U.S. policy is not about one individual, and no matter how much faith people place in President-elect Barack Obama, the policies he enacts will be fruit of a tree with many roots. Among them: his personal politics and views, the disastrous realities his administration will inherit, and, of course, unpredictable future crises. But the best immediate indicator of what an Obama administration might look like can be found in the people he surrounds himself with and who he appoints to his Cabinet. And, frankly, when it comes to foreign policy, it is not looking good.

Obama has a momentous opportunity to do what he repeatedly promised over the course of his campaign: bring actual change. But the more we learn about who Obama is considering for top positions in his administration, the more his inner circle resembles a staff reunion of President Bill Clinton's White House. Although Obama brought some progressives on board early in his campaign, his foreign policy team is now dominated by the hawkish, old-guard Democrats of the 1990s. This has been particularly true since Hillary Clinton conceded defeat in the Democratic primary, freeing many of her top advisors to join Obama's team.

"What happened to all this talk about change?" a member of the Clinton foreign policy team recently asked the Washington Post. "This isn't lightly flavored with Clintons. This is all Clintons, all the time."

--more--

www.alternet.org/waroniraq/107666/

What's he doing?

[Dogmudgeon]

1. What's he doing?

Not hating all things Clinton?

Jeeze, sometimes it reads like FR around here.

:eyes:

--p!

[anonymous171]

2. Obama should pick people on ideological grounds only.

[Nederland]

40. Yeah

...because that would be a COMPLETE change from the way Bush did things. :eyes:

[Roy]

58. Yep..compentency vs loyalty!!!

[DJ13]

3. I love Obama, but using too many Clinton people is a big mistake

If thats what voters wanted they would have nominated Hillary.

[cali]

26. There is one and only one "farm team" to draw from

Do you know the history of Clinton's first months in office? Of Carter's? Inexperienced people are a disaster. Positions like CoS have to be filled by someone with actual WH experience. And so far, the only cabinet position that has definitively been filled, is HHS. Daschle was not a Clintonian. Obama's two most senior advisors aren't Clintonians.

Scahill should stick to Blackwater. He's way off base here.

[lame54]

4. Here, you're going to need this...

:popcorn:

[jpljr77]

5. Perhaps he's picking people with experience.

Just because they served under Clinton doesn't mean the Obama Administration will govern like Clinton. These appointees take their direction from their boss: President Obama.

It's like when a company is bought out. Lots of managers stay in place, but the scope and direction of their work can totally change. But you retain them because they have experience and can work under new management.

Maybe, just maybe, President Obama has a plan that he hasn't shared individually with every single member of the left-wing Internetosphere.

[sharp_stick]

6. What's he doing?

Forming a fucking cabinet and getting ready to lead the Goddamned country that's what he's doing. The fucking whining is deafening WTF do people expect? The only people left in Government other than Republicans with any experience in running a Government are from Clinton's days for Christs sake. I wonder if anybody from the LBJ days is still alive, maybe that would make everyone happy.

This is pathetic, all these opinions about how bad the picks are and all this advice coming from everyone. The only thing it's lacking... How about a fucking option? All I hear is oh this guy sucks, that guy sucks, it's so much like Clinton, too much experience... blah blah blah followed by a fucking byline, got an opinion put up a fucking option.

I guess he could still pick the stock trading baby from eTrade for SEC chair, would that be change enough?

[anonymous171]

7. Obama's appointee's work for him. He will set the agenda.

Even if Ralph fucking Nader was in the cabinet he would have to listen to him.

[onehandle]

8. Oh noes! Alternet found Obama out!

They thought he was going to grab people off the street and say, "Hey, you wanna be in my Cabinet?"

Instead, Obama is hiring the smartest people available.

Obama is dooooooomed!

[JuniperLea]

10. Seriously! I guess people want "idealists" instead of "intellectuals"

That sounds dangerous to me. All the good intentions in the world will not make up for knowledge and intelligence.

[Occam Bandage]

9. Any liberal in Washington with any experience will have worked for Clinton.

Given that the Carterites are too old by now (and disregarding their negligible successes), should Obama instead be pulling his experienced top staffers from the Reagan, Bush I, and Bush II administrations?

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

11. This Jeremy Scahill Sounds Like An Ignorant Moron.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

12. No. But, he ran as a centrist, and is behaving like a centrist. Politics as usual.

[Two Americas]

17. he ran as a blank slate

He said he would do whatever worked. He said he invited and welcomed and would listen to dissent. He said all voices would be heard.

All of that is the mark of a good politician in a representative democracy. Our job is to raise our voices, not sit back and "be loyal." That is an invitation to tyranny and is contrary to every principle of self-government.

Wealthy and powerful people are not waiting, they are doing everything they can to influence the new administration. We have a moral obligation to be a counter force to that.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

19. Well, apparantly, the centrist/right (DLC) wing is being heard.

Looking at the number of Clintonistas being revived and appointed isn't exactly a sharp turn to the left.

I certainly agree that giving him a free pass as he does so isn't going to help. But, the left is taken as a sure thing under the "lesser of two evils", "not as bad", scenario created by the DLC types.

[Two Americas]

21. agreed

Volatile times, though, and I am more optimistic than I have been in a while. I was surprised at the vehemence of the conservatives here, but that is probably a sign of desperation. The people are moving dramatically to the left, and I don't think a Clinton-style pro-corporate direction is likely now.

You know, I have yet to criticize Obama much, but I get accused of that all the time. But then I never worship nor demonize politicians, since I am not seeking a spiritual adviser or savior or hero to worship when I look at a politician. Many do and are. Obama could turn out to be a fairly good one, but under the guise of "supporting" him we have many people surreptitiously advancing some very right wing and conservative ideas.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

22. The best thing about Obama is that, like Kennedy, he set things in motion.

I think that he will continue to steer center, but the country is changing despite anything that politicians may do. The politics-as-usual isn't obviously not working, nor appealing to the people. The actually do want change rather than the standard platitudes and pie-in-the-sky-when-you-die promises.

Politicians don't lead, they follow. Obama had better pay attention to what's happening rather than his political advisers or he'll be out on his ear.

[tekisui]

13. Yes. This is change. We'll talk again in four years.

[Pastiche423]

34. Where is the "change"?

Specifically.

[tekisui]

36. Here for one:

http://www.change.gov/

Here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x7901542

Here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=7895573&mesg_id=7895573

The tone, the transparency, the level of discourse. The policies will be 180 degrees different than chimpy's. Obama is going to close gitmo, restore habeas, end torture, fund stem cell research, pull the troops out of Iraq in about 18 months, and pass healthcare reform.

That is just the tip of the iceberg. It may not look like what you had in mind, but it is exactly what he ran on.

[Pastiche423]

38. DLCers and Clinton re-treads are change?

Nope, they are not. More corporatists and warmongers w/a D following their names is not change.

Change = progressives, not meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

[tekisui]

44. Meh. Keep your eyes closed. I really don't care.

You obviously didn't pay attention during the campaign, or you wouldn't be so shocked that he isn't fitting YOUR definition of change.:hi:

[Pastiche423]

45. MY definition of change?

Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary

change: 1 a: to make different in some particular way
b: to make radically different

That is MY definition of change.

I will admit that I did not hang on Obama's every word during the primary. Dennis Kucinich was my choice.

But I did hear that word every time I heard Obama speak. Yet so far, his choices have zippo to do w/change.

[tekisui]

48. Meh.

:)

[monmouth]

14. Possibilities for cabinet positions from FDR admin. were all dead, unfortunately...n/t

[latebloomer]

15. Those who protest that he is just getting the most experienced people

ignore their histories and ideological beliefs. Why select these particular people. It sure sends a strong message.

And when people talk about how his appointees will carry out his bidding, it begs the question- Won't they be advising HIM?

[shanti]

54. they may be advising him

but it's OBAMA who has the final say-so. i trust his judgment. give the man a chance. he hasn't even taken office!

[LostinVA]

16. This is the zillionth time this has been posted on here

[raysr]

18. Wow,

And I just thought it was an interesting take. Relax! Sorry! Fuck!
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/388523_tomteepenonline20.html

[leftchick]

20. scary shit

been there done that and it SUCKS!

:grr:

<snip>

The prospect of Obama's foreign policy being, at least in part, an extension of the Clinton Doctrine is real. Even more disturbing, several of the individuals at the center of Obama's transition and emerging foreign policy teams were top players in creating and implementing foreign policies that would pave the way for projects eventually carried out under the Bush/Cheney administration. With their assistance, Obama has already charted out several hawkish stances. Among them:

-- His plan to escalate the war in Afghanistan;

-- An Iraq plan that could turn into a downsized and rebranded occupation that keeps U.S. forces in Iraq for the foreseeable future;

-- His labeling of Iran's Revolutionary Guard as a "terrorist organization;"

-- His pledge to use unilateral force inside of Pakistan to defend U.S. interests;

-- His position, presented before the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), that Jerusalem "must remain undivided" -- a remark that infuriated Palestinian officials and which he later attempted to reframe;

-- His plan to continue the War on Drugs, a backdoor U.S. counterinsurgency campaign in Central and Latin America;

-- His refusal to "rule out" using Blackwater and other armed private forces in U.S. war zones, despite previously introducing legislation to regulate these companies and bring them under U.S. law.

[cali]

27. Clinton's foreign policy wasn't perfect

indeed there are some obvious flaws, but by and large, it was a policy that valued diplomacy over reckless aggression. It's just laughable, after the last 8 years, that the faux progressives are attacking Obama. And he's still 2 months away from taking office.

[Life Long Dem]

23. I wonder why he is getting caught up in a rumor?

[LaurenG]

24. Has any president ever used ex Clinton teams before?

Has Obama announced that he will allow carte blanche to any of the team members?

I think people are scared of something that isn't going to come to fruition.

[NJmaverick]

25. I have the perfect respone to this ill conceived and misguided article

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=7900424&mesg_id=7900424

[raysr]

28. I figured Jeremy Scahill

would have some cred here. The Lieberman thing disturbs me a lot. We've seen this too much in the last 8. He thanks "O"? Too bad that got out.

[NJmaverick]

30. You figured wrong

Writing articles does not give one any special cred. One needs to effectively support and explain their position, something Jeremy fails to do.

[leftchick]

32. he certainly does with liberals and progressives

anyone who can not see what is written in blood now is deluding themselves.

[EFerrari]

64. There are a lot of people here who read Scahill. n/t

[mzmolly]

29. People wanted a change from BUSH's policy, not Clinton's.

:hi:

[notesdev]

52. The beauty of 'change'

is that it means something different to each person who hears it.

I definitely did not interpret 'change' as being 're-hiring all of the Clintons' deputies to run the government'. I'd imagined it as bringing in new, fresh faces - uncorrupted and uncompromised. This is a very big country and there should be no lack of talent to draw on.

Remember, the Clinton team is the one that brought us Bush. Repeating that mistake is not a direction that says 'change' to me.

[mzmolly]

57. The Bush team brought us Bush, and Obama hasn't hired "all" of

Clinton's deputies to run the government. ;)

[bigtree]

31. I don't know where Obama is supposed to find folks experienced in serving in a Democratic admin.

He needs these experienced folks if he is to make any significant progress in revamping these agencies away from whatever Bush has done to them. I remember Clinton tried to do that with Arkansas transplants, a good many of who got laughed out of town.

[Triana]

33. THIS is change-are YOU going to participate in it, or NOT?

http://change.gov


Have you written to the Transition Team about your thoughts yet on this issue and many others? Why NOT?

FOR THE FIRST TIME IN EONS OUR LEADERS ARE ASKING FOR OUR THOUGHTS AND OPINIONS. Hellooo???

Are you going to send them, or just gripe here? Griping here is cool, but they're ASKING FOR YOUR INPUT. Please GIVE it to them.

EVERY.

CHANCE.

YOU.

GET.

And Obama is giving us PLENTY of chances. And STILL there's whining and gnashing of teeth. Jeeeze.

_ _ _ _ _

THIS is change - have you filled out this survey yet? Why NOT? They are ASKING WHAT WE'LL DO TO HELP THEM and ASKING for our VOICE! I got this in email. . .

_ _ _ _ _


Please take a few minutes and help shape the future of this movement.

Share your campaign experience and your thoughts on the best way to keep supporting our agenda for change.

The inauguration is just 62 days away, and as President-elect Obama and Vice President-elect Biden prepare to take office, they'll need your support more than ever.

You've built an organization in your community and across the country that will continue to work for change -- whether it's by building grassroots support for legislation, backing state and local candidates, or sharing organizing techniques to effect change in your neighborhood.

Your hard work built this movement. Now it's up to you to decide how we move forward.

Take this short survey and share your ideas:

http://my.barackobama.com/whatsnext

Thanks to you, this country has an historic opportunity. Electing Barack was the first big step, but there's a lot of challenging and important work ahead.

Together, we can keep making history,

David

David Plouffe
Campaign Manager
Obama for America

_ _ _ _ _

THIS is change. I got this in email and posted it in GDP and it only got SEVEN RECOMMENDATIONS AND FOUR OR SO REPLIES. It seems people would rather KVETCH and WHINE than DO anything to provide their voice and and support to a new government that is asking for it FOR THE FIRST TIME IN YEARS...

_ _ _ _ _

I have a special request for you.

The Obama-Biden Transition Project is a nonpartisan entity whose purpose is to facilitate the transition to a new government and prepare for the next administration.

In the past, efforts like these have often been very secretive and funded by the D.C. lobbying and corporate community.

But, like in the campaign, we've decided to do things differently.

For the first time, transition efforts won't be financed with donations from Washington lobbyists and PACs -- which means we'll need to keep asking for your help. Your generosity during the campaign helped get us here, but building a more transparent and open government means continuing to rely on a broader group of people to do this the right way.

We only have a few weeks to assess the state of the federal agencies, prepare our agenda, and staff key positions in the new administration. Your support right now will be crucial to helping us accomplish these goals.

Will you help support the urgent mission of our transition team with a donation?

https://donate.barackobama.com/transition

You know that we got here by building this campaign from the ground up. We're committed to building the White House team the same way.

Thank you,

David

David Plouffe
Campaign Manager
Obama for America
_ _ _ _ _

GET BUSY!! YOU WANT CHANGE? THEN GET OFF YOUR DUFF AND HELP BARACK OBAMA BRING IT. Just because he's now elected does NOT MEAN WE ARE THROUGH AND THAT IT IS NOW ALL UP TO HIM TO DO!! BE THE CHANGE....WE'RE IT...YOUR VOICE, YOUR WORK, and YOUR MONEY (as opposed to that of goddamned DC PACS and lobbyists are needed - Obama cannot do it ALONE. He's ASKING FOR OUR PARTICIPATION. How LONG has it been since our government did THAT? A LOT less whining and a LOT more partcipation is called for. This is an OPPORTUNITY like none we've ever had. DON'T BLOW IT!

[Pastiche423]

35. "FOR THE FIRST TIME IN EONS OUR LEADERS ARE

ASKING FOR OUR THOUGHTS AND OPINIONS"

Like Obama did before the FISA vote? He totally ignored the over 23,000 voters that begged him to vote NO.

Yeah right, we are being listened to. :eyes:

[Triana]

37. *sigh*

Hey - if YOU don't want change and would rather sit there and whine about everything the man does or doesn't do than using the multitude of avenues HE has provided for YOU to commmunicate with him and his administration about it, then suit yourself. Complacency is in many ways, what got us stuck with GWB. You want change, change THAT. A LOT of DUers are acting like spoilt, temperamental 2-year-olds lately. Get OVER yourselves and get to work!

Would Obama have gotten ELECTED if we all sat here whining? I DON'T THINK SO! And nothing is going to CHANGE by our doing that either -- NO MATTER WHO IS PRESIDENT. Figure it out. He's damn near spoon-fed us opportunities to PARTICIPATE since he won. And what happens?

"WHIIIIIIIIIIIIINNNNNE!" Jeeeze.

[Pastiche423]

39. I want change

But so far, it doesn't look like the next administration does.

Status quo. Status quo. Status quo. Status quo. Status quo.

[JuniperLea]

43. How is appointing people with actual intelligence and experience NOT change?

There's not a "Heckuva Job Brownie" in the lot... that is change.

[Pastiche423]

46. DLCers and Clinton re-treads are from the past

Change means to do something different. How are his choices different?

[JuniperLea]

49. Who else in DC has any experience?

You want him to put his cronies into positions, so he can pat them on the back and say, heckuva job?

There are a limited number of Dems with that level of experience. And what was it about the Clinton administration you didn't care for? Was it the solid financial situation? The peace? The fact that the rising tide floated all boats? Or perhaps it was the massive surplus in our treasury? Was that what pissed you off?

[Qibing Zero]

53. Fuck 'experience'

Sure, the people need to be qualified, but this argument is similar to the ones used against Obama in the first place. We're tired of the people who are 'proven' and 'experienced', because while they've spent their time in the business they are often incredibly wrong about things. The same can be said for many of the people Obama seems to be choosing here.

When we voted for Obama, we thought he would be the best person for the job (at least out of him and McCain, heh), regardless of his lack of experience comparatively. Perhaps more importantly, we voted for change. I guess we were silly to assume that change meant new faces, eh?

[JuniperLea]

61. Step away from the RW Kool Aid

Obama has plenty of experience... he is an ace at Constitutional law. I'm not sure where you're getting this bullshit: "We're tired of the people who are 'proven' and 'experienced', because while they've spent their time in the business they are often incredibly wrong about things." Utter tripe and balderdash. One of the main BushCo stupidity issues has been his putting people WITHOUT experience into positions where their inexperience was costly in LIVES as well as money. I'm not sure how the hell you arrived at any of these assumptions.

[Pastiche423]

55. What did I not care for about the Clinton adminstration?

NAFTA
Fairness Doctrine
Welform Deform

Just to name a few.

There are plenty of Democrats w/experience that are not DLC. In fact, the DLC supports warmongering, corporatists and free trade. They do not support We, the People.

[JuniperLea]

42. Since he's been president elect...

I'm really shocked at having to spell that out... but you just wanted to push your false reasoning, so, whatever.

[Pastiche423]

47. You're gonna have to spell it out

I keep looking as he selects his team, but I see no change. I see more of the same.

[JuniperLea]

50. Well I'm sorry if he's choosing people...

Who left our country in such poor shape when Clinton left... oh, wait. We were doing beautifully.

[Pastiche423]

56. You may have been doing beautifully

But most of us poor folk weren't.

[JuniperLea]

60. I was as poor as can be

You have no clue who you are talking to. If you didn't do well during the Clinton years, you must fit into some unusual demographic or had some extenuating circumstances, because the stats show that everyone, from the bottom up, did very well.

[Pastiche423]

63. Please show me the stats

[mzmolly]

59. True. Clinton had poverty rates at a thirty year low. He expanded home ownership

among poor, we saw unprecedented job growth, help with child care and so on. The differences made a difference - to paraphrase Paul Wellstone.

[Joe the Liberal]

41. I question if it's change too......

I trust Obama to do whats right but as of late his administration is getting filled with Clinton administration rehashes. If he truly promised change he would pick some new faces for his administration.

[omega minimo]

51. I've said for months that Prez BO would probably bring a repeat of the Clinton administration

"Floating all the boats" = "spreading the wealth"


I've said for months that Prez BO would probably bring a repeat of the Clinton administration because he never gave any indication AFAIK that he would really challenge the status quo.... his praise of Reagan was a big hint, too....

The Reagan Error may be over but his "trajectory" is not.

[L0oniX]

62. Fuck it! It's every man for himself. Buy your guns and ammo now ...we're in for a fight.

I predict that the Dem party will divide. The Reagan Dems, DLC lovers and right leaning centrists can go fuck themselves!