• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

?'s for Obama supporters

Texan

Well-known member
How is the Obama 'team' going to "change" Washington if his 'team' consists of the same old people? :?

==============================================

More ex-Clinton officials tapped to join Obama team

By Richard Wolf, USA TODAY

WASHINGTON — President-elect Barack Obama promised a change in policies on the campaign trail, but many of the people he's bringing into government have been here before — in the Clinton-Gore administration.

The latest example is prominent Washington lawyer Ron Klain, Vice President-elect Joe Biden's choice for chief of staff, Democratic officials told the Associated Press on Thursday. The officials disclosed Biden's selection on the condition of anonymity because they weren't authorized to speak publicly for Obama's transition team. Klain served under Al Gore in the same job a decade ago.

The selection follows Obama's first two personnel moves — naming John Podesta to head his transition office and Rep. Rahm Emanuel, D-Ill., as his White House chief of staff. Both men held high-ranking positions in Bill Clinton's White House. The six people leading transition efforts in the State, Defense and Treasury departments all served in some capacity under Clinton.

Democrats and Republicans lauded the moves as an indication that Obama would rely on experienced hands for advice. With only one Democratic administration in the past 28 years, "There are not many Democrats who have actually been there, done that," said Mike McCurry, who served as White House press secretary under Clinton.

It doesn't mean Obama's policies will mimic Clinton's, said Washington lawyer Benjamin Ginsberg, who advises Republicans. "I don't think for a second you can draw the conclusion that it's just going to be 'Clinton Part Two,' " he said.

Transition team spokeswoman Jen Psaki said Obama wants "a competent team that is diverse in many ways, including experience. Serving in high-level positions, whether in government, in the private sector or in public service, is seen as a positive."

Klain fits the mold of experienced Democratic hand. Before joining Gore, he was an associate counsel in the White House, chief of staff to Attorney General Janet Reno, chief counsel of the Senate Judiciary Committee under Biden and law clerk to Supreme Court Justice Byron White.

His role fighting for Gore during the 2000 presidential recount was re-enacted by Kevin Spacey in the HBO film Recount.

Biden and his wife, Jill, visited Vice President Cheney and his wife, Lynne, on Thursday at the Naval Observatory, home to vice presidents. There was no hint of animosity during the 50-minute visit, coming a month after Biden called Cheney "the most dangerous vice president" in U.S. history.

Emanuel and Klain have worked for Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac, the mortgage companies taken over by the government this year after collapsing investments rendered them insolvent. Klain is a former partner in O'Melveny & Myers, where he lobbied for Fannie Mae.

The Obama transition team announced tough ethics rules this week that prohibit federal lobbyists from working on the transition in areas in which they lobbied during the past year. Job applicants are asked if they or close relatives have relationships with Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac.

Steve Elmendorf, a lobbyist who helped manage Democrat John Kerry's campaign in 2004, said it's hard for Obama to avoid hiring lobbyists of any sort. "With the Republicans controlling the government for eight years, people had to make a living," he said.

Contributing: Fredreka Schouten



http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2008-11-13-transition_N.htm

===============================================

If you REALLY want to "change" Washington, don't you have to change the people? :???:
 

Texan

Well-known member
kolanuraven said:
They are changing from Bush people to Clinton people....that's perfect by me.
:lol: :lol:
So...you don't care that he ran a dishonest campaign? You don't care that he campaigned on a promise of changing Washington, but instead is bringing the Clinton team out of mothballs?

Obviously, he has to have someone on his team with some experience - since he has relatively NONE. But...is this the "change" that people voted for?
 

nonothing

Well-known member
Well to start ,the biggest and most needed change was getting bush and chenny out.....Maybe they can reuse that mission accomplished sign GW had.....lol....
 

Texan

Well-known member
nonothing said:
Well to start ,the biggest and most needed change was getting bush and chenny out.....Maybe they can reuse that mission accomplished sign GW had.....lol....
Bush and Cheney weren't running - they were going to be out either way. Do you have anything intelligent to add?
 

kolanuraven

Well-known member
Texan said:
kolanuraven said:
They are changing from Bush people to Clinton people....that's perfect by me.
:lol: :lol:
So...you don't care that he ran a dishonest campaign? You don't care that he campaigned on a promise of changing Washington, but instead is bringing the Clinton team out of mothballs?

Obviously, he has to have someone on his team with some experience - since he has relatively NONE. But...is this the "change" that people voted for?


Listen...you asked a question....I gave you my answer.

If you don't like it....not my problem.

If the answers upset you so....don't be asking questions is all I can say.
 

Texan

Well-known member
kolanuraven said:
Listen...you asked a question....I gave you my answer.

If you don't like it....not my problem.

If the answers upset you so....don't be asking questions is all I can say.
Yes, I asked a question - that you didn't answer. Let me try again:

If you REALLY want to "change" Washington, don't you have to change the people?
 

kolanuraven

Well-known member
Texan said:
kolanuraven said:
Listen...you asked a question....I gave you my answer.

If you don't like it....not my problem.

If the answers upset you so....don't be asking questions is all I can say.
Yes, I asked a question - that you didn't answer. Let me try again:

If you REALLY want to "change" Washington, don't you have to change the people?



The ARE changing the people, now it may be to the ones YOU don't like and I do like, but it's change....and for the good.


On the question of a fair /honest campaign....name me ONE campaign that was/is EVER ran fair and or honest???
 

Texan

Well-known member
kolanuraven said:
The ARE changing the people, now it may be to the ones YOU don't like and I do like, but it's change....and for the good.
Did you miss the part about Bush not running again? The staff/cabinet was going to change anyway - you don't think the Obama supporters realized that? LOL


kolanuraven said:
On the question of a fair /honest campaign....name me ONE campaign that was/is EVER ran fair and or honest???
So...Obama is just like the rest of them? How is that "change"?
 

TSR

Well-known member
kolanuraven said:
Texan said:
kolanuraven said:
Listen...you asked a question....I gave you my answer.

If you don't like it....not my problem.

If the answers upset you so....don't be asking questions is all I can say.
Yes, I asked a question - that you didn't answer. Let me try again:

If you REALLY want to "change" Washington, don't you have to change the people?



The ARE changing the people, now it may be to the ones YOU don't like and I do like, but it's change....and for the good.


On the question of a fair /honest campaign....name me ONE campaign that was/is EVER ran fair and or honest???

Sigh, if we could just get Bill O'Reilly to run??? :lol: :lol:
 

kolanuraven

Well-known member
Texan said:
kolanuraven said:
The ARE changing the people, now it may be to the ones YOU don't like and I do like, but it's change....and for the good.
Did you miss the part about Bush not running again? The staff/cabinet was going to change anyway - you don't think the Obama supporters realized that? LOL


kolanuraven said:
On the question of a fair /honest campaign....name me ONE campaign that was/is EVER ran fair and or honest???
So...Obama is just like the rest of them? How is that "change"?



Listen...you gotta form your questions more directly baby if you're not getting the answers you want.....but I guess you've gotten that a lot in life, huh???? :wink: :wink: :wink:


Are you sure you're not Sandhusker? Or maybe a long lost twin cause you're starting to sound an awful lot like him.
 

nonothing

Well-known member
Texan said:
nonothing said:
Well to start ,the biggest and most needed change was getting bush and chenny out.....Maybe they can reuse that mission accomplished sign GW had.....lol....
Bush and Cheney weren't running - they were going to be out either way. Do you have anything intelligent to add?

Point taken ...
 

TexasBred

Well-known member
kolanuraven said:
Texan said:
kolanuraven said:
Listen...you asked a question....I gave you my answer.

If you don't like it....not my problem.

If the answers upset you so....don't be asking questions is all I can say.
Yes, I asked a question - that you didn't answer. Let me try again:

If you REALLY want to "change" Washington, don't you have to change the people?



The ARE changing the people, now it may be to the ones YOU don't like and I do like, but it's change....and for the good.



On the question of a fair /honest campaign....name me ONE campaign that was/is EVER ran fair and or honest???

They are not really changing people. Only refurbishing and recycling the used ones.
 

Texan

Well-known member
Here's an article (thanks, ff :wink:) that seems to point out exactly what we've been trying to tell you libs - Obama's talk about "change" was nothing but a lie - a con pulled on a bunch of gullible morons.

Pay special attention to these quotes:

Obama's victory in the general election produced what his primary campaign couldn't: A swift merger of the Clinton Wing of the Democratic Party with the Illinois Senator's self-styled insurgency.

(Note that he couldn't/wouldn't be honest with people about his intentions until AFTER he had won. After all, if he had told the voters that he planned to be another Clinton Administration, why would they have voted for him instead of the real thing - Hilllary?)

The single most important change in that respect is at the top, and the replacement of the slim, tightly-wound campaign chief of staff, David Plouffe, 41, with the slim, tightly wound Podesta, 59.

Plouffe was the guiding hand, operationally and often strategically, of Obama's campaign. He was also, insiders say, a sharply anti-Washington voice, key to the candidate's outsider message.

(Note that he replaced the only agent of "change" that he had going for him - as soon as he won the election. It was only after he conned the voters and got what he wanted that he came clean and showed his real intent. Is that change?)

It appears that there really isn't any "change" - just another lying politician who "changes" his mind and "changes" his story AFTER he cons the voters.

Well...if it's any consolation to you liberal morons that fell for it:

We told you so. :lol: :lol: :lol:


=============================================

Obama gets the Clinton band back together

Here's how you can tell the campaign is over and the transition has begun: Barack Obama's aides now wear suits and ties, their desks are in the Federal Building on 6th Street in Washington — and Clintonites are everywhere.

Obama's victory in the general election produced what his primary campaign couldn't: A swift merger of the Clinton Wing of the Democratic Party with the Illinois Senator's self-styled insurgency. The merger began, during the campaign, in the policy apparatus — which is now rapidly becoming the governing apparatus.

The absorption of the Clinton government in waiting represents Obama's choice not to repeat what he and his advisors see as an early mistake made by the last two presidents: Attempting to wield power in Washington through an insular campaign apparatus new to town.

Obama's first major appointments have been Democrats who worked for President Clinton and did not endorse him in the primary: Transition chief John Podesta and Rep. Rahm Emanuel, who will be White House chief of staff, stayed neutral, and Ron Klain, who will be Joe Biden's chief of staff, backed Biden. Obama, advisers told Politico, may even be weighing offering Hillary Rodham Clinton herself the Cabinet plum of Secretary of State.

"Obama is showing great good sense in making use of their experience," said William Galston, a former Clinton domestic policy adviser who’s now at the Brookings Institution. "You have an entire cadre of people in their 30s and 40s and early 50s who were either in senior jobs or second- and third-tier jobs in the Clinton administration, who really earned their spurs and know their way around — and know something about how the institutions in which they served actually function."

Galston noted that while Clinton shunned the remnants of the Carter Administration in 1992, Obama's Democratic predecessor led a popular eight-year administration, and the party is no longer riven by deep ideological splits.

"The president-elect has the great good fortune of having a Democratic Party with a usable past," said Galston, who downplayed the differences between the Clinton and Obama camps during the primary. "It was never a substantive or an ideological split — it was more like Team A and Team B."

While only one pure Clintonite, former White House chief of staff Podesta, has been added to the Obama inner circle, the shift in Obama's universe is not to be understated. From the top down, his early choices reflect an openness, and even a warmth, to the veterans of 1990s governance. It’s a shift from a campaign that in the primary explicitly attacked President Clinton's tenure as a time of partisan strife and missed opportunities.

The single most important change in that respect is at the top, and the replacement of the slim, tightly-wound campaign chief of staff, David Plouffe, 41, with the slim, tightly wound Podesta, 59.

Plouffe was the guiding hand, operationally and often strategically, of Obama's campaign. He was also, insiders say, a sharply anti-Washington voice, key to the candidate's outsider message.

Plouffe came of political age inside the House Democratic leadership in the 1990s, and he was part of a core Obama group who had never worked for Clinton, and who harbored the sense of frustration and missed opportunity that prevailed on the Hill during Clinton's second term.



http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1108/15617.html
 

kolanuraven

Well-known member
I'm liking the change....Clinton could be Pres FOREVER as far as I'm concerned....so I got no problem with the Clinton people coming back.
 

Texan

Well-known member
kolanuraven said:
I'm liking the change....Clinton could be Pres FOREVER as far as I'm concerned....so I got no problem with the Clinton people coming back.

And I'm sure Clinton would probably like you a LOT, too. Especially if he found out what the rest of us found out - that you're really one of those porkypine girls. :lol:

But, if it makes you feel any better, I'd rather have Clinton than what the gullible liberal morons gave us this time, Porky. :wink:
 

CattleArmy

Well-known member
Texan said:
nonothing said:
Well to start ,the biggest and most needed change was getting bush and chenny out.....Maybe they can reuse that mission accomplished sign GW had.....lol....
Bush and Cheney weren't running - they were going to be out either way. Do you have anything intelligent to add?

Rude!

If people intelligent people can only add stuff you are going to get really tired of talking to me. 8)
 

CattleArmy

Well-known member
Texan said:
kolanuraven said:
I'm liking the change....Clinton could be Pres FOREVER as far as I'm concerned....so I got no problem with the Clinton people coming back.

And I'm sure Clinton would probably like you a LOT, too. Especially if he found out what the rest of us found out - that you're really one of those porkypine girls. :lol:

But, if it makes you feel any better, I'd rather have Clinton than what the gullible liberal morons gave us this time, Porky. :wink:


Seems you men folk are awful fixated on the image of Kola with man parts all over her. :roll:
 

CattleArmy

Well-known member
Texan said:
kolanuraven said:
They are changing from Bush people to Clinton people....that's perfect by me.
:lol: :lol:
So...you don't care that he ran a dishonest campaign? You don't care that he campaigned on a promise of changing Washington, but instead is bringing the Clinton team out of mothballs?

Obviously, he has to have someone on his team with some experience - since he has relatively NONE. But...is this the "change" that people voted for?


Changing Washington is getting rid of the currents and bringing in new ones. New by new new standards or just new to the current Washington scene it's all new.
 

kolanuraven

Well-known member
CattleArmy said:
Texan said:
kolanuraven said:
I'm liking the change....Clinton could be Pres FOREVER as far as I'm concerned....so I got no problem with the Clinton people coming back.

And I'm sure Clinton would probably like you a LOT, too. Especially if he found out what the rest of us found out - that you're really one of those porkypine girls. :lol:

But, if it makes you feel any better, I'd rather have Clinton than what the gullible liberal morons gave us this time, Porky. :wink:


Seems you men folk are awful fixated on the image of Kola with man parts all over her. :roll:



OMG....I wonder if it's THEIR man parts they are thinking of???????? :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock:


Sounds as if they've been into the Vigortone!!!! :lol: :lol: :lol:
 
Top