Barack Obama: New Kind of Politician
President-elect Barack Obama’s choice to tap former Clinton Administration Deputy Attorney General as Attorney General sees to indicate that his campaign rhetoric notwithstanding, he’s going to govern as an establishment Democrat.
Holder was a not just Clinton Administration insider, he also brings with him some of the Clintons’ ethical baggage. As Jennifer Rubin details, his conduct in the pardon of fugitive Mark Rich in the dying hours of that Administration was cited as “unconscionable.” Some kind new of politics.
While Obama campaigned on changing Washington, Holder has spent his entire professional career in the nation’s capital where he doesn’t have a record (or the reputation) of someone who shakes things up.
Interesting that Holder is the first cabinet appointee whom the president-elect has tapped (at least that we know about). This follows the appointment of several former Clinton officials to the incoming White House staff. It looks like Obama’s team is building a team not just of Clinton insiders, but also of Washington insiders as well. This is not change. This is more of the same.
As the pro-Hillary hillbuzz puts it, Holder
. . . actually seems like a candidate Hillary Clinton would have picked had she won this year — which makes us ask just how much “change†Obama intends to bring if most of his Cabinet picks are all Clinton Administration people. Not that we’re complaining, but it’s a stark contrast to the rhetoric of his campaign in the primaries where he was all about distancing himself from the Clintons, and now it looks like just about every post will be filled with Clinton people. All of this might be a good indicator of “change†meeting ‘â€realityâ€.
(Via Instapundit.)
No wonder I’m finding it difficult to trust the president-elect.
UPDATE: Some Obama fans aren’t happy: “These guys didn’t put together a campaign in order to turn the government over to the Clintons.â€
30 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
[...] GayPatriot » Barack Obama: New Kind of Politician Blogcasting from the worldwide headquarters of the not-so-vast gay right wing conspiracy. Representing the millions of patriotic gays and lesbians across the USA by standing up for freedom, fairness, free speech, privacy and true … [...]
Pingback by GayPatriot » Barack Obama: New Kind of Politician — November 19, 2008 @ 4:53 am - November 19, 2008
I wonder if it was decided before hand as a way to get the Clinton’s support in the final days of the campaign
Comment by a different Dave — November 19, 2008 @ 9:56 am - November 19, 2008
Change = Recycling
Comment by The other Peter H — November 19, 2008 @ 10:26 am - November 19, 2008
The Chicago machine and the Clinton machine and Congressional Democrats all have maps of where each other’s bodies are buried. They rely on using each other’s “made men” to keep the honor of their brotherhood. Old time machine politics has a code like any coercive enterprise. Anyone who thought the Obama Family would take to mattresses and overwhelm the Clinton Family or the Pelosi Family or the Corzine Family or the Kennedy Family just doesn’t understand the laws of piracy.
Comment by heliotrope — November 19, 2008 @ 10:44 am - November 19, 2008
Eric Holder is a real piece of work. In addition to wrangling pardons for Marc Rich, FALN terrorists, and members of the Weather Underground, there’s this:
Guys like that make me want to believe there really is a hell.
Comment by V the K — November 19, 2008 @ 10:45 am - November 19, 2008
This reminds me of the old BBC show, ‘Yes Minister’ and ‘Yes Prime Minister.’ All about how the elected official was the dupe of the professional politicians. It matters not who wins the votes, those people who make their living in Washington are going to make sure they aren’t left out in the cold.
I remember how upset people were that W. Bush tapped some of his fathers people. So here’s my question, did Clinton start with a new slate? Since it had been 12 years since Carter - and he ran as a centrist - anything but Carter.
Comment by Leah — November 19, 2008 @ 11:18 am - November 19, 2008
Hey, It’s Change…. Change back into the Clinton administration.
Well, at least now we know what the terms of deal was to get Hillary to drop out of the race.
Comment by sonicfrog — November 19, 2008 @ 11:40 am - November 19, 2008
It’s the Mad Hatter’s tea party, “…change places!”. But it’s always the same guests.
Beltway insiders, Clinton partisans and Goldman-Sachs. “…Change places!”.
Comment by Ted B (Charging Rhino) — November 19, 2008 @ 11:52 am - November 19, 2008
I lost track… Did the Obama camp pay off the Clinton campaign debts?
I am going to make a check list of Mr. Obama’s campaign promises and see how many actually get done over the next 4 years. But of course any failures will be tagged with “Bush made such a mess that we couldn’t have possibly cleaned them up in 4 years. Give me 4 more years”
I also find it interesting that the Obama camp is investigating Mr. Clinton’s global connections to disqualify her as Secretary of State, but those same connections had no bearing on her fitness for POTUS… Interesting indeed.
I also wonder if Mr. Clinton gave Mr. Obama any hints on the best view from the Oval Office during a romantic moment.
Comment by TnnsNE1 — November 19, 2008 @ 12:29 pm - November 19, 2008
The Thunder Run has linked to this post in the - Web Reconnaissance for 11/19/2008 A short recon of what’s out there that might draw your attention, updated throughout the day…so check back often.
Comment by David M — November 19, 2008 @ 12:45 pm - November 19, 2008
You don’t want someone at Justice who “shakes things up.” You want a steady hand, knowledgeable of the needs of law enforcement.
Then you should be thrilled!
Comment by Erik — November 19, 2008 @ 1:34 pm - November 19, 2008
ROTFLMAO
Sorry, jerks, but that’s how you get a radical Leftie elected. You have your sleazy Chicago power structure compromise with the sleazy Washington power structure - which means, all those sleazy Clintonistas (if not the Clintons themselves). Welcome to your world!
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 19, 2008 @ 1:38 pm - November 19, 2008
As someone who supported Barack Obama in numerous ways, including two financial contributions to his campaign, I don’t in any way feel betrayed by the President-elect’s decision to appoint to his administration people from the Clinton Administration. I don’t think he’s turning his back on the ideals of change he promised.
Change consists of ideas and goals and leadership. “Outsiders” who don’t understand the levers of power can’t make it happen. But people experienced in the ways of Washington can make it happen.
The past is the past. I don’t care what role Eric Holder might have played in the Marc Rich pardon. I prefer to look to the future and judge Holder on what kind of leadership he provides in carrying out President Obama’s ideas and goals. I’ll apply that test to anyone named to posts in the new administration, whether they come from inside Washington or outside the Beltway.
To “sonicfrog” in #4 — As someone who supported Hillary Clinton during the primaries I would advise you to check your facts. There was no “deal” to get her to drop out of the race for the Democratic nomination. She ended her effort when it finally became obvious she couldn’t secure the support of more delegates than Obama had.
Comment by Jack Allen — November 19, 2008 @ 1:38 pm - November 19, 2008
Oh, and Hillbuzz is a scam, if not an outright parody. That blog has an inflated sense of self importance and made wildly exaggerated claims during the election. Either way, conservatives who read it got “punk’d” on election day.
Comment by Erik — November 19, 2008 @ 1:42 pm - November 19, 2008
And now Tom Daschle…..HHS …wow change is sweping the country!!!!!
Comment by Patriot MOM — November 19, 2008 @ 1:44 pm - November 19, 2008
#10 “The past is the past. I don’t care what role ….”
I hope you are not saying that a person’s past is not relevant. That would be like saying, “You know that guy Benedict Arnold sure did a good job at the Battle of Saratoga, why don’t we put him in charge of the Department of Defence?”
We are, or at least should be, responsible for our actions and should be judged accordingly. I personally do not think it is always wise to reward bad behavior.
Comment by Not Always Right — November 19, 2008 @ 2:18 pm - November 19, 2008
Pathetic.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 19, 2008 @ 2:49 pm - November 19, 2008
A lesson I tried to teach my son :
The best predictor of a person’s future behavior is their past behavior.
Both a lesson on his own behavior and the behavior of others.
Comment by TnnsNE1 — November 19, 2008 @ 3:15 pm - November 19, 2008
Of course, during the campaign, Obama said that “Washington insiders” were all corrupt and awful and were the reason our government and our country were in such terrible shape.
Now that the campaign is over, Obama flipped, and of course his acolytes like Erik are now screaming how wonderful Washington insiders are — which, of course, totally contradicts what they were saying during the campaign.
Amazing. You don’t need to be a good politician, or even an intelligent person, if you can convince enough people like Erik to repeat whatever you say as fact no matter how opposite it is to what you were saying previously.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — November 19, 2008 @ 6:59 pm - November 19, 2008
I’m just glad we can trust the new Pres elect to fullfill his promises. I’m looking forward to him not being just another polititian who lies until he’s elected. I for one was looking forward to a clearing of the air and a new direction. Oh……….(crickets)………..never mind.
Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — November 19, 2008 @ 9:53 pm - November 19, 2008
Personally, the Obama message which resonated with me was turning the page on the “failed policies of the last 8 years.” That was the line he hammered again and again throughout the campaign. It worked.
And I challenge you to find any Obama supporter who thought the President-Elect was going to bring only new voices into the government. Obviously, veterans like Tom Daschle, Hillary Clinton and Eric Holder have been around Washington for awhile. Others like Janet Napolitano, Penny Pritzker and Susan Rice have not.
Obama has a good balance in his cabinet so far.
Comment by Erik — November 20, 2008 @ 1:38 am - November 20, 2008
Still, we were promissed “change”. We were promissed that Comrade Barak Milhouse Obama Carter was “fresh and new”. So far, it’s the same shit, different day.
Do you apply the same standard to Republicans or just the liberals?
An aweful lot of looking back for someone who’s “progressive” and “forward thinking”. And why dwell on the past? Why not look forward?
Really? How many black people has he appointed or considered compared to whites?
What’s more, Erik, are you ever going to explain to me why we should ignore what a POS William Ayers is, or are you just going to spin that we should forget about the past and ignore my previous questions? I can repost them, if you want.
It seems to me that Comrade Obama seems to fancy surrounding himself with paragons of liberal failure. Seems to me that he’s inclined to do so to give himself cover when he screws the pooch. The way I see it, he’s appointing scape goats to these positions.
Either that, or he’s just an idiot.
Comment by ThatGayConservative — November 20, 2008 @ 2:22 am - November 20, 2008
It’s funny how the Obamoonies have decided suddenly that change is over-rated.
Enjoy the Dear Leader’s Kool-Aid, Erik and Jack.
Comment by V the K — November 20, 2008 @ 8:56 am - November 20, 2008
Wow, already so much negative judgment toward our next President. Be the change you want, e.g. advocate for appointments you want, don’t just whine.
To subvert the system, you must first join the system. This maxim is basic systems theory. I am advocating for Obama to choose both those with DC experience who know how to play the game AND new folk who come with different experiences, perspectives, and are not beholden to their political DC ties.
Good Luck, Obama!
Comment by elotrolado — November 20, 2008 @ 11:09 am - November 20, 2008
The “past is the past” in politics as far as I am concerned. Had Holder committed a crime while serving in the Justice Department it would be a different matter. But he did not.
In the Obama Administration, Holder and other Cabinet officers will be carrying out the policies of President Obama. If Holder fails to do so I will have erred in trusting him. And the President will have likewise erred.
It might seem clever or cute to call the President-elect “comrade” etc. but everyone ought to stand back awhile and wait to see what President Obama does. Some exit polls indicated a fifth of voters who call themselves “conservative” voted for Obama. We’ll know in a few years, maybe even a few months, if he earned their trust.
Comment by Jack Allen — November 20, 2008 @ 3:59 pm - November 20, 2008
Yup - “Just Give Marxism A Chance!” It’s the new “conservative” (ahem) thing to do.
By the way Jack, I do appreciate that you admit at #12 that you have been a strong Obammunist thoughout the general campaign, and a Hillary supporter before that. I could be mistaken here, but I believe your previous pose at GayPatriot was only that you were “considering” Obama or found him “interesting” or some such. So much for the principles of Barry Goldwater, eh? No longer useful to you.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 20, 2008 @ 5:48 pm - November 20, 2008
And I love how the flip-flopper Erik has suddenly decided that Penny Pritzker was a good thing.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — November 20, 2008 @ 7:29 pm - November 20, 2008
To V the K in # 22 — You must live inside a shell since the message can’t get through to you. Appointing people who know their way around Washington doesn’t mean President-elect Obama won’t seek change.
Change consists of ideas and ideals.
To IloveCapitalism in #25 — I think history will record that President Obama came closer to the principles of Senator Goldwater than George W. Bush did and a president McCain would have. The true believers of Goldwterism in the 1960s are today’s centrists.
Comment by Jack Allen — November 21, 2008 @ 1:18 pm - November 21, 2008
Pathetic!
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 21, 2008 @ 3:11 pm - November 21, 2008
Well, speaking as one on both counts, I’ll buy that. I’ll buy that my / Reagan’s / Goldwater’s vision of America - the smallest possible domestic government, strong defense, maximum personal liberty - are what centrist Americans really want in their hearts.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 21, 2008 @ 3:13 pm - November 21, 2008