GayPatriot

The Internet home for American gay conservatives.

Rahm Must Go

by

In my preliminary research of presidential chiefs of staff, I don’t think I’ve discovered any as partisan as the incumbent, Rahm Emanuel.  More than any of his predecessors, he has an ideological axe to grind.

He cut his teeth in Chicago politics, his first job in national politics was national campaign director for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee in 1988.  Seventeen years later, he would take over that operation which, by definition, is highly partisan.  That job seemed particularly suited to the Chicago Democrat.  Throughout his career, he has shown a ruthless partisan streak, dedicated to electing Democrats and defeating Republicans.

Indeed, he seems to have long harbored a particular animus against his partisan adversaries.

This seems hardly the individual to administer the executive office of the President of the United States, a man elected, albeit by partisan means, to serve the entire United States.

Given that this particular president who had, before taking office, almost no experience as an administrator, it would seem he would want a gifted experience as his chief of staff, someone who could balance the president’s preference for rhetoric with a competence at administration.

Where he needs a dispassionate administrator, the president has instead appointed a partisan gunslinger.  Take a gander at Emanuel’s defense of Obama’s tack of blaming his predecessor:

Rahm Emanuel, Obama’s chief of staff, denied that the president has changed his tone toward the previous administration. He said Obama is “not trying to place blame, but he is trying to say clearly: Here’s what we’ve got and here’s our way out of it. He’s offered a positive alternative to their criticism.”

“The truth is that 98 percent of his speeches are about the future, and 2 percent are about inheritance,” Emanuel said. “Whereas I think for Republicans it’s 2 percent about the future, and 98 percent hope that the people have amnesia.”

He just had to offer that dig in against Republicans.

Shouldn’t a White House chief of staff be above politics?

It is revealing that the president would tap such a partisan for the most important administrative job in the White House.  Not a man who whose political experience fits with the new type of politician Mr. Obama claimed to be in the campaign.

As the quotation above reveals, Emanuel is instead one of those people whom Obama repeatedly decries rhetorically.  He’s always looking for someone else to blame, always attacking Republicans.

While others think Treasury Secretary Geithner should be the first to go*, I think that Emanuel’s departure would signal that the president understands his first two months in office have been far too partisan and that he intends to shift course and goven in the spirit of his campaign rhetoric of change and postpartisanship.

—–

*And I agree we need someone in that job who inspires greater confidence in the financial markets.

Comments

  2. ‘Shouldn’t a White House chief of staff be above politics?’

    That is a very curious thing to say. previous chiefs of staff include Rumsfeld, Cheney and Josh Bolten, all of which could be construed as having overtly political operating principles and practises, the first two outside of that particular job description, but as for Bolten. his contempt of congress raises flag to the international observer. Does that mean that he was/they were bad at their job? and after they stop being chief of staff and have another role in government, such as Alexander Haig, who went from CoS to secretary of state, should they be above politics then as well?

  3. Personally, I’m of the mind that having Rahm Emanuel, an individual who is completely amoral, will do anything for power, and is not above screaming “Dead! DEAD! DEAD!” in reference to people he doesn’t like, in a position of obvious power, responsibility, and control of the Obama Party is not a bad thing.

    Because having that there makes it obvious what a liar Barack Obama is.

  5. Rahm Emanuel is little more than a symptom of a much bigger problem: Barack Obama is just not that smart and is in way over his head. It matters not how much of the mess is due to bungling by the Bushies and how much of the mess is due to corrupt politicians like Barney Frank and Harry Reid. What matters is the (in)competence of the administration. The fallout will affect all of us regardless of our political leanings.

    Frank Rich writes in the NY Times: Unless and until Barack Obama addresses the full depth of Americans’ anger with his full arsenal of policy smarts and political gifts, his presidency and, worse, our economy will be paralyzed.

    My question to Rich is: what evidence do you have that Obama has a full arsenal “policy smarts” and “political gifts”?

    This isn’t a partisan question. MSM cheerleaders like Frank Rich failed utterly in their duty to fully explore Obama’s qualifications (or lack thereof) to be president (especially in difficult times).

  11. “Barack Obama is just not that smart and is in way over his head.”

    Yes. Barry has the thinnest resume of anyone ever elected to the presidency, with the possible exception of Abraham Lincoln. Something tells me Barry’s no Abraham Lincoln, despite any delusions he might have.

  12. Obama’s plan to socialize is very effective.

    As his youth movement for community service canvasses the country spreading Obama literature and recording information (i.e. does this household support Obama, do you have weapons, what is your political affiliation, etc.) Then when he is ready to drop the hammer, his civilian law enforcement (well funded and equiped as if they were military) will first get those households that are not pro Obama and have weapons.

    Then the dictatorship is born.

    May sound crazy but wait until you start getting those door knocks wanting to know so much information. The schools indoctrinating the children will be gathering information as well. There will be lists and databases identifying those who will be considered enemies of the state.

    America is in for a long battle, you may think it is crazy talk and that it can’t or won’t happen here, I tell you, IT IS HERE!

  14. I’m less worried about partisanship than I am about the revolution. Capitalism is under assault and our “mixed” market economy is headed for massive government regulation, more government subsidies, outright state ownership, price controls and stagflation.

    These guys actually want this. Topple the wealthy, babysit the poor and micro manage the middle. That is how the economy works “from the bottom up.” (As Obama so often stated during the campaign.) Obviously, you can not have an egalitarian society if the rich keep getting richer. The war on poverty is a dismal failure. Tax the rich and pull down their mansions. It was ever thus. Russia, Cuba, Eastern Europe, Viet Nam, and now Venezuela. Strange how it always takes a dictator to make it “work.”

  16. #13 – And Geena, when even Hugo Chavez criticizes our Dear Teleprompter, you know his foreign policy is in the toilet:

    http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSTRE52L19G20090322

    Now, here’s the $64 question – will the DNCMSM even notice that Hugo “Por que no te callas” Chavez has called out The Snob?

    I say this story gets buried – unlike when Chavez criticized GWB, at which point the entire DNCMSM was buzzing about it for days on end.

    Regards,
    Peter H.

  17. I think the CoS in the White House ought to reflect the views of the president and I doubt any president would pick a CoS who did not. Therefore is it not probable that Obama picked this jerk as his CoS because under Obama’s facade is someone just as ruthless and partisan as Emanuel?

  19. Peter Schiff said something interesting recently. I’m paraphrasing, but roughly: The mission of Fannie and Freddie used to be to make housing more affordable… i.e., to lower its cost to working people. Now their mission is to prop up housing prices… i.e., to re-inflate the bubble… i.e., to keep housing expensive.

    Play the linked video when you have an hour at home: he says many other interesting things.

  21. All Chiefs of Staff are political. They are there to pass and push the agenda of their bosses. The current Chief of Staff reflects the first Marxist in Chief President….with a lot of fascist and Castro/Che Guevera tactics (the latest being to mobilize the 14 million troops from his campaign) and in those weird posters of Nobama that so remind me of the musical Evita….the Peronistas and now we have the Obamaistas….Rahmbo was chosen because he uses Marxist/Stalinist/Fascist tactics….to push the Marxist/Fascist positions of the Marxist in Chief and along with David Axelrod..their job is to get the Marxist in Chief re-elected….and they will do what they have to do to get that done along with the Marxist in Chief’s Marxist/Socialist agenda…..they used “brown shirt” fascist tactics, including use of the media to get Nobama into office…and they will use the same methods to keep him in office.

    They criticize Karl Rove then adopted his precinct by precinct method to get the Marxist in Chief elected..so used a combination of 19th century methods to push a 19th century philosophy of Marxist redistribution in the 21st century…while Communist China looks more like the capitalism of the USA that ended at noon time on January 20, 2009.