No Moderate Cabinet

The President-elect is still selecting his cabinet. He's met with Hillary Clinton who's said to be under consideration for Secretary of State and more former Clinton administration officials have been named to top posts.

Gregory Craig will probably get the headlines. He is to be White House counsel. Craig led Bill Clinton's legal team through the 1998 impeachment proceedings. But also on board the new administration will be Ronald Klain. Klain, who's to be Chief of Staff to the Vice President previously served as Vice President Al Gore's Chief of Staff and as a lobbyist for among others the failed mortgage giant Fannie Mae, the media giant Time Warner, and the Coalition for Asbestos Resolution, a business group that sought government help resolving asbestos lawsuits.

It's all well and good, we're told. Obama's assembling a cabinet like Lincoln's - moderate and bi-partisan. But bi-partisanship when it comes to things like settling Asbestos suits is the kind of "bi-partisanship" with corporate America that makes people sick -- and not just for political reasons

George Bush's cabinet came in crammed with industry lobbyists. The Director of the White House Council on Environmental Quality was a lawyer for the asbestos polluters. A former lobbyist for Monsanto served as Deputy Director of the EPA and the head of the Forest Service was a timber industry lobbyist.

Obama's not making the big policy appointments yet. But what if he did? Bush put an affirmative action opponent--the former dean of the Pat Robertson School of Government in charge of The White House Office of Personnel Management. At the Administration For Children and Families, Bush named a man who spent a decade fighting domestic violence and child custody laws. To head up the Advisory Committee for Reproductive Health Drugs at FDA, Bush named a physician who refused to discuss contraception with unwed women.

To come close to any of that, Obama would have to name sex radical Susie Bright for Health and Human Services, tree-sitter Julia Butterfly Hill for EPA. Dennis Kucinich for Secretary of State. Treasury? Jamie Galbraith. Defense? Trumping the criminal warmongering of Donald Rumsfeld would take a pacifist lawbreaker way to the extreme of Cindy Sheehan.

Let's not permit the pundits narrow the field with the kumbaya for moderation. The playing field of government not only needs evening up, it needs total replanting by people with at least as much vision and oomph as those they're replacing--vision of a very different kind.

Laura Flanders is the host of RadioNation and GRITtv. Watch GRITtv on Free Speech TV (Dish Network Ch. 9415) on cable (8 pm ET on Channel 67 in Manhattan) or online at GRITtv.org. Carl Ginsburg co-wrote "Who is the Oracle?"

Comments (25)

1. Sorry Ms. Flanders, but the "oomph" left right after Obama won the nomination.

   So much for being the "Washington Outsider". Not only does Obama not think outside the box, he's more than happy to sit in it. But you dems shouldn't feel too bad though, afterall he "is" resurrecting the former Clinton administration.

   Posted by ACook at 11/18/2008 @ 10:32am

2. 'Let's not permit the pundits narrow the field with the kumbaya for moderation. The playing field of government not only needs evening up, it needs total replanting by people with at least as much vision and oomph as those they're replacing--vision of a very different kind.'

   You really think anyone is listening?

   Posted by OneVote at 11/18/2008 @ 10:48am

3. Look, ACOOK is half right, HAPP somewhat right.

   Obama is NOT going to name a LOT of folks that people like Ms Flanders are going to fall in love with...and that's probably a good thing.

   YES, Bush named radical righties to his posts, but you don't counter that by naming radical LEFTIES to an Obama Administration.

   The lingering doubts about liberals still exists and Obama has to win over a lot of the country for their future to be assured. He needs to show competence first (a trait obviously lacking in Dubya) and ideology second, even third.

   Again, the Left seeks "the whole enchilada" ...they're going to be as disappointed as the Right who HOPE that Obama goes "wacky lefty" and they can try to appear to be the "voices of moderation and common sense" in 2010 and 2012.

   Obama's smarter than that.

   Posted by Mask at 11/18/2008 @ 10:55am

4. Posted by Mask at 11/18/2008 @ 10:55am

   MASK,

   We are looking for a "balance" of progressives and moderate voices in the Administration, not a DLC cabinet.

   If we wanted a DLC Administration we would have elected Hillary, not Barack!

   Posted by Metteyya at 11/18/2008 @ 11:11am

5. obama is a sellout! cut the bs! he is not a "change" candidate!

   Posted by nationy at 11/18/2008 @ 11:12am

6. "Again, the Left seeks "the whole enchilada" ...they're going to be as disappointed as the Right who HOPE that Obama goes "wacky lefty" and they can try to appear to be the "voices of moderation and common sense" in 2010 and 2012.

   Obama's smarter than that."

   Posted by Mask at 11/18/2008 @ 10:55am

   While there may be some truth to that, the fact is Americans are far more liberal than they self-identify.

   With the exception of a small handful (mckinney etc.) there is no "wacky left".

   Anything short of changing the extreme rightward course of the last 20 yrs, would be unacceptable.

   No one is screaming for far left. We are screaming for accountability, transparency and constitutionality. Three things desperately lacking in the past few administrations.

   Eric

   Posted by Malcontent at 11/18/2008 @ 11:43am

7. I'm tanned, rested, and ready!

   Posted by susiebright at 11/18/2008 @ 11:50am

8. Posted by Malcontent at 11/18/2008 @ 11:43am

   Well, first....you're going to catch holy hell around here, Eric, for calling Cynthia McKinney "wacky"!...heheh

   Second, the IMAGERY is what I'm talking about. If Obama appoints some "Joceyln Elders" who runs off at the mouth about "teaching kids masturbation"...it's going to blow up in his face and give fodder for the Repubs in 2010 and 2012.

   He has sober, serious people who solve problems with thought and competence....the Right will be left hanging high-n-dry and Obama's re-eletion will put Reagan 1984 to shame.

   Posted by Mask at 11/18/2008 @ 12:04pm

9. Posted by susiebright at 11/18/2008 @ 11:50am

   Nawwwwww...it couldn't be her!

   (kudos to Bugs in "Rabbit Hood" upon Errol Flynn's arrival...heheh)

   Posted by Mask at 11/18/2008 @ 12:25pm

10. 'Hillary Clinton to accept Obama's offer of secretary of state job'

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/nov/

    Surprise...surprise....NOT!

    Posted by OneVote at 11/18/2008 @ 1:04pm

11. I don't see that anything Laura said here is of consequence. I hope the Democrats get past settling old scores and do what is best for the people.

    Posted by jsens at 11/18/2008 @ 2:29pm

12. Mr. Obama is indeed devious. Consider the notion he offers, subject to many provisions, the post of Sec'y of State, or some other cabinet post, to Sen. H. Clinton. Since vetting will "prove" she might be subject to conflict of interest, not due to her own doings but due the doings of her husband, WJ Clinton, the "offer" will be recinded (with crocodile tears). This effectively will marginalize both H. Clinton AND more importantly WJ Clinton. Now I ask you, isn't that a really nifty ploy to eliminate both Clintons from much future influence within either the Democratic Party as well as Mr. Obama's governmental Administration ?

    Posted by tucanofulano at 11/18/2008 @ 2:44pm

13. Why, exactly, is a moderate right politican like Obama going to name anyone other than people onboard with his moderate right agenda to his cabinet?

    Or, if we want to be slightly more charitable, perhaps he will select people based on their qualifications first, then make sure they aren't too far out of line of acceptable thought.

    Personally, I'd love to see the criteria for selection for someone like the Secretary of Defense for any administration. And, I dont know about you, but I can't think of any criteria for Secretary of Defense that would leave Cindy Sheehan a contender.

    While I can appreciate the irony of imagining what "ideological" appointments from the left might look like, I think we should learn the central lesson of the Bush administration - i.e., there is no faster way to undermine your political philosophy than to hire incompetent proponents of it to run the government.

    That's what you advocating as a tit-for-tat measure, and it's a bad idea.

    Posted by srjenkins at 11/18/2008 @ 3:29pm

14. Posted by Mask at 11/18/2008 @ 12:04pm

    This is a classic example. All people masterbate. It is the ONLY safe sex. It is normal, healthy and the most logical alternative to pregnancy and disease.

    The fact of the matter is Joceyln Elders was the most rational intellegent candidate for the position.

    Sadly, the puritanical amongst us trashed her for being medically correct (can't have a SG like that!) and logical (can't work for govt. than, I guess). And the press and intellegent people couldn't stop it.

    (Imagine, for one fine moment, that everybody who derided her AND had ever masterbated, just disappeared, in a flash of sad irony...)

    Just because you are stupid and uptight (not you personally), doesn't make me radical. These folks fight against their very nature.

    The left isn't whacko, they are.

    (That was a poor example BTW.)

    Posted by Malcontent at 11/18/2008 @ 4:32pm

15. "This is a classic example. All people masterbate."

    Posted by Eric at 11/18/2008 @ 4:32pm

    I would bet a chocolate malt that FG would deny he does.

    Posted by Benchrest at 11/18/2008 @ 4:45pm

16. Posted by Benchrest at 11/18/2008 @ 4:45pm

    Even when he's thinking about Hillary?

    Posted by Malcontent at 11/18/2008 @ 5:02pm

17. 'President Bill Clinton was widely criticized for some pardons and other acts of executive clemency;[1] collectively, this controversy has sometimes been called Pardongate in the press.[2] Longtime Clinton supporters and Democratic leaders such as James Carville, Terry McAuliffe and Jimmy Carter all were critical toward the Clinton pardons, with Carter calling them "disgraceful". '

    Wikipedia..........

    Eric Holder gets not for AG.

    'The only hesitancy about Holder's selection was that he himself had reservations about going through a confirmation process that was likely to revive questions about his role in signing off on the controversial pardon of fugitive financier Marc Rich. Although there is no evidence that Holder actively pushed the pardon, he was criticized for not raising with the White House the strong objections that some Justice Department lawyers and federal prosecutors in New York had to pardoning somebody who had fled the country. But after reviewing the evidence in the case, and checking with staffers on the Senate Judiciary Committee, Obama aides and Holder both decided the issue was highly unlikely to prove an obstacle to his confirmation, one of the sources said--especially given the Democrats' more sizable post-election majority in the Senate.' Newsweek, Mike Isikoff, Obama's AG, TDay

    Posted by OneVote at 11/18/2008 @ 5:08pm

18. Reformation of the Justice Department anyone?

    Posted by OneVote at 11/18/2008 @ 5:11pm

19. Posted by Malcontent at 11/18/2008 @ 5:02pm

    Possibly your funniest comment, ever.

    Posted by srjenkins at 11/18/2008 @ 5:11pm

20. Laura Flanders' brains are on fire. She wants:

    <<< Susie Bright for Health and Human Services, tree-sitter Julia Butterfly Hill for EPA. Dennis Kucinich for Secretary of State. Treasury? Jamie Galbraith. Defense? >>>

    I only wish Obama listens to her advice.

    Posted by Hugo_Pirovano at 11/18/2008 @ 5:19pm

21. Even when he's thinking about Hillary?

    Posted by Malcontent at 11/18/2008 @ 5:02pm

    LOL!!!! Perfect!

    Posted by Benchrest at 11/18/2008 @ 5:38pm

22. Succeed or fail, this time there can be no excuses. Posted by HAPPYLonghorn at 11/18/2008 @ 10:41am

    Funny coming from the perspective of a conservative. A group who has made tons of excuses for the Republican Congress and President.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 11/18/2008 @ 9:39pm

23. Succeed or fail, this time there can be no excuses. Posted by HAPPYLonghorn at 11/18/2008 @ 10:41am

    What's that tried and true excuse? Oh yeah whenever a Republican does something wrong they are in fact not a Republican. That's it. Give me a break Happy. Are you guys willing to take this sham of a war to fault? The massive deficit? The increasing lack of security for Americans? How about the fact that most of the world hates us? Or the economy that is tanking? According to your argument Bush has had 8 years and our country is shambles therefore it is his fault.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 11/18/2008 @ 9:41pm

24. Oh and by extension according to your argument it is the fault of the conservative ideology as a whole.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 11/18/2008 @ 9:42pm

25. As I have read elsewhere and I think I agree:

    Conservatives are trying to create a fake division between progressives and the Obama administration by going on and on about whether these "Clinton" appointments are "really change" blah blah..."aren't you progressives mad? you should be!" etc. etc.

    it's important for progressives not to get sucked into this trap.

    what's at issue (as I've heard other progressives smartly point out) is the policies, not the identity of the appointees.

    Posted by badiou at 11/19/2008 @ 4:35pm