Axlerod on Faux - Chris Wallace: "The President Elect will set the policies and..

[DCBob]

those in his administration will implement them." (paraphrasing) He said this in response to a comment that many are concerned that Obama's cabinet appointments do not represent change.

[jefferson_dem]

1. The Faux hacks are hilarious...

They are trying to adopt Obama now, saying his picks are reassuring in that they are tilted toward the experienced centrism. At the same time, they are obviously trying to marginalize the activist left, accusing Obama of letting them down.

Wha happened to the radical Socialist? :shrug:

Folks, they got nuthin'. Obama's a political genius.

[DCBob]

3. So true. It sounds like Faux is in the tank for Obama now!!

Too funny!

[merh]

7. I post on a mixed board (with righties, centies) and the righties

are about to loose their mind. The premature gotchas, the criticism before he is sworn in, the "oh, he let the left down" - it is hysterical.

I do believe Obama is wise and I can't wait until he is sworn in so that changes can start to happen. Until then, I get to laugh my ass off at the idiot right.

They have a party to rebuild and they are too worry about Obama to notice. :evilgrin:

[Kalyke]

2. Thus far they don't represent change.

I'm not having a screaming fit over it, but I'm not happy, either.

[DCBob]

5. What if these "non-change" people cooperate with Obama and implement his change policies?

Wouldn't that still be change?

[stillcool]

10. Ah...more of the

the group think, lockstep thing I keep reading about. Obama really sucks, doesn't he?

[high density]

17. So you think George Bush or John McCain would've brought in the same people as Obama?

:eyes: :crazy:

[BlueManDude]

4. The current administration was/is infested with people from the FORD ADMINISTRATION

I don't recall all the complaints about that.

[Thrill]

6. Robert Kuttner on ABC. Seemed fine with his picks. Although he would like to see a few Progressives

on the economic Councils. He named a couple. Didn't catch the names

[DCBob]

9. I think there are a few "progressives" coming.

Obama wants a diverse administration and I am sure he will have it.

[rocktivity]

8. They may not represent change from the Clinton Administration

but then again, EVERYONE did pretty well during the Clinton Administration.

:headbang:
rocknation

[Diamonique]

11. What Axelrod said is what I've always thought to be true.

The president sets the policy, and the cabinet implements it.

These people wouldn't have been selected unless they agreed up front to follow Obama's lead. I never saw a problem with his choices.

I gotta tell ya... I am a lefty left liberal, and I've seen articles and web posts talking about Obama letting lefties down. I don't feel like that at all.

And I'm finding it quite hilarious watching the wingnuts twist themselves into pretzels kissing President-elect Obama's ass.

[Skwmom]

12. But what if all of the people surrounding you in an area don't agree with your policy and

start to leak to the press?

Wouldn't that represent a problem? It's not like you could just fire them b/c it would make you look inept for hiring them in the first place. That's why I don't understand the argument that Obama can just appoint all these people that "disagree" with him.

[FrenchieCat]

13. What if you are underestimating the strength of Obama's will and ideas?

What if Obama prefers centrists to carryout his progressive policies because there is a bigger chance of them passing that way? What if that may be the smartest way to get done what he wants done? What if Barack Obama knows more about how to get things done in Washington than you?

What if, what if, what if?

[Skwmom]

19. You think all of those "centrists" are just going to carryout an agenda that goes against

their corporatist, big money, Neocon interests? Obama is already sending out signals that he will play ball. You don't just send out that kind of message to people like this and then go PSYCH.

One person is not going to be able to turn this country around. That is why he needs to be surrounded by the best and the brightest. Instead, in so many areas he is surrounding himself with the same idiots that got us into this mess. This is like watching a train wreck in slow motion.

Have you ever heard the saying, the mind has the infinite capacity to rationalize? Well, I've seen some really bright and good people rationalize "going along" with things that are contrary to everything they believe in. I'm not saying that Obama isn't a good man but he will be under tremendous pressure to go the path of least "resistance." Which is why we should never make it easy for him to go down that path.

Obama is going to have a LOT of people pushing him to serve the big money, corporatists, neocon special interests. If we don't push back, and push back HARD, it will make it that much easier for them to persuade him that he should go along with what they are pushing for him to do.

[polichick]

16. He could just send Rahmbo to see them. :)

[Skwmom]

20. I've found myself wondering just who Rahmbo is to keep in line?

[geek tragedy]

14. That ignores the nature of the bureaucratic state.

The President doesn't oversee everything that goes on in the Departments of State or Commerce or whatever. The people he appoints are in charge of that.

I don't trust people like Michael O'Hanlon to implement good policy.

[No Elephants]

15. the President will set the policies. Well, duh!

[DCBob]

18. You would think that would be obvious but many in our party think Hillary and others may go rogue.

Furthermore, if she or anyone did, they would be fired.