Here's your "change"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hew

What better way to show the country that you're serious about changing the climate of partisanship and strife in Washington than by offering your Chief of Staff gig to Rahm Emanuel, a vicious partisan Democrat attack dog. . . .

---

On Fox Business News it was said that this was one of the reasons for the market falling today, it was taken by some the same way you did -- a signal from Obama that he was going to govern from the left instead of from the center like he campaigned.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joe S.

Clearly he has an agenda and will seek to execute it but, as we both know, running for office and being in office are two different things. As he gains access to various pieces of information that were previously not available to him, he may modify his position based on his enhanced frame of reference.

---

I agree...the snakes, weasels and jackals in Washington (elected and otherwise) soon suck up much of every president's idealism and force them to moderate their positions. In Bush's case that happened when he tried to be bipartisan in his first year of office. I don't think that Obama's desire to implement his ideals will be moderated...just his ability to implement them (read: filibuster). I just found it extremely curious that for someone who ran his campaign on the concept of change would, within a mere 24 hours of being elected, turn to the ultimate party hack and Washington insider who is the epitome of the snakes/weasels/jackals. Do you think that's the kind of change the independents who voted for him envisioned or expected? (that's rhetorical ;-))

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hew

I agree...the snakes, weasels and jackals in Washington (elected and otherwise) soon suck up much of every president's idealism and force them to moderate their positions. In Bush's case that happened when he tried to be bipartisan in his first year of office. I don't think that Obama's desire to implement his ideals will be moderated...just his ability to implement them (read: filibuster). I just found it extremely curious that for someone who ran his campaign on the concept of change would, within a mere 24 hours of being elected, turn to the ultimate party hack and Washington insider who is the epitome of the snakes/weasels/jackals. Do you think that's the kind of change the independents who voted for him envisioned or expected? (that's rhetorical ;-))

---

I really think a lot of it will depend on how the role of CoS if fleshed out in the WH. If the CoS is the keeper of order on the staff, it is better. If the CoS becomes Chief Policy Wonk, no it is not good for those that wanted change in Washington.

1600 Regards,

Joe S.