November 28, 2008 7:06 AM
Is Obama's foreign policy team leaning too far - to the right?
Some on the left are fretting that President-elect Barack Obama's foreign policy and transition teams are too Clinton-centric and conservative.
Vice-president-elect Joe Biden initially backed the war in Iraq and has supported other military interventions in his long Senate career. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton also supported the Iraq war resolution, a vote that Obama framed as a critical failure of judgement during the primary. She's also taken a harder line on Iran than the president-elect--and is in line to be his Secretary of State.Jim Jones, a retired Marine General who advised Clinton, Obama and John McCain during the campaign and has refused to disclose his partisan leanings, is slated for National Security Adviser. And running the Pentagon? For at least the first year of his administration, it's virtually certain that the new president will retain Robert Gates--the Secretary of Defense appointed by President Bush.
Liberals scored one victory, though, when a top candidate to take over the CIA withdrew from consideration this week after concerns surfaced over his views on the agency's interrogation methods. In a letter taking his name out of consideration, John Brennan said he didn't want to be a "distraction" to the president-elect.
Yet most leaders on the left are keeping to themselves any criticisms of the centrist quartet that will help shape and implement Obama's foreign policy.
For now there is a measure of trust from liberals who believe Obama will hold to the principles he espoused during the campaign: end the war in Iraq, negotiate with adversaries and restore America's standing in the global community.
"We should have a simple sign on our wall saying, 'It's the policy stupid,'" said Tom Andrews, the former Maine congressman, riffing off James Carville's 1992 Clinton campaign mantra. "Many will give President-elect Obama the benefit of the doubt about who is executing the policy as long as there is no comprise or backtracking on the policy itself," added Andrews, who now heads the group "Win Without War."
Salon says progressives aren't ready to panic, yet.
So far, the Obama administration is shaping up to be more or less exactly what Obama always said he was, in between the "hope" and "change" rhetoric: pragmatic, consensus-oriented and interested in getting things done. That's not necessarily what a lot of Democrats want him to be, though. Obama was bound to disappoint his supporters; think of the transition as the road map for how it's going to happen. And know that it won't come as a surprise to the president-elect himself; in 2006, in "The Audacity of Hope," he wrote that people tend to "project their own views" on him, and recognized what could happen as a result: "As such I am bound to disappoint some, if not all of them.""This has been the pattern for him historically -- the left falls in love with him because of his eloquent oratory and his, I think, genuine sense of mission to help people who are less fortunate," said biographer David Mendell. "But he has legislated from somewhere in the middle, and then once he gets into a general election campaign, he tends to squirt that direction even farther. He'll irritate people on both sides -- except the right expects him to be a Democrat, and the far left expects him to be one of them. And he's consistently disappointed the far left."
November 28, 2008
8:24 AM
George Hayduke writes:
Interesting that the article seems to presume a disconnect between the President and his cabinet officials. I don't think Obama will tolerate too many loose canons on his watch. I get a feeling that he's a Harry Truman kind of guy - "The buck stops here"!
I would expect that he will make policy and his staff will ensure that it's implemented. I don't think there's going to be a "man behind the curtain" as there was in the Bush White House (I'm thinking that was Cheney!)
November 28, 2008
8:25 AM
George Hayduke writes:
Interesting that the article seems to presume a disconnect between the President and his cabinet officials. I don't think Obama will tolerate too many loose canons on his watch. I get a feeling that he's a Harry Truman kind of guy - "The buck stops here"!
I would expect that he will make policy and his staff will ensure that it's implemented. I don't think there's going to be a "man behind the curtain" as there was in the Bush White House (I'm thinking that was Cheney!)
November 28, 2008
8:26 AM
Sock Ray Blue writes:
Mark, you expected something different? Obama is a virgin in a field of political horn dogs. I've seriously wondered if his presidency will end in suicide. Either real or contrived. I guess we'll have to wait and see how this chapter ends. I'm excited if for any reason than the coming melodrama.
November 28, 2008
8:29 AM
Sock Ray Blue writes:
Mark, you expected something different? Obama is a virgin in a field of political horn dogs. I've seriously wondered if his presidency will end in suicide. Either real or contrived. I guess we'll have to wait and see how this chapter ends. I'm excited if for any reason than the coming melodrama.
November 28, 2008
9:38 AM
history buff writes:
It looks like Obama wants to change foreign policy but he wants to act responsibly. By having foreign policy advisers that supported the Bush status quo at one time, he will have a competent group of people with whom he can open a dialogue. Obama wants to move things from where they are, so it is completely logical that he would have advisers who can tell him where things are, instead of sycophants telling him what he wants to hear.
After all, Obama was a law professor before he was a politician. The Socratic method is ingrained in his mind. But it requires people to ask questions, something Bush didn't tolerate.
It will be good for the nation to have a president who thinks instead of an autocratic personality that acts on gut instinct, which was mostly filled with beer at the time he should have been developing his resources for intellectual activity.
November 28, 2008
10:20 AM
Shaggy writes:
For someone who based their candidacy on change he sure seems to have picked career Politicians as his staff.
Thank god every single one of them has more experience then him.
He realizes he has no experience and needed to get people to tutor him for on the job training.
November 28, 2008
10:31 AM
SASQUATCH writes:
THE OBAMA ECONOMIC TEAM IS RIGHT OF CENTER...Volcker, Summers and Geithner could or have served Republican administrations.
As for foreign policy is concerned, Hillary is nearly as much a hard-core lefty-socialist as is Obama. And the last time I looked at my political compass, socialism always ponts to the left!
November 28, 2008
10:44 AM
SASQUATCH writes:
WHERE IS THAT OBAMA LOVE?
I thought that by now Obama would have had an opportunity to chat with that al-Qaeda and other terrorists crowd in order to "spread the love around." After all, some terrorist groups publicly backed his run, they must be pals. Instead of "spreading the the love around," we and the Europeans are now being TARGETED for execution. Suddenly, I don't feel quite as safe as two days ago.
Is Obama just waiting for the Lincoln Bedroom to become available?
What's up with that, anyway?
November 28, 2008
10:47 AM
history buff writes:
I thought my critique posted at 938 was pretty good, but I have to admit, Time's analysis might be better.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1862446,00.html?imw=Y
November 28, 2008
10:49 AM
LetsThink writes:
Is it possible for president-elect Obama to lean too far to the right????
This is the man that had the most liberal voting record of any person in the Senate.
November 28, 2008
10:49 AM
SASQUATCH writes:
WHERE IS THAT OBAMA LOVE?
I thought that by now Obama would have had an opportunity to chat with that al-Qaeda and other terrorists crowd in order to "spread the love around." After all, some terrorist groups publicly backed his run, they must be pals. Instead of "spreading the the love around," we and the Europeans are now being TARGETED for execution. Suddenly, I don't feel quite as safe as two days ago.
Is Obama just waiting for the Lincoln Bedroom to become available?
What's up with that, anyway?
November 28, 2008
12:07 PM
SASQUATCH writes:
OBAMA'S CAP-AND-TRADE FLUSHED DOWN THE MAHOOLA...ALONG WITH GLOBAL WARMING!
PARIS - There is both growing public reluctance to make personal sacrifices and a distinct lack of enthusiasm for the major international efforts now underway to battle climate change, according to findings of a poll of 12,000 citizens in 11 countries, including Canada.
Results of the poll were released this week in advance of the start of a major international conference in Poland where delegates are considering steps toward a new international climate-change treaty to replace the Kyoto Protocol, which expires in 2012.
There already are reports emerging that some countries, such as coal-dependent Poland, are pushing for special treatment to avoid making major commitments to slash carbon emissions during a global economic downturn.
A file photo showd snow cannons blasting artificial snow on a slope in Kitzbuehel, Austria. Due to the uncommonly warm weather many European alpine ski resorts have no snow.
Roland Schlager/Getty Images
Less than half of those surveyed, or 47 per cent, said they were prepared to make personal lifestyle changes to reduce carbon emissions, down from 58 per cent last year.
Only 37 per cent said they were willing to spend "extra time" on the effort, an eight-point drop.
And only one in five respondents, or 20 per cent said they'd spend extra money to reduce climate change. That's down from 28 per cent a year ago.
November 28, 2008
2:25 PM
incognitoboy writes:
sasquatch-
is 'mahoola' a word you made up on your own? or are you just parroting a more clever person, YET again? is it just too much for you and shaggy to believe that obama MAY just have a handle on reality that you didn't expect? is that why you just HAD to find SOMETHING negative to say since the articles about the appointments at issue here don't proclaim the impending slide towards marxism you've been wringing your hands about for months now?
"This has been the pattern for him historically -- the left falls in love with him because of his eloquent oratory and his, I think, genuine sense of mission to help people who are less fortunate," said biographer David Mendell. "But he has legislated from somewhere in the middle, and then once he gets into a general election campaign, he tends to squirt that direction even farther. He'll irritate people on both sides -- except the right expects him to be a Democrat, and the far left expects him to be one of them. And he's consistently disappointed the far left."
CONSISTENTLY DISSAPOINTED THE FAR LEFT. hmmmm.....
yup. marxist socialism is DEFINITELY on the way, boys. :roll: so now you guys are going to have to criticize our president-elect for something substantial.....like his annoying habit of dissapointing the far left.
"So far, the Obama administration is shaping up to be more or less exactly what Obama always said he was, in between the "hope" and "change" rhetoric: pragmatic, consensus-oriented and interested in getting things done."
i'm looking forward to seeing a president who's aware of his own limitations, and able to surround himself with those people who know the score, and who both disagree and agree with him, and MAYBE an intelligent road can be travelled then. MAYBE we can have an administration we can all (or most) be proud of. just maybe....
we haven't had one of those for awhile.
November 28, 2008
3:31 PM
incognitoboy writes:
sasquatch-
is 'mahoola' a word you made up on your own? or are you just parroting a more clever person, YET again? is it just too much for you and shaggy to believe that obama MAY just have a handle on reality that you didn't expect? is that why you just HAD to find SOMETHING negative to say since the articles about the appointments at issue here don't proclaim the impending slide towards marxism you've been wringing your hands about for months now?
"This has been the pattern for him historically -- the left falls in love with him because of his eloquent oratory and his, I think, genuine sense of mission to help people who are less fortunate," said biographer David Mendell. "But he has legislated from somewhere in the middle, and then once he gets into a general election campaign, he tends to squirt that direction even farther. He'll irritate people on both sides -- except the right expects him to be a Democrat, and the far left expects him to be one of them. And he's consistently disappointed the far left."
CONSISTENTLY DISSAPOINTED THE FAR LEFT. hmmmm.....
yup. marxist socialism is DEFINITELY on the way, boys. :roll: so now you guys are going to have to criticize our president-elect for something substantial.....like his annoying habit of dissapointing the far left.
"So far, the Obama administration is shaping up to be more or less exactly what Obama always said he was, in between the "hope" and "change" rhetoric: pragmatic, consensus-oriented and interested in getting things done."
i'm looking forward to seeing a president who's aware of his own limitations, and able to surround himself with those people who know the score, and who both disagree and agree with him, and MAYBE an intelligent road can be travelled then. MAYBE we can have an administration we can all (or most) be proud of. just maybe....
we haven't had one of those for awhile.
November 28, 2008
7:06 PM
SASQUATCH writes:
INCOG:
MAHOOLA == DUMPER, CRAPPER, SHITTER ON "THE BIG ISLAND!" AKA OUTHOUSE IN HOPE, ARKANSASS!
November 29, 2008
12:50 PM
Here we go again writes:
Change We Can Believe In - another campaign lie. The old guard partisan Washington insiders, many from the Clinton admin, are back in power and the Messiah wants us to ignore the contradiction and pretend we didn't notice.
Democrats have always assumed that voters were stupid and beholden to them. This is no different.
November 29, 2008
2:06 PM
Captain Blah writes:
Here We Go Again, blah blah blah, another hate America if I don't get my way right wing cry baby. Blah blah blah. Hates democracy and the American public because they voted for someone it doesn't like. Blah Blah Blah. Won't give Obama a fair chance. Blah blah blah. Typical. Blah blah blah. Not a real American.
November 29, 2008
5:10 PM
Kevin J Jones writes:
These appointments are a clear repudiation of Obama's reformist image. He only attracted anti-war support because he opposed the Iraq War. While people tried to portray this as evidence of his non-conformist virtue (or of his secret hippie identity), they do not note that his was the only practical position for a man seeking election in Chicago's left-wing Hyde Park.
Instead of "right-wing," we should call this cabinet "hawkish." They brought us the disaster of Kosovo, which only looks minor compared to Iraq.
People who oppose our government's bad foreign policy exist on the right and the left. Just look at Pat Buchanan and his excellent journal The American Conservative.
It was easily predicted that neo-conservatives would be writing a bunch of stories saying "golly, Obama's not a peacenik after all!" They are preparing to insinuate themselves and their baleful policies into an Obama administration.
Terrible to say, Obama may even be more likely to bomb Iran to prove his bona fides.
The idea that the left is inherently dovish is stuck in the Vietnam era. Too many in the American left opposed entry into 20th century wars not because they themselves were wisely anti-war, but because they were "anti-anti-communist" or even pro-communist.
Since the French Revolution, the left has always benefited from war, which is one big government project to overturn the status quo.
Bellicose leftists enjoy an increase of wartime governmental powers at home. They are happy to rewrite the laws of conquered countries and they also help write propaganda to portray in the enemy what they don't like about the U.S.
Sorry, anti-war progressives, but Obama was never your man.
November 29, 2008
8:21 PM
Hogar De Vuelta (العودة) Barack Obama so far so good, but trust is built on actions, not rheto writes:
I must say so far I have been surprised, but the Times take on it may be the bigger picture. Retreat with the cover of hawks may just be his aim. I am particularly pleased by his appointment of Larry Summers. I nice sharp stick in the eye of the FemiNazis who ran him out on a rail at Harvard.
I am certainly hoping for a different Obama presidency than his rhetoric promised. He seems to be a master of Post Modern speech which is heard by everyone the way they want to hear it.
November 30, 2008
6:45 AM
leftside writes:
Obama is an intelligent man. Intelligent men are not afraid to surround themselves with the best people in order to accomplish goals and do whats best for America.
Bush was not an intelligent man. As such, he surrounded himself with "yes men". That's what big headed people do when put in a situation they can't handle and don't have the courage to admit it.
I guess will just have to wait and see which philosophy works out better for America.
November 30, 2008
10:24 AM
Ben-- Former Democrat writes:
Left,
We really don't know how intelligent Obama is or isn't, since he has been fiercely protected by the media. He has been smart enough though, to be ambigious enough, to win the presidency of the USA.
November 30, 2008
12:23 PM
ML writes:
Time magazine article by Joe Klein - a good read:
We have "only one President at a time," Barack Obama said in his debut press conference as President-elect. Normally, that would be a safe assumption — but we're learning not to assume anything as the charcoal-dreary economic winter approaches. By mid-November, with the financial crisis growing worse by the day, it had become obvious that one President was no longer enough (at least not the President we had). So, in the days before Thanksgiving, Obama began to move — if not to take charge outright, then at least to preview what things will be like when he does take over in January. He became a more public presence, taking questions from the press three days in a row. He named his economic team. He promised an enormous stimulus package that would somehow create 2.5 million new jobs, and began to maneuver the new Congress toward having the bill ready for him to sign — in a dramatic ceremony, no doubt — as soon as he assumes office.
That we have slightly more than one President for the moment is mostly a consequence of the extraordinary economic times. Even if George Washington were the incumbent, the markets would want to know what John Adams was planning to do after his Inauguration. And yet this final humiliation seems particularly appropriate for George W. Bush. At the end of a presidency of stupefying ineptitude, he has become the lamest of all possible ducks.
It is in the nature of mainstream journalism to attempt to be kind to Presidents when they are coming and going but to be fiercely skeptical in between. I've been feeling sorry for Bush lately, a feeling partly induced by recent fictional depictions of the President as an amiable lunkhead in Oliver Stone's W. and in Curtis Sittenfeld's terrific novel American Wife. There was a photo in the New York Times that seemed to sum up his current circumstance: Bush in Peru, dressed in an alpaca poncho, standing alone just after the photo op at the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation forum, with various Asian leaders departing the stage, none of them making eye contact with him. Bush has that forlorn “what-the-hell-happened?” expression on his face, the one that has marked his presidency at difficult times. You never want to see the President of the United States looking like that.
So I've been searching for valedictory encomiums. His position on immigration was admirable and courageous; he was right about the Dubai Ports deal and about free trade in general. He spoke well, in the abstract, about the importance of freedom. He is an impeccable classicist when it comes to baseball. And that just about does it for me. I'd add the bracing moment of Bush with the bullhorn in the ruins of the World Trade Center, but that was neutered in my memory by his ridiculous, preening appearance in a flight suit on the deck of the aircraft carrier beneath the "Mission Accomplished" sign. The flight-suit image is one of the two defining moments of the Bush failure. The other is the photo of Bush staring out the window of Air Force One, helplessly viewing the destruction wrought by Hurricane Katrina. This is a presidency that has wobbled between those two poles — overweening arrogance and paralytic incompetence.(President Bush in the Middle East.)
The latter has held sway these past few months as the economy has crumbled. It is too early to rate the performance of Bush's economic team, but we have more than enough evidence to say, definitively, that at a moment when there was a vast national need for reassurance, the President himself was a cipher. Yes, he's a lame duck with an Antarctic approval rating — but can you imagine Bill Clinton going so gently into the night? There are substantive gestures available to a President that do not involve the use of force or photo ops. For example, Bush could have boosted the public spirit — and the auto industry — by announcing that he was scrapping the entire federal automotive fleet, including the presidential limousine, and replacing it with hybrids made in Detroit. He could have jump-started — and he still could — the Obama plan by releasing funds for a green-jobs program to insulate public buildings. He could start funding the transit projects already approved by Congress.
In the end, though, it will not be the creative paralysis that defines Bush. It will be his intellectual laziness, at home and abroad. Bush never understood, or cared about, the delicate balance between freedom and regulation that was necessary to make markets work. He never understood, or cared about, the delicate balance between freedom and equity that was necessary to maintain the strong middle class required for both prosperity and democracy. He never considered the complexities of the cultures he was invading. He never understood that faith, unaccompanied by rigorous skepticism, is a recipe for myopia and foolishness. He is less than President now, and that is appropriate. He was never very much of one.
November 30, 2008
12:56 PM
American Citzen writes:
"His position on immigration was admirable and courageous"
F*^ck Joe Klein
November 30, 2008
1:00 PM
leftside writes:
Ben, the reason you feel that way is because he doesn't have an "R" next to his name.
Be patient. Obama will get this fixed and then you can elect someone you'd like to have a beer or maybe even Palin who took 5 or 6 years to get a basic degree to create another disaster. Since intelligent people bother you, you'll always have plenty of candidates in the Republican party to accommodate your needs.
November 30, 2008
1:35 PM
Here we go again writes:
Everyone assumes that Obama is intelligent.
That's because affirmative action always creates doubts about multiple ivy league creds that are very hard to come by on your own.
November 30, 2008
1:49 PM
Ben-- Former Democrat writes:
Left,
You Dems sure are scared of Sarah aren't you....
November 30, 2008
4:39 PM
leftside writes:
Ben,
D*mn right. Any idiot you clowns put up has a chance of winning if the propaganda sells and the middle falls asleep like they did in 2004. Even "Joe the Plumber".
Problem is you "clowns" don't give a sh*t who runs on the Republican ticket and the sad thing is you've got nobody coming up with any sense of country, other than what profits can be scammed from the working class and their children.
November 30, 2008
6:01 PM
Ben-Former Democrat writes:
Left,
Apply what you just said to Democrats and Obama. That is how I feel.
Sarah is true America. That's why she scares you. Enjoy your left wing utopia while you can. It ends in 4 years.
November 30, 2008
6:39 PM
jay-former republican writes:
now you're just being silly, benny.
you can't defend a talking monkey like sarah as your party's best candidate for the most powerful job on the planet and still maintain your credibility here.
she scares us because she's unqualified.
you have to wonder why you don't feel the same way.
leftside puts it very well.
you'll actively vote against your own best interests...as well as the country's...because of your ignorant political affiliations based upon your anti-immigration emotions.
November 30, 2008
6:56 PM
Ben -hates radical liberals writes:
jay,
Careful jay your misogyny and fear is showing.
Oh, and my radical anti-American left wing friend, you don't know my political affiliation, unless you pegged me as an American.
November 30, 2008
7:24 PM
leftside writes:
What's the matter Ben can't you come up with your own words when the truth hits you in the face.
"Enjoy your left wing utopia while you can. It ends in 4 years."
That's what your ilk claimed this time around. Fortunately for America the youth didn't fall for your garbage and the Palin ***wink*** only aroused cynical old men such as yourself.
November 30, 2008
7:54 PM
Ben-- Former Democrat writes:
Left,
Well I came up with that all by my lonesome.
As for the youth, yeah Democrats have had their way with them. Wait until they are older, they will wise up. I did.
December 1, 2008
8:01 AM
JMH writes:
"Instead of "right-wing," we should call this cabinet "hawkish." They brought us the disaster of Kosovo, which only looks minor compared to Iraq." - Kevin Jones
WTF are you smoking? Looks like you have really gone out of your mind with this statement...
Lets see... Kosovo - took a couple of months, no Americans died and it is fairly stable to this day. No fighting, nothing... On the other hand Iraq - going on for years and probably a few more, thousands have died on both sides, we got NOTHING out of it, it CONTINUES to cost us BILLIONS and it looks like it will be unstable for quite some time (probably for the next decade).
They aren't even close... In Kosovo, our objectives where achieved quickly and rather cheaply, in Iraq, al-Quida's objectives seem to being achieved and we have gotten nothing in return for this folly... sorry you guys supported this calamity, but you were all suckers... Face it!
From reading some of the posts from the anti-American rightwingers in this country, it sure sounds like they will say anything to try and bring Obama & America down. Nothing he does will make them happy and they are willing to go completely out on the edge of reality to try and trash him and bring down America with him!
If he was to go far left, I could expect the whining from you NeoCon stooges, but he tries to set up a centrist government that will actually try to govern with pragmatism, differing viewpoints and inclusion with an eye actually on reality (which is what we should all want right?)... so the NeoCons gotta make up stupid sh*t like "the disaster in Kosovo" to justify their hatred of all things not NeoCon? Pathetic...
Love it or leave it NeoCons, please get out of my country, since you have already done everything you can to destroy it these last years, it is quite obvious you still want to get in the way of fixing it. You know what, you are irrelivant, accept it! If you don't want to help trying to fix the mess left behind from your FAILED NeoCon polices and you aren't getting out of the way, then YOU are part of the problem!
We will get America back on it's feet again, respected, prosperous and a global leader again! Cry about it all you want... no one cares what you guys have to say anymore - traitors!
December 1, 2008
8:14 AM
gr8fuldude writes:
I think rather than calling the foreign policy team "right wing", I would use the term "centrist". Obama is a bright guy. As such, he will surround himself with the brightest people he can find. I can respect that, without regard to their political labels. After the last eight years, I would think that the people of America would welcome someone who can put the nation's well being above political infighting.
December 1, 2008
10:09 AM
jay writes:
that's a good point, dude. i think he's smart for picking a fairly centrist support team so far.
benny...can you provide some examples of positions of mine that support your latest conspiracy theory that i'm "radical, anti-American, and left wing" or did you just get caught lying...again...
December 1, 2008
2:25 PM
Russ writes:
Obama won the election and then he turned to Axelrod and said, "now what?". So their going out to get Clintons old group because they don't know what else to do.
December 1, 2008
2:49 PM
leftside writes:
...and Bush went out and got Reagan cronies.
The difference is, Clinton's old group, as you call them, were extremely successful. What...do you want Reagans cronies back? Don't answer that, you stepped in it deep enough as it is.
December 1, 2008
3:16 PM
Hank writes:
As one who did not totally support either candidate, I'm glad Obama is not going full steam ahead with a precipitous withdrawl from Iraq. With all the other headaches, such as the economy, I don't look forward to increased chaos over there. But I would look forward to most troops being out of there in a couple of years.
So, even though he might not be living up to all of the campaign rhetoric (who does?), I am happy with the selection of Gates for Defense. Hillary isn't exactly an ultra right winger, either.
December 1, 2008
7:55 PM
Paul writes:
As Bush leaves office there is only one thing to remember. 4200 Americans died in Iraq, tens of thousands injured.
yes he killed more Americans than Bin Ladin.
Something to think about
December 2, 2008
8:47 AM
Ben writes:
Here is also something to think about. OVER 48,000 American citizens have been killed by illegal aliens in the United States of America since September 11, 2001.
December 3, 2008
8:28 AM
Joe the Plummer writes:
Bush is an illegal alien??
I've alway wondered about where his loyalties were. that expalins it.