Monday, November 24, 2008
A note on the return of Team Clinton
There has been endless grumbling, joy, and random commentary about the return of so many Clinton administration alumni to the inchoate Obama administration. Well, that is what comes from electing the new guy. Barack Obama has not been around long enough to develop his own deep bench. Whether that is a bug or a feature depends on your point of view. Since the Clinton team was fairly pragmatic, especially after Newt softened up the beaches in 1994, I am as happy as I could be given the outcome of the election.
The question, of course, is whether Team Clinton will stay practical. There is no small risk that the thrill of a massive Democratic majority in both houses of Congress will reveal their inner socialist. The first order of business for the Republicans, therefore, is to shrink the Democratic majority in 2010.
15 Comments:
By 
smitty1e, at
Mon Nov 24, 07:57:00 AM:
Whereas the first order of business for the Left is to keep up the effort at dividing and conquering the Right.
By 
, at
Mon Nov 24, 09:44:00 AM:
You over look how shifty and devious Emanuel is! Once Hillie resigns her seat, she and Willie work for Obama and are no longer political threats. Once Obama gets settled wirh Ayers and his ilk whispering in Obama's ear, Obaama ccan begin replacing the Clintonistas with real ultra-leftists.
Hillie will be the first to go, six months to a year after taking the job. She'll have no power base and no be able to argue the she wasn't terminated for cause. She's no better qualified than Obama, after all.
By , at
Mon Nov 24, 12:38:00 PM:
Since the Omessiah started speaking at 11:10 CST This AM, the market has lost nearly half of it's morning gain. Could it be that the CAPITALISTS heard something they didn't like about his "great leap forward....?"
By SR, at
Mon Nov 24, 12:46:00 PM:
Who else does the Big O have to choose from?
It's not like the Dems have anything resembling a bench; dynamic governors and all. Napolitano and Granholm? Give me a break...the biggest fairy tale and all that.
By , at
Mon Nov 24, 01:50:00 PM:
If Hillary takes the political hit with the nutroots for the inevitable anti-jihad war-mongering Obama has to man up to over the next couple of years, and Bush takes the hit for the recessionary economy, then Obama can skate right past the market slide post-election. I guess I understand the calculus, but this presumes Obama is some sort of modern Machiavelli. Anything is possible, I guess, but seeing him move so fast from Revolutionary Socialist to Pragmatic Centrist is making my head spin.
By , at
Mon Nov 24, 02:03:00 PM:
VDH says what we're seeing isn't Lincoln, or "Pragmatic Centrist", but instead an example of Orwellian "two legs bad, two legs good" thinking. It's what they do when they're up against the wall and desperate.
By , at
Mon Nov 24, 02:13:00 PM:
the market has lost nearly half of it's morning gain. Could it be that the CAPITALISTS heard something they didn't like about his "great leap forward....?"
Define CAPITALIST, meta: The market was up 6% this morning on the news that the government was bailing out Citi (and putting you and me on the hook for 90% of the banks $350B in bad loans.)
By , at
Mon Nov 24, 02:45:00 PM:
*Since the Omessiah started speaking at 11:10 CST the market has lost nearly half of it's morning gain.*
Gee, Meta, do you think President Bush's appearance late this morning with Paulson by his side warning that there will be more bailouts had anything to do with the stock market tumble?
Check the ticker now. Up almost 5% since losing half of its morning gain after Bush spoke.
By , at
Mon Nov 24, 04:41:00 PM:
I am beginning to see very little difference between the administrations and policies of Clinton, Bush and Obama. I think Spengler captures it well in this article:
Obama's one-trick wizards
By Spengler
Asia Times
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/JK25Dj06.html
So as someone from Princeton, what is your take on the Harvard / Yale puppy mills? How far does this rot extend into academia? Is there a common theme or small group of profs that have inflicted our financial management with bankrupt theories?
A suggestion for a dedicated post.
By , at
Mon Nov 24, 05:08:00 PM:
"There is no small risk that the thrill of a massive Democratic majority in both houses of Congress will reveal their inner socialist"
Given what happened the last time he came into view, we can only hope.
By Georg Felis, at
Mon Nov 24, 07:48:00 PM:
No, the real question will be how long it will take Obama to realize this nice, well-working team he has put together is not taking orders from him.
So far, Hillary's first term is going pretty good.
By Noumenon, at
Tue Nov 25, 04:43:00 AM:
Barack Obama has not been around long enough to develop his own deep bench. Whether that is a bug or a feature depends on your point of view.
I liked Steve Sailer's way of putting it:
"Obama's problem is that he's so inexperienced that he barely knows anybody other than a bunch of thuggish Chicago political operators like David Axelrod and Rahm Emanuel and a lot of unpresentable far leftists with whom he hung out in the 1980s and 1990s. So, for lack of a better idea, he's just plugging in Clinton Administration retreads in the top jobs."
By , at
Tue Nov 25, 07:39:00 AM:
he's just plugging in Clinton Administration retreads in the top jobs."
I would hardly call Geithner (Treasury), Jim Jones (NSA) and, Gates (Defense) "Clinton retreads."
By Noumenon, at
Tue Nov 25, 08:07:00 AM:
You're right about Gates, but Wikipedia calls Geithner a protege of Larry Summers and Robert Rubin. I couldn't disambiguate Jim Jones.
By Dawnfire82, at
Tue Nov 25, 10:45:00 AM:
He's still plugging Clinton retreads into the top jobs. Just not ALL the top jobs.
