Eric Holder is Obama's attorney general

[Kevin]

So where's all that change that Obama fellow was talking about during the campagain?

[Wall St. Wiz]

So where's all that change that Obama fellow was talking about during the campagain?

It was all BS.  He has never been about change, he is a conventional liberal democrat picking Clinton retreads and inside the beltway career hack politicians.  The only thing different about him is his skin color.

[paul718]

So where's all that change that Obama fellow was talking about during the campagain?

It was all BS.  He has never been about change, he is a conventional liberal democrat picking Clinton retreads and inside the beltway career hack politicians.  The only thing different about him is his skin color.

I think people are misconstruing Obama's whole "Change" message.  I think he was talking about change from Bush and Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld/Ashcroft policies.  Competence over cronyism, etc.  Thus far, his appointees are competent.  I may not agree with them on most issues, but they're competent.  Except for Joe Biden, of course.  I think he's incompetent.  But I don't think he'll have much influence in the Administration.  At least I hope not. 

And I don't know if I'd refer to Clintonites as "liberal."  In fact I'd rather see Clinton retreads than members of the more liberal wing of the Democratic Party. 

He won the election, he can appoint whoever he wants. 

[Sam Spade]

I wonder if we have posters here smart enough to realize the point I'm making.  Probably not.

[ChrisFromNJ]

I wonder if we have posters here smart enough to realize the point I'm making.  Probably not.

Enlighten us, oh genius one.

[Jeff from NC]

So where's all that change that Obama fellow was talking about during the campagain?

It was all BS.  He has never been about change, he is a conventional liberal democrat picking Clinton retreads and inside the beltway career hack politicians.  The only thing different about him is his skin color.

I think people are misconstruing Obama's whole "Change" message.  I think he was talking about change from Bush and Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld/Ashcroft policies.  Competence over cronyism, etc.  Thus far, his appointees are competent.  I may not agree with them on most issues, but they're competent.  Except for Joe Biden, of course.  I think he's incompetent.  But I don't think he'll have much influence in the Administration.  At least I hope not. 

And I don't know if I'd refer to Clintonites as "liberal."  In fact I'd rather see Clinton retreads than members of the more liberal wing of the Democratic Party. 

He won the election, he can appoint whoever he wants. 

In addition, Obama's message was that politics is not about pushing out people who disagree with you and filling the government with your own ideologues.  Thus it makes sense for him to keep on a few Republicans (like Gates), bring back some Clinton centrists (like Hillary, Emmanuel, etc.) and then liberals (though I'm at a loss to name any other than Obama... President is cabinet-level right?).

[The Duke]

I wonder if we have posters here smart enough to realize the point I'm making.  Probably not.

I'm pretty sure you're point is that if Obama plays his cards right, he can slam a new New Deal through Congress while Republicans are still forming up our circular firing squad and deciding on the proper method of execution for various discredited members of the campaign staff.  We'll wake up the morning after wondering how the hell we all got transported to Sweden.

But instead of that, Obama is giving us a rallying point.  Instead of libertarians fighting against social cons in an intra-party death match, we get unified Republicans fighting against the guy who deported Elian Gonzalez.

Is that about right?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

So where's all that change that Obama fellow was talking about during the campagain?

It was all BS.  He has never been about change, he is a conventional liberal democrat picking Clinton retreads and inside the beltway career hack politicians.  The only thing different about him is his skin color.

I fail to see what's liberal about Obama.

[JSojourner]

So where's all that change that Obama fellow was talking about during the campagain?

It was all BS.  He has never been about change, he is a conventional liberal democrat picking Clinton retreads and inside the beltway career hack politicians.  The only thing different about him is his skin color.

LOL

The funny thing is that if Obama DIDN'T choose people with experience, nattering Republicans here would be blasting him for being inexperienced...and surrounding himself with inexperienced people.

You guys are really going to have to start wearing Clintonmeters -- which display, on any given day, whether you love them or hate them.  Because, since about 2006, I have been losing track.

[Brittain33]

They were already energized after the Palin pick. In case you forgot, they lost.

If they're going to get all excited talking about Clinton smuggling drugs through Arkansas or having an illegitimate love child or Hillary's ankles etc. instead of planning a platform that appeals to a majority of Americans, my friends, that's re-energizing I can believe in.

[The Mikado]

I fail to see what's non-changey (imaginary word) about Eric Holder.  Unlike our last three Attorney Generals, he's not 1. a Senator who lost reelection to a dead man who sang in a second-rate barbershop quartet, 2. an incompetent flunkie with a fondness for torture and inappropriate ideas about politicizing DOJ, or 3. the Invisible Man.  He's a calm, competent operator with a track record of success, a pair of safe hands to put our Justice Department in.  I can't think of any bigger change than competency and intelligence in our Justice Department.  What more could you ask for?

[Kevin]

So where's all that change that Obama fellow was talking about during the campagain?

It was all BS.  He has never been about change, he is a conventional liberal democrat picking Clinton retreads and inside the beltway career hack politicians.  The only thing different about him is his skin color.

LOL

The funny thing is that if Obama DIDN'T choose people with experience, nattering Republicans here would be blasting him for being inexperienced...and surrounding himself with inexperienced people.

You guys are really going to have to start wearing Clintonmeters -- which display, on any given day, whether you love them or hate them.  Because, since about 2006, I have been losing track.

I was just looking for some more outside the beltway types instead we see President-Elect Obama bringing back the Clinton era gang along with his own from Chicago, does this sound familiar anyone? 

Perhaps I dare say like the appointments the exiting President made?     

[The Mikado]

So where's all that change that Obama fellow was talking about during the campagain?

It was all BS.  He has never been about change, he is a conventional liberal democrat picking Clinton retreads and inside the beltway career hack politicians.  The only thing different about him is his skin color.

LOL

The funny thing is that if Obama DIDN'T choose people with experience, nattering Republicans here would be blasting him for being inexperienced...and surrounding himself with inexperienced people.

You guys are really going to have to start wearing Clintonmeters -- which display, on any given day, whether you love them or hate them.  Because, since about 2006, I have been losing track.

I was just looking for some more outside the beltway types instead we see President-Elect Obama bringing back the Clinton era gang along with his own from Chicago, does this sound familiar anyone? 

Perhaps I dare say like the appointments the exiting President made?     

The change is in the fact that the government will be in the hands of tough, intelligent, competent operators, rather than the gang that can't shoot straight.  Replacing Rice with Clinton, Ashcroft/Gonzales/Mukasey (has he done anything of note in the last two years) with Holder, replacing Dick Cheney with Joe Biden...how is this not change?

[Brittain33]

I was just looking for some more outside the beltway types instead we see President-Elect Obama bringing back the Clinton era gang along with his own from Chicago, does this sound familiar anyone? 

Perhaps I dare say like the appointments the exiting President made?     

No, really, I don't see it. In Bush's first term, he brought in people from his father's administration and earlier, like Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Powell. Tommy Thompson came in with an independent reputation, and so did John Ashcroft, who had the trust of the socons. He also brought in some relatively obscure people from around the country like Gale Norton and Spencer Abraham, not leading lights, but not exactly cronies either. It wasn't a bad cabinet and it represented Bush's campaign well.

Over time, it got worse. Paul O'Neill couldn't play nice and left, to be replaced with a non-entity whose main job was selling the President's tax policies. Christie Whitman saw the writing on the wall and left. Bush promoted people who weren't just his own gang, but mediocrities who had been raised from obscurity to big power in Texas based only on their loyalty to him, and who then jumped another level past their competence. Miers, Gonzales. Is Karen Hughes still traveling the world as the face of America, telling Arabs that they're just like Americans because "we both love children"?

Obama is bringing in people who are competent and tested in their field. That, IMO, is wonderful. We need basic competence. After Clinton and Carter, I'm a big skeptic of the "I'm a total outsider and I'm going to bring in clueless people from random states to sweep the place clean." It doesn't work. We need people who will be good at their jobs and take direction from someone who has clear ideas of what he wants done, minus the drama.

[Brittain33]

The change is in the fact that the government will be in the hands of tough, intelligent, competent operators, rather than the gang that can't shoot straight.  Replacing Rice with Clinton, Ashcroft/Gonzales/Mukasey (has he done anything of note in the last two years) with Holder, replacing Dick Cheney with Joe Biden...how is this not change?

Gonzales makes Ashcroft look very good by comparison. Much as Bush has done much to burnish his father's legacy by distracting attention with his own incompetence.

[The Mikado]

The change is in the fact that the government will be in the hands of tough, intelligent, competent operators, rather than the gang that can't shoot straight.  Replacing Rice with Clinton, Ashcroft/Gonzales/Mukasey (has he done anything of note in the last two years) with Holder, replacing Dick Cheney with Joe Biden...how is this not change?

Gonzales makes Ashcroft look very good by comparison. Much as Bush has done much to burnish his father's legacy by distracting attention with his own incompetence.

Wouldn't disagree with either of those...and John Ashcroft's actually a decent fellow (if gruff and rather unapproachable).  But what I was getting at is that I don't understand why people don't realize that this is change.  Like you pointed out, Obama's choosing hard-nosed, intelligent, strong, independent people.  People who know how to run the government running the government...it's hard to imagine more of a breath of fresh air than that.

[Rob]

This should fuel right-wing Republicans quite strongly, considering his involvement in the Marc Rich pardon at the end of the Clinton administration.

*yawn*

You want to reenergize them?  Go on ahead...

First off, no one cares about Marc Rich anymore. Secondly, we don't need to worry about hurting the feelings of people who didn't vote for us and never will. In fact, I would be worried if Obama's moves didn't "reenergize" the not-so-loyal opposition. Bring 'em on.