Since at least one commenter has asked about this specifically, here are a few thoughts about what Obama’s selection of Rahm Emanuel as his White House chief of staff means. First, it apparently means that many Obama supporters are going to freak out over an important, but not major appointment, or they are going to find themselves very disappointed to discover that Obama is, in fact, a Chicago politician who is interested in pushing his agenda rather than being the national psychotherapist they seem interested in finding.
I am not sure if the left is freaking out over this pick, but if they are, it is going to be the first of many times they lose it over Obama’s centrism. The weirdest thing about this election was listening to Democrats acting if he was the new liberal icon and Republicans attempting to pretend he was the new socialist devil. He is neither, and there was never anything in his speeches or his policies to suggest that he was. Watching Republicans try to demonize him as some wild lefty over the next few years is going to be pretty damned amusing, especially since if anything, Obama represents a competent, nonthreatening centrism.
Jim
Those saying Emanuel’s pick was a big fuck you to Republicans are missing the boat, IMO. I really think it’s designed to keep Congressional Dems in check. Pelosi and Reid have been pretty incompetent the past two years. Now Obama has taken one of their better weapons off the Hill and put him in the White House. Those who think Obama is just some soft neophyte are in for a rude awakening.
J.
I thought Rahm Emanuel was a smart pick. And if there is one thing Obama has shown/proven is that he is thoughtful and smart when it comes to surrounding himself with good, smart, QUALIFIED people.
Btw, what’s wrong with being a centrist, especially if that’s really your position? Is "Centrist" now going to be the new "Liberal"?
Am looking forward to (now there’s a weird thought) Obama’s press conference at 2:30 p.m. ET today — and to seeing who else he appoints to key positions.
Jim also makes a very good point, reinforcing what a smart pick this was.
Catpain Haddock
Nothing is more threatening to the GOP than competent centrism. How can they fight that?
Mike P
Personally, I am looking for any excuse to get some more John Boehner in my life. Two weeks ago, he called the president-elect a "chicken shit", and then yesterday he sends out a hysterical press release in regards to Obama tapping Emanuel…I love that he just doesn’t seem to know when to stop digging.
rob!
any Obama pick that pisses off Joe Scarborough and John Boehner is probably a pretty good pick.
Rahm the Spaceknight may not have been my choice, but Obama’s a lot smarter than I am, so…
redbeardjim
Yeah, like I said in an earlier thread, my major reaction has been "At least this gets him out of the House."
MattF
Non-threatening… unless you get in his way. Which I like. It’s a good thing.
gnomedad (fmr. Nixon Hailfire Palin)
I’ve always suspected that’s the real reason they freaked out over Bill Clinton.
Ben
So far the people I’ve seen the most upset about the Rahm pick are the anti-war hard liners and Republicans. I respect the anti-war folks, but they aren’t pragmatists… and anyone that scares the crap out of Republicans is good in my book.
It’s the Chief of Staff folks… he doesn’t make policy. Rahm seems perfect for the job.
dave
Re: redbeardjim, I agree, where do you want that DLC pro-NAFTA guy. As a loose cannon with his own agenda in the house or in the office next door right under your thumb?
DJShay
The far left is already second guessing every Obama move. I’ve always said he will be a far more centrist President than either party has anticipated so far. He will (and already is) drawing fire from the left for Rahm and Summers.
rmp
I just got done reading Larison’s blog and then I come here and what do I find ….
Thanks John for highlighting his blog in the past. It’s on my must read daily list.
MikeJ
I have never before seen an opposition party throw such a hissy fit over the pick of a chief of staff. Unless you want to try to push the president around, why should you give a shit who the CoS is?
Oh. I guess that’s it. And they’ve just figured out they won’t get to.
Geeno
Rahm is a partisan gamesman. I think a lot of republicans just saw their opportunity to bully democrats into their lame ass version of bipartisanship go *poof* with that pick. He’s going to ride the democratic caucus to stay together, and slap down the republicans when they go into drama mode ‘cuz the democrats wouldn’t break ranks.
A VERY smart pick for a president who wants his agenda to actually go somewhere.
Walker
Treasury secretary is the bigger deal. A lot of people are unhappy that Summers is in the running.
Juan del Llano
Not too far off the mark, considering…
But I’d say Obama represents something completely different and on a whole other level from any of these old labels. All the talk of left, right, center, etc. sounds like something from the Eisenhower years. What we really have here is a new dimension, and toiling in the vineyard of the expired (think John Cleese & the parrot) will only postpone transformation. I doubt most pundits will catch on, but it doesn’t really matter. I’m just too delighted for words.
As for Rahm, I think the choice is loaded with smart. Tells me Obama is serious about making things happen.
Svensker
I keep hoping that. I’m one of the "anti-war nuts" and Rahm, a former IDFer, is way too pro-Israel and pro-war for my tastes.
ChrisS
Rahm is indeed a hard ass and it shows that Obama isn’t going to be a push-over president. It’s an appointment that I understand as necessary for a guy that’s going to make a lot of enemies while trying to undo a lot of Bush/Cheney disasters.
All Obama has to change in Washington is appoint competent folks to DoJ and judgeships, reign in defense spending and end a dumb war, and take energy and science a smidge more seriously than nerd jokes.
It’s not that the left wing is going to abandon Obama if he doesn’t institute every single wish list item, which is what some on the right think will happen. After 8 years of Bush/Cheney, the majority of the left will be happy with competent governance.
Comrade Stuck
@J.:
I agree wholeheartedly, and would add that Obama’s choices aside from being solid to augment his lack of experience in certain areas, they are always picks that say, I want to win.
Emmanuel is the best choice to shield him from the coming onslaught of liberal factions in congress and elsewhere demanding their due for pet issues, instead of dealing first with the urgent ones for the country’s survival.
Soylent Green
Which means that every citizen will have something to bitch about. What could be more egalitarian?
Punchy
RE is an Ily polly who is best described as a bad ass. Tough, smart, caculating. There wont be any Lewinskis, Gonzos, or Katrina responses with this guy around. The reason "the left" is "freaking" (they’re not) is cuz he’s connected to Clinton, and so many O supporters have grown to despise the Hillary.
AhabTRuler
Exactly. Emanuel has shown that he has the organization and cojnones to run an operation in the face of opposition, both Dem and Rep. He is, in my mind, perfect for COS.
BooBooBear
Ditto. I’m tired of democrats running like a bunch of scared little girls every time the noise machine mouths some soundbite tag line.
I think he is a smart and tough choice. Some of the network reports said he had friends on the other side, and most of all he was respected as tough.
They are going to need him to help pull the remaining rational Republicans into doing the right thing for the country.
Tattoosydney
@Jim:
I suspect you are right. After two years of Pelosi and Reid achieving very little, Obama seems to be getting in a gentle reminder to the two of them that he spent the last two years campaigning and winning almost every fight he got involved in. Watch and learn. Help or get out of my way.
John Cole
People are upset about Summers in Treasury? Why? An economist, former President of Harvard, and former Treasury Secretary is not good enough?
The Moar You Know
@Ben: I wish Wilfred was here, but I suspect he died of an explosive anuresym when the announcement was made. Rahm is as pro-Israel as it gets (he volunteered for the IDF in Gulf War I and is a dual citizen), and the anti-Israel/pro-Palestinian/whatever they call themselves wing (all 400 of them) of the Democratic party are collectively shitting their Depends right now.
There is going to be much lulz from the Obama administration. Already the collective pants-peeing from the Republicans has been worth every dime I donated and there is still at least four more years of that; but the real payoff will soon be the collective pants peeing from "progressive liberals" who are going to find out the hard and nasty way that Obama is not, in fact, a Magical Unity Pony.
Svensker
Just went over and read the Larison article — he’s usually right on the money and shares a libertarian streak, so I find him calming. However, his judgment (or Rolling Stone’s) that Rahm is popular with the "netroots" is ferplooey. Kos and FDL have never liked Rahm, hate that he gets credit for the 2006 win (when they think that should go to Dean and his 50 state strategy), and dislike Rahm’s spiking of anti-war measures, not to mention FISA.
So, netroots loves Rahm? Um, no.
greynoldsct00
The more I hear about Rahm, the more I think this is a good choice, for all reasons stated above. Obama wants qualified people around him. And that the guy takes no shit, is even better, he’s got to keep all factions up there in line.
Was funny watching Scarborough have a hissy fit about it.
greynoldsct00
People are crabbing about how comments he made re women while at Harvard. But I’ve also heard he has the best credentials so – ladies let’s just deal.
Comrade Stuck
@John Cole:
Because he upset the PC police at Hawwvard, Nothing more, nothing less.
Ben
Svensker:
Notice I said "anti-war folks" not "nuts." ;-)
I think the Rahm choice is a very smart move. I mean you put a pro-Israel hawk and former Clinton Administration member in a relatively important position, but one that is more about implementing policy than setting policy. A role that Rahm has proved adept at in the past.
It’s at least partially about placating some factions that could make life very difficult for you.
liberal
@John Cole:
Summers helped block regulation of derivatives. See this Washington Post article for an example.
Genine
Exactly. Yes, there are those on the left not happy about the pick. But he is very competent and can GET THINGS DONE. He is also no push-over. As people have pointed out, he has no role over policy or anything like that. Because they will be working so close together, Obama may use him as a sounding board. But Obama has also shown he is good at keeping his own counsel and that of his trusted advisers.
So, I am pretty happy about the pick.
Svensker
@Comrade Stuck:
No. His love note to Ken Lay and his attitude toward deregulation also inspire distrust. See more at Open Left.
wvng
True, if centrism is defined where most polling shows it really lies – smack dab in the mainstream of Democratic policy positions. It is not the mythical "center right" that the msm is so fond of.
But I also agree with Juan above: "But I’d say Obama represents something completely different and on a whole other level from any of these old labels. " I think the community organizer from Chicago has a highly engaged army of people across the nation at his disposal, a supreme grasp of strategy in support of specific goals, and the conventional thinkers will have no idea what hit them until they are already flattened. Like Hillary and McCain.
liberal
@The Moar You Know:
Huh. So pointing out that Israel is committing a war crime by transporting settlers to the occupied territories is somehow "anti-Israel/pro-Palestinian/whatever", as opposed to "pro-justice"?
Anon
Wait, he didn’t pick Khalidi as CoS? Instead, he picked a Israel-supporting, IDF volunteer? I wonder how the right-wing wackos explain this.
liberal
@greynoldsct00:
Well, in addition to that, he did slander students who argued that Harvard should divest from Israel as anti-Semites.
LOL! See my post on derivatives, and also Svensker’s post.
Xecklothxayyquou Gilchrist
Do you think he’s up to getting us some cheeseburgers?
Comrade Dread
Yeah, but you know the Malkinites. Anything a Democrat does is automatically the "worst form of Socialism evah in the history of the world!"
Even if its not at all different from what a sane Republican would do.
dewberry
About Summers and the people who are upset about his role in deregulation.
I don’t want ideological purity tests. I think sometimes the best thinkers are those who have made mistakes and actually LEARNED from them. I want a coalition of our best and brightest really considering about how to move us forward and how to steer this economy. I want us to have an un-biased look at what we did right and what we did wrong in the past. My view is that people who have been "right" on every issue are usually people who managed to avoid taking a stand.
Summers said one really idiotic thing at Harvard (what can I say, I’m a girl who likes math so it bugged me) and I’m willing to let that go by. By all accounts, he’s brilliant. We need brilliant right now.
libarbarian
Im down with anyone who makes a good Animal House reference.
Now, he needs a guy who can seamlessly quote Caddyshack.
jibeaux
I have a soft spot for guys who go around waving their stumpy middle finger at people.
shirt
A DLC obstructionists to the progressive movement has been removed from the table and placed in a posistion where he might be able to contribute in a way consistant with his talents.
Brilliant. Make the asshole usefull!
Comrade Jake
Newsflash: Obama’s judgment when it comes to picking staff is pretty fucking awesome.
The Grand Panjandrum
@John Cole: Wasn’t the biggest concern about PRESIDENT-ELECT Obama that he was "too nice" and might not withstand the withering Republican beat down? Now he’s such a meanie because he picked Rahm Emmanuel another real meanie? Jesus, I getting fucking dizzy!
Rahm Emmanuel will be a good soldier. Obama is going to listen to all the arguments (including Rahm’s), he will then actually think things through and THEN he will issue orders to Emmanuel. Rahm will salute smartly and say, "Yes, Mr. President."
And Boehner rushing to the fainting couch and saying Emmanuel is "too partisan" just provides further evidence that John Boehner is a candy ass.
(BTW with Blunt not seeking the #2 job again it looks like Cole’s dream is about to come true.)
Whoa! That just sent a thrill up my leg.
Atanarjuat
So Obama picked yet another Beltway insider to be part of his "Yes We Can" regime. Why would that be news to anyone?
Did anyone seriously believe that "Change We Can Believe In" meant a change of the entrenched, party establishment? It’s just a sleight-of-hand campaign motto, folks. Get over yourselves and keep watching as more of this Beltway nepotism grows and solidifies over the next two months.
– A Country in Grave Peril
liberal
Rahm also has had questionable taste in picking Dems to run for Congress. Ex 1: Mahoney.
Here’s another Atrios post on Rahm’s choices…
libarbarian
No he didn’t.
He said something more subtle that was misinterpreted by touchy people.
Ed Marshall
Reagan’s COS was basically president. If that’s the job Rahm got I’d call it a disaster. If Obama has hired him as an enforcer to go bust heads in the legislature it’s full of win. He’s an asshat, I hate his politics, but he lives to make enemy lists and figure out who the friends of his enemies are and find some way to fuck all of them if they cross him.
liberal
@dewberry:
Where’s the evidence that Summers has learned anything?
Yes, you can argue that given what’s happened, he’s "learned," but that would apply to just about anyone except the far-right idiot Republicans in Congress who think the solution is to have even less regulation.
BS. Dean Baker, who has a blog over at The American Prospect, got both the tech bubble right and the housing bubble right. And it’s not because he was lucky: he understood the fundamentals.
Wrong. He also slandered principled student critics of Israel as anti-Semites.
That’s just silly: there are plenty of brilliant economists who didn’t get it wrong on (de)regulation.
Dennis - SGMM
Nanook just cribbed from one of Paul L’s prior comments.
Fresh trolls, please!
liberal
@libarbarian:
You’re simply wrong. Go ahead and post what he said.
jnfr
I can only think that most pundits don’t know any actual liberals/leftists. I certainly do, having spent my life living in and organizing with the left. Aside from some fringey elements who never seem to be happy with anything, I’m not seeing anyone freak out over Rahm. But then, I know very few people who think Obama is some kind of liberal savior – those of us who actually are leftist see him as center-left at best, and mostly a pragmatist. Which is fine by all the people I know, because we can also tell he’s smart, thoughtful, and extremely competent both politically and organizationally.
Rahm will get things done, and I’m good with that.
The Other Steve
I am so not interested in the freak out.
I read the GOS last night, and there was a bunch of wailing of hands over Rahm. Not quite certain why. I think it had to do with he hates puppies.
Larry Summers, I don’t get either. Just cause he was a terrible Harvard President doesn’t mean he can’t be a good Treasury Secretary. Certainly the fact he’s done it before isn’t a bad thing.
A hell of a lot better than John Snow or Dan Quayle.
liberal
@Ed Marshall:
Finally someone on this thread who has it right.
Comrade Stuck
@Svensker:
A lot of people wrote and said love notes to Ken Lay in 1999. Including many democrats. No one knew at the time he was a crooked SOB. And the same goes for deregulation. Obama is the President and will set policy that Summers will have to follow. I don’t know that much about Summers and whether he’d be the most competent choice for SOT. But I do trust Obama to make the best choice, and will defend that choice against those who want to nitpick about whether he fits their ideological notions of what’s a proper progressive or not. I reject ideological purity tests between the center and the left. Competence and loyalty to the prez is what I look for. That being said, if Obama or any of his administration wander too far off the democratic reservation, say toward the right, I will be opposing them vigorously.
jibeaux
I propose a moratorium on second guessing Obama. Thus far his political instincts have turned out to be more or less brilliant. I like Rahm, I think we’re going to need a head or two knocked together. If you don’t, I’d say to give him a chance and see how he works out. You can always bitch later, I always say!
Roland X
Okay, I’m sorry, but I’ve gotta ask: universal health care is centrist? Ending the Iraq war is centrist? Ending "don’t ask, don’t tell," fair trade, re-shifting the tax burden back towards the wealthy, billions for infrastructure and new jobs (you know, like some kind of Works program;-), pushing a carbon-neutral agenda…these are all dead center? I had no idea I was so middle-of-the-road! *g*
Okay, in all seriousness, the idea that Barack Obama was "the most liberal" member of the Senate was insane from Day One. We have a real socialist in the Senate, for gods’ sake! But can there be any real doubt that Obama is a moderate liberal with a genuinely progressive agenda? No, he’s not going to take away anyone’s guns (good thing, too, IMHO — that’s my one real apostasy from the progressive platform), but he’s going to be a friend to Labor, the middle and lower classes, anyone who cares about the environment, and pretty much every sane nation of the world. In America, at least, that’s pretty darned left-ish. :-)
—
(/) Roland X
Hope is a phoenix
liberal
@The Other Steve:
Uh, why don’t you read the evidence presented above that Summers was completely, undeniably wrong at a crucial juncture. Then you might "get it."
workingmomOH
After the last eight years the center is the new left.
liberal
@Comrade Stuck:
That’s just a godamned stupid denial of reality. Lots of people realized that not regulating derivatives (it wasn’t really a matter of degulation per se, but rather blocking regulation of new financial products) was potentially disasterous. (E.g. William "Derivatives are financial WMDs" Buffett.) And in this instance, there was someone who called it correctly, who Summers blocked: Brooksley Born.
With your attitude, we should just reelect Bush for a third term; after all, the main things we hold against him are (1) his record, (2) his ideology. Exactly the two criteria you say shouldn’t apply to Summers.
Punchy
You sure about this? I heard (here, actually) that the US does not allow "dual citizenship"s. You’re either only a US citty, or you’re not.
Is this incorrect?
Xenos
The comments were just the tip of the iceberg. He is a brilliant guy who just does not relate well with other people – more than a bit Asperbergersy. Understands things so long as they are abstract and complex but a bit out to sea when they involve actual human beings. Summers would make a great advisor, but I would not want him in charge of an agency in the center of a huge political and economic crisis.
Comrade Stuck
@jibeaux:
Double Amen to that. But no chance of it happening as Cole’s little grenade chuckin’ on Summers demonstrates.
The Other Steve
Oh, I don’t know. Maybe because it’s all out of context quotes?
I mean, seriously, GFY… and the jackass you rode in on.
John Cole
We will file this under believing the bullshit. You would actually be pretty surprised at what the American people actually believe in and want. The Media Education Forum has a great dvd out there, although I can not remember the name right now, that shows that issue after issue, the American people poll to the left of the current “center.” On healthcare (yes, singlepayer), on environmental protections, on taxes, on education fundin, and on and on and on, the polling shows that the people, at large, support the more “liberal” position. However, the Republicans have been masterful at making things sound different than they are. See “death tax” for the estate tax. I would write more but I have to run.
Xenos
@Punchy: That is incorrect. So long as maintaining a citizenship does not involve renouncing your US citizenship (which is a formal process done before a consular officer – you can’t accidentally renounce your citizenship), there is not a problem.
If Israel went to war against the US while Rahm was enlisted in the IDF he might have a criminal law issue, but no hazard to his citizenship.
As another example, my kids have three citizenships in spite of being born in Boston, MA. My sons will be subject to conscription in the Greek army, so we have to plan vacations carefully!
Comrade Stuck
@liberal:
Fuck you liberal, and your whiny ass purity shit. Listened to it too many times and it’s still the load of judgmental crap it’s always been. Go over to GOS, you’ll be appreciated there.
BooBooBear
Oh, lord, please someone help.
My worthless congresscritter, Marsha Blackburn is on MSNBC talking about bi-partisanship. One of the biggest enablers of Bush/Cheney.. . and now she’s talking about small government?!?!?!
AAAAAHHHHHH. Make it stop!!
ksmiami
It all comes down to this. First Centrism is the new liberalism and Obama is a bad ass motherfucker who gets shit done. If people haven’t figured that out in his 2 years of wall to wall outsmarting huge political machines, then I don’t know what it will take to convince them otherwise. Teh Stupid really really hurts!
The Grand Panjandrum
Rats! I forgot my popcorn.
jnfr
@Punchy:
My husband has both Canadian and US citizenship. The US doesn’t officially recognize it, but they don’t/can’t do anything to stop it either. Canada doesn’t care what the US thinks.
lutton
I’m fine with the appointment. Rahm left something to be desired as a congressman, and especially for foisting that philandering former republican Florida congressman upon the party.
But he’s probably going to be a masterful COS.
The Other Steve
The US does not recognize dual citizenship, but other countries do… so…
I’ve heard some pretty damn ridiculous attacks against Rahm. One yesterday at the GOS was that he lost a finger fighting Palestinians for the IDF. Oh the evil bastard!
The truth is, he lost his finger because he sliced it while working at Arby’s and it became infected and doctors had to amputate.
ARBYS! He worked at Arbys! Fucking elitist.
Punchy
Obama needs Richard Clarke for DHS head. The guy had his shit together. Blackballed by Bush, this guy would make it his life’s goal to show Bush what a fucking dumbshit he was for firing him, and he’d probably work 21 hours a day to do so.
jnfr
@BooBooBear:
I very much hope that with Obama in charge, both pundits and Republicans are about to learn that bipartisanship does not mean "doing what the righties say".
LarryB
As an avid (nay, obsessive) reader of the liberal blogs during the election, I can say that the front pagers, at least, maintained a fairly clear-eyed view of where Obama stands vis-a-vis the left. The consensus view was that there wasn’t much to choose between him and Hillary on policy. The Obama fan club was all in the commentariat.
Brick Oven Bill
I do not like the pick. The Directorship of Fannie Mae / Freddie Mac has been home to political hacks from both sides of the aisle. Emanuel was a Fannie Mae Director. He is part and parcel of the same old network.
I would have preferred to see a mid-grade military officer run things.
Deborah
I thought Summers was dumb with his pro-Pinker comments re women and science.
I also find Pinker irritating with his "I challenge the nurture over nature orthodoxy that enmeshes my colleagues!" schtick when virtually everyone in biology is waaaaay past nature v nurture and investigating how environment affects gene expression. As a popular writer he’s good at communicating his own ideas and abysmal at communicating the context of the field.
That said, it seems quite irrelevant to running Treasury. Let’s leave the purity purges at Red State.
Xenos
Those sliced roast beef sandwiches always did gross me out. Now I know why.
timb
In a conversation with my fellow law students yesterday, the Republican duo are still percolating with annoyance at all the Messianic support Obama gets from the left. I gave up a day’s pay to work on Election Day and I consider myself a screaming lib, but I told them the next time you see Jessie Jackson and a bunch of college kids crying, it’s because the disillusionment that’s coming.
What the Right calls "left" is competent centrism and we’re about to get a whole dose of it. Emanuel is the pick to keep what happened to Carter not happen to Obama.
As for the folks who hoped for the second coming of FDR, they are going to be disappointed, completely and utterly. Obama’s just not that kind of guy. Make sure you check out the Newsweek stories on Obama. He’s gonna very calmly and competently lead this nation to reforms that should have happened decades ago and he’s goona piss a lot of liberals off in the process.
kuvasz
i don’t care if the guy picks moms mably as his chief of staff, i just want the executive branch of the federal government run efficiently and effectively.
one thing that the republicans have surely done over the last decade is to place in the minds of the american people that "government" itself is congenitally disfunctional. if obama and congressional democrats have the ability to pick up the tools of government and weld them effectively they will not be voted out of office.
if the best way to secure that ability is to counter with strength or guile the republican legislative guerrilla warfare we all anticipate, so be it. emmanuel looks like the best guy to do so.
The Moar You Know
@Punchy: That is not correct, I know several. This is how it works.
Let’s say you’re born in Brazil to American parents (real-life example here). You are, by American law, an American citizen since your parents are American. You are also, by Brazilian law, a Brazilian citizen. My buddy has both passports to prove it :)
Israel probably has a similar law, as do many other countries.
Also, some nations don’t allow you to renounce your citizenship if you’re born there, that can also produce a dual citizen, even if you go through the US citizenship process and "renounce" your former ties.
Ed Marshall
No one gives a shit what Brick Oven Bill wants.
The Other Steve
BTW…
Campbell Brown gives a roundhouse kick to the McCain Team
sorry, I was just reading a bit about the new JVCD movie, and got excited about roundhouse kicks. :-)
Brian J
I haven’t done any sort of survey on this, but it seems like the biggest complaint from the left is that this choice goes against Obama’s allegedly new approach to practicing politics. In other words, Emmanuel is more than willing to knock some heads together if need be, whereas we should be getting someone a little less cutthroat.
But that’s just it. I don’t think this job appointment is about his politics, which seem firmly in the moderately liberal mold, but about his ability to get shit done. I can’t say I’m an expert on the management skills of the White House, but it seems like that’s a decent way to go about hiring someone. The man has the sort of necessary skills to perform competently and, while he’s probably not a hardcore leftist, he’s not exactly Zell Miller, either…not that it’s exactly the point of the job offer.
Punchy
@Xenos: Gracias. Dual Citty OK, eh? Maybe I’ll try for some Finnish citizenship, just to get in good with the Finnish hotties (by far the hottest in the world, IMO)
The Moar You Know
@liberal: I knew you’d be here too, shitting all over the thread and bawling about all the horror of Obama’s picks. Just wait. You’ll probably stroke out before Inauguration Day. Your tears are delicious, and there will be so many more of them.
Zifnab
I don’t think re-electing FDR would leave people feeling any less disappointed. Roosevelt wasn’t quite the screaming liberal everyone makes him out to be. And this isn’t quite the 1930s. Departments – like the FDA, HUD, the EPA, and DHS – already exist and just need to be utilized. Highway funding bills became a staple after Eisenhower. Welfare and social programs were instituted half a century ago under LBJ. Medicare and Medicaid have been seeing regular revisions throughout Carter and Clinton. Obama doesn’t need to reinvent the wheel. He just needs to get it rolling.
Ben
I hear a few people bitching that Rahm is a "Washington insider" or part of the same old network… but the job of the CoS is to put that old boy network to work. You NEED someone who understands the BS.. you need an insider. It’s a necessary evil.
The Moar You Know
@Brick Oven Bill: Corporal Hitler seems suited to your tastes.
Yeah, I went there.
The Other Steve
More likely those on the right, as it’s the right whose been preventing us from this reform.
The fact is, liberals are never happy. Just go back and read the comments to Obama’s diary post at dailyKos.
Walker
Because he has exactly the same sentiments and conflicts of interest that are making Paulson a problem right now (e.g. he refuses to do anything that will hurt Goldman Sachs).
Brian J
I’m not particularly sure of what I am supposed to think of his comments on gender in math and science and the issues with his economics professor friend and the Russian government, let alone his supposed penchant for deregulation a decade ago, but if there’s one thing that both people on the left and right seem to think, it’s that Summers is an absolutely brilliant man. Then again, there are plenty of people who seem to be able to do the job without his baggage, so perhaps he could fill an important role on some commission and remain an outside adviser to the administration, without being the public face of the Treasury Department.
cain
@The Moar You Know:
From what I’ve been reading, he’d push for Palestinian and Israel peace process and he’d tell Jewish righties to fuck off while doing it. Hard to accuse him of being an anti-jew. As I understand it, he’s very loyal but somewhat hard to work with as he’s a bit of a shouter. I’m starting to see Star Trek, i’m wondering who is going to fill Mr. Spock’s role opposite the good doctor McCoy. :-)
BTW Openleft seem to have a good conversation around it. Chris Bowers doesn’t support the pick at all and is asking the question "What has Emanuael done?" see here. There is a bit of hyperventilating going on. Mostly, they want a "pure" idealogical progressive candidate. I was under the impression that a centrist was a progressive. Maybe I was wrong. But it’s interesting all the same.
cain
Siryn
Rahm did not serve in IDF. That’s a myth. Yes, he’s badass, but not *that* badass.
TheHatOnMyCat
Exactly. And this is exactly why the "conservative" political appeal has been grounded in distractions, the so-called "cultural" and "values" issues, which work to fire up emotions that will override the voters’ focus on their real interests.
America could not have had a 100-year history of progressive, center-left government (in deed, if not in word) unless the populace were basically center-left in its thinking.
The reason why the "conservative movement" has crashed and burned is that it has no real alternative vision of America that can compete with the core, center-left view. Lacking a true vision, it has relied on slogans, emotional appeals, and demagoguery to manipulate voters.
I grew up in Arizona in a Goldwater political world before most of the country had ever heard of him, I am very familiar with the "conservative movement." It’s a retrograde set of ideas, centered largely on resentment of the center-left worldview and its effects. It has no real vision of a particluar future …. never has. It can still develop one, but I don’t predict early or easy success in doing so. Who would lead such an effort? Where is the intellectual energy for that going to come from?
The right’s problem is that it has driven away all the people with intellectual integrity. A political force based on people who think the earth is 6000 years old is crippled right out of the gate.
JGabriel
David Brooks:
Shorter David Brooks: The Obama Administration of my dreams is staffed by Republicans.
Why does anyone take this guy seriously?
.
srv
As predicted, "Change" continues to morph into "Return to the Status Quo". Watch as one true-believing special interest gets thrown under the bus after another.
The right does have a problem, as Rahm is literally the son of a terrorist, but they can’t figure out how to make that work with the Irgun.
Svensker
@ The Moar You Know
Who put nails in your ChexMix?
Comrade Jake
@Comrade Stuck:
Seconded.
Josh Hueco
@The Other Steve:
Mmmmm….Campbell Brown…nom nom nom.
aimai
This is incorrect:
@John Cole:
People are upset about Summers in Treasury? Why?
Because he upset the PC police at Hawwvard, Nothing more, nothing less.
Summers insulted all the female faculty and students at Harvard, both undergraduate and graduate, proved that he had missed the last 50 years of research on genetics, behavior, and science, and proved that he was too arrogant to defer to area specialists or to concede that there were areas of science that his econ degree did not entitle him to pontificate about. In addition he presided over the deregulation fest of the 90s so doesn’t have a lot of credibility when it comes to seriously thinking about re-regulating our failing economy now.
aimai
Pastafarian
Well, Obama’s just announced a pretty radical restructuring of the federal government.
I for one welcome our new Muslim terrorist socialist overlord.
H/T: TPM
The Moar You Know
@Siryn: Check his wikipedia entry (hate using it for a source, but it is convenient): he was a civilian volunteer in the IDF during Gulf War I (not nearly the same as a combat soldier, and not badass). He worked in the motor pool refinishing brakes on vehicles.
Not remotely badass.
Shygetz
The major job of the CoS is to, well, be Chief of the White House staff. It’s his job to make sure Obama’s strategy is carried out coherently by the rest of the staff. His policies DO matter, because in most White Houses he will have considerable control over what the President sees, but in the end what really matters is his management ability and his connections in D.C. Emanuel was an excellent pick.
Zifnab
It is the irony of the Obama movement. He sings "Change!" "Change!" "Change!", but all he really offers – and all anyone real wants – is to get back to the sanity and wiser policy of the Clinton years.
The Republicans launched a revolution back in ’94 and they’re reaping the inevitable massive backlash. "Change!" would better be phrased as "Oh, shit. We fucked up. Change it back." Americans are returning to their liberal roots.
Brian J
That’s not entirely true. Aside from his comments about women and math and science, there’s also questions of his judgment regarding his friend and fellow economist Andrei Shleifer, who made lucrative personal investments while advising on the privatization of the Russian economy. They had to settle a $26 million lawsuit with the federal government. There are other issues, but they mostly seem related to Harvard University matters.
But perhaps the biggest is the claim by people like Dean Baker that he along with others like Robert Rubin are responsible for the trend of deregulation in financial markets. I don’t really have an opinion on this matter, because I don’t know that much about it. If I had to guess, however, this is probably what’s going to give him the most trouble.
Emma Anne
Summers said one really idiotic thing at Harvard (what can I say, I’m a girl who likes math so it bugged me) and I’m willing to let that go by.
Yeah, I have some personal dislike for the man because of the "girls are dumb" remarks. But that is irrelevant to whether he ought to be appointed. I am much more concerned with his fondness for deregulation.
The Moar You Know
@Svensker: Same guy who peed in my Wheaties, I think.
I just get a kick out of trolling the shit out of Zionists and pro-Palestinians both. They BAWWW so hard when one does so that I just find it…irresistible. Really. It’s a character flaw, one among many of mine.
o kanis
People are upset about Summers in Treasury? Why? An economist, former President of Harvard, and former Treasury Secretary is not good enough?
==============
As Rubin’s deputy, Summers helped deregulate derivatives during Clinton. See the NYT; The Reckoning — Taking a Hard New Look at a Greenspan Legacy, by Peter S. Goodman.
In 1997, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, a federal agency that regulates options and futures trading, began exploring derivatives regulation. The commission, then led by a lawyer named Brooksley E. Born, invited comments about how best to oversee certain derivatives.
Ms. Born was concerned that unfettered, opaque trading could “threaten our regulated markets or, indeed, our economy without any federal agency knowing about it,” she said in Congressional testimony. She called for greater disclosure of trades and reserves to cushion against losses.
[snip]
In early 1998, Mr. Rubin’s deputy, Lawrence H. Summers, called Ms. Born and chastised her for taking steps he said would lead to a financial crisis, according to Mr. Greenberger. Mr. Summers said he could not recall the conversation but agreed with Mr. Greenspan and Mr. Rubin that Ms. Born’s proposal was “highly problematic.”
[snip]
Ms. Born pushed ahead. On June 5, 1998, Mr. Greenspan, Mr. Rubin and Mr. Levitt called on Congress to prevent Ms. Born from acting until more senior regulators developed their own recommendations. Mr. Levitt says he now regrets that decision. Mr. Greenspan and Mr. Rubin were “joined at the hip on this,” he said. “They were certainly very fiercely opposed to this and persuaded me that this would cause chaos.”
Also, look up Harvard and the Shleifer scandal, looting Russia division. Google is your friend.
Brian J
Do you mind elaborating there?
Punchy
In Summers’ defense, the girls who cannot speak are.
Comrade Darkness
Given that his comment rang like a touchstone for what else must be going on in his head, you are far more forgiving than I would be in the same situation. You’re the head of one of the most influential educational institutions in the world and you accidentally denigrate 59% of the nation’s graduate student population? One achingly exhausting battle-ridden step forward and one thirty year leap backward, *snap*, just like that.
If they guy gets a pass it would be for having Aspergers, as suppositioned above. How could he have no sense of how unproductive the comment would be? Aspergers at least would explain the disjoint between his accomplishments and his cluelessness.
That said, Obama gets to appoint whoever he wants, since he’s now the boss, but I reserve the right to point out when they fall down on the job, once they are in the job. Obama’s campaign hiring proves he can hire effectively, so a short honeymoon is probably earned. But as to Summers, keep him sweating in a back room and away from a mic.
georgia pig
I’ve always liked this sharp-elbowed side of Obama. Rahm’s an asshole, but he’s our asshole. Obama’s inner circle will still be Chicago-dominated, and Chicago ain’t DC by any stretch, thank god. Emanuel is weak on policy, but CoS won’t do that in a WH with a pres who does his own policy, unlike the current occupant. Puts Rahm where he’s effective (busting heads and lining up votes), out of the political shop (Axelrod’s turf) and out of the policy shop (Obama + advisors).
libarbarian
@liberal
"”Serious and thoughtful people are advocating and taking actions that are anti-Semitic in their effect if not their intent"
Which I find to be as different from calling someone an antisemite as saying "The policies you support objectively and unfairly single out black people for disproportionate effect whether you intend to or not" is from saying "You’re a fucking Klansman".
timb
Agreed completely.
BTW, I didn’t mean to say the Right wouldn’t cry every night, just like I didn’t mention that "water is wet." These are the people who attacked George H.W. Bush and Clinton for doing awful things like governing competently (to be honest, I did not vote for Georgie’s dad either time he ran, but he was competent).
They are loons and kooks, e.g. go over to either Goldstein’s or patterico’s sites to watch them argue over Patterico saying "Obama is a good man." The comment threads are full of self-righteous 29%ers declaring that Obama is Satan and a bad person, etc. As such, they are unimportant for the first couple of years (except for the Schadenfreude).
But we’re completely in agreement that people I usually agree with aren’t going to be happy. So many unhappy college kids and Code Pink ladies…Believers are always disillusioned in politics. Alas, we cynics know, since we believed once too.
Comrade Stuck
I thought we put the guilt by association to rest this election. Unless, there is evidence of serious ethical lapses involving something Summers himself has done, then I don’t care. I trust Obama’s judgment, though not perfect, it’s the best we’ve seen in a long time. Everything I’ve heard, other than his dumb remarks about women and innate abilities, has had to do with ideology of what sort or another. I’ve been a fierce opponent of freewheeling deregulation since Carter first broached the subject, and Regain and many dems ran with it till we are where we are today. Those days are over, and Obama knows it, and his Cabinet will do his bidding or else.
o kanis
Finally, it’s the height of yucks that Obama, he of the Wall Street vs Main Street rhetoric, would have, among his economic "advisers" two of the four people (the others being Greenspan and Graam) responsible for the financial shit pile.
I had to laugh when I saw Rubin among the wise men and women standing behind Obama, as the President Elect waxed rhetorical about "deregulators" and greedy Wall Street.
High hilarity. People do love so to hide behind their fingers. It’ll pass.
Maggie
Larry Summers would be a great choice. He’s freaking smart. Which is why his name is on the short list – cause Obama goes for that sort of thing.
And FWIW what he said about women in science was exactly right. If we want to know why there are fewer of them in the very highest ranks of the profession, we need to consider the evidence which is that while men and women have about the same average ability at math, there is more variance in the distribution of men around the mean, which means there are more men in the extreme tails than women. In my experience as a woman who is awesome at teh math that’s exactly right. The folks who can tell you that the hyperplane of the four-dimension function you are considering is a watermelon are men. But even if that’s not so, all that Larry said was that given that evidence we need to consider that it’s possibly right. Which, you know, is what people in the reality based community are supposed to do. It’s supposed to be those other idiots over there who won’t let facts get in the way of their pet ideologies. (Stuff like this is why I’m not a Democrat either. Guh.)
Brian J
I’m not saying any of this should matter. I’m simply saying that these are a few of the issues that might matter to people who have a problem with Summers being Treasury Secretary.
I’m with the person who said above that all other issues aside, he’s brilliant, which is something we need right now.
Vincent
I’m willing to reserve judgment as it hasn’t even been a week yet. And if all "change" comes to is a restoration to the competent government of the Clinton years… how exactly is that a bad thing? Just being anti-Bush is more than enough change for me. It might not be big and flashy but that doesn’t mean it’s not change.
Tymannosourus
GOP leaders are saying that they didn’t go conservative enough in the election, and that’s why they lost.
I’m trying to hug myself, that’s how happy I am.
Tymannosourus
Comment Deleted
Comrade Scrutinizer
They may be terrorists, but they’re our terrorists. Also, you betcha.
jrg
"The Blank Slate" did not give me that impression.
We’ve come a long way since the P.C. bullsh*t of the ’90s. Either a theory stands on it’s own, based on evidence, or it does not.
Blank-slate political correctness demagogues who feel the need to discount any theory whose results they don’t care for are no less dangerous to science than creationists. That was a big part of Pinker’s argument, and it still stands, IMO.
Grand Moff Texan
Jesus, guys, why read the tea leaves when you can read FORTY-FOOT TALL LETTERS OF ORANGE FLAME?!?!?
1. This is an olive branch from the DNC to the DLC, and it’s been two years coming. If you didn’t already know that, you must be new to the left blogsphere.
2. A COS needs sharp elbows. Rahm has them.
The end.
Larison is either ignorant or still bitter, and I don’t give a shit which.
.
Mr Furious
@The Moar You Know: Irrelevant, Emanuel isn’t a dual-citizen anyway. That is something trotted out by a primary opponent. His father is Israeli, and that made Rahm a citizen of Israel as well, but Rahm renounced his Israeli citizenship when he turned 18.
He DID volunteer to serve in the IDF during the first Gulf War, but not as an Israeli.
The dual-citizen rumor is a false as the finger blown off ina tank incident rumor.
BooBooBear
This may be off topic, but check out the Wonkette post on the Sarah Palin trashers. . . all ex-Romney folks.
Best quote:
"This would kind of suck if your original candidate, the guy you actually liked, could have handled the most pressing political issue of the day about a thousand times better than the actual nominee. But counterbalance your sympathy with the fact that Romney loyalists are by definition fans of the biggest tool invented since the dildo."
The Other Steve
I think they’re somewhat rare. Back in 2004 one of my friends from the Clark campaign we volunteered with was a leader of a Code Pink chapter.
Wrap your head around Code Pink supporting a General for President.
JR
We must always, always, here and there and fore and aft, insult "progressive liberals." They are the ultimate strawman and must be demeaned, laughed at, scorned, trampled and sneered at. Always, even after they have helped elect someone you support, you must stab and snipe the "liberals."
How else can this nation deserve the hell of its own making?
Surely you do not believe God is "con"servative.
The Other Steve
There really is no difference between Clinton and Bush.
I’m voting Nader!
Martin
Let’s also add that Rahm brings needed WH and House competency to balance out Biden’s ability to work the Senate. This is a pretty well-rounded team here at the top. In terms of working the agenda, whatever that might be, I’m feeling pretty good here. I like that Rahm and Obama are opposites temperamentally. If they actually like each other, that’s usually a good tension.
As to Summers, it doesn’t matter what the fundamental truth is on the guy – he’s damaged goods and that needs to be factored in. That pisses off my inner idealist, but politics is like that – do you want people spending time on his comments or the economy? But consider that you pretty much need to put an expendable character in there. Treasury is going to be who everyone hates because they’re going to be the one shitting on everyones dreams for the next 18 months even if they are perfectly competent and do everything right. And the fact that they can’t fix the world overnight means everything bad will be blamed on them from 1/20 onward.
Rick Taylor
Obama’s positions disappointed me plenty of times early on in the election, particularly some of the things he said about insurance. I even voted for Hillary, before she started loosing and I could no longer avoid seeing how crazy she could be. Since then I’ve been extremely impressed and inspired by the campaign he ran, but I’ve never fallen for the Republican rhetoric. He’s highly competent and his heart is in the right place, which is what we desperately right now; I’ll that over ideological purity any time. Lincoln was criticized for being politically opportunistic and weak in opposing slavery; being a good politician can be a positive thing.
OniHanzo
@rob!
God I loved that comic.
p.a.
Where were you 1992-2000?
Glad to see some union representation among O’s economics team.
demimondian
@dewberry: Sorry, I was perfectly willing to let Summers’ statistical error about women slide. I’m much more worried about his history with unfettered deregulation of statistically-based financial markets.
PC? Yeah, he isn’t as polished and controlled a speaker as, say, oh, Joe Biden. Who cares? Finance? You know, I *really do* want my Secretary of the Treasury to have a clear understanding of the statistical basis of derivatives. Lawrence Summers has shown that he doesn’t understand *that* part of statistics, either.
Cassidy
@moar…Don’t think of it as a character flaw, but as a hobby.
Peeps need to step back and let the man work. He has a history of surrounding himself with smart, competant people. I am sure that every posting will be well thought out. Secondly, Obama never promised flashy change. He will slowly move progressively forward and once we realize it, we’ll be going "Damn, that works". The man is all about slow is smooth, and smooth is fast.
demimondian
@Rick Taylor: What the man said.
I mean, it’s suddenly like. "Oh, Jesus! Barack has read Machiavelli!"
Um, yeah. I hated his vote on FISA, and I still think he was simply wrong, and believed that it was an unnecessary cave — and it hurt him a lot during the summer. However, I voted for him anyway, expecting nothing better, and will continue to complain about what I see as his mistakes.
That doesn’t mean I’m anything but thrilled about having a vicious and effective leader *with his heart in the right place* in the White House.
demimondian
@Cassidy: "Slow is smooth, and smotth is fast" FTW
harlana pepper
anyone who followed Obama’s voting record would know that has never been a raging progressive by any stretch. so the Rahm pick, meh.
Llelldorin
Yes, we’ll be disappointed, except for two things:
(1) Obama is likely to run the country competently, at least. I didn’t agree with Clinton on his every policy, either, but even the wrong policies competently followed can produce decent results.
(2) Frankly, after the last eight years, Obama could prick his finger on a spinning wheel after the Inaugural Ball and spend the next four years asleep on his desk and it would still be a marked improvement over the Bush Administration.
Barbar
What is the "statistical basis of derivatives?" What does this even mean? How exactly would you have regulated derivatives to avoid this financial crisis? You know, using your understanding of their statistical basis?
The thing is, after the crisis, everyone wants more regulation. I’m not worried about the demand for regulation in the future.
Looking forward, here’s a more important issue to be concerned with: all the "serious" people in Washington are going to be looking for something to CUT from the budget. You can’t just spend, spend, spend like a wacky liberal, you know. You need to sacrifice something.
Recently, Summers has been quite outspoken about the need for more federal spending in this recession (to be accompanied by belt-tightening in good times, but hey what can you do now). He has credibility on this issue that I think will be quite important for Obama.
Joel
I would love to see Joe Stiglitz on the council for Economic Advisors, but that will not happen. Maybe he just doesn’t want catch teh stupid from Mankiw.
AnotherBruce
they are going to find themselves very disappointed to discover that Obama is, in fact, a Chicago politician who is interested in pushing his agenda rather than being the national psychotherapist they seem interested in finding.
Since TAC is a polite conservative publication, I’ll politely tell Daniel Larison to fuck off. No "the left" is not looking for a therapist, we’re looking for someone to govern effectively, instead of the incompetent rule that we’ve had for the last 8 years.
sickamore
@Pastafarian:
It’s just crazy enough to work!
boonagain
Sorry to hijack but Reid just announced that Lieberman is being stripped of his Chairmanship.
Brachiator
@The Moar You Know:
This really is not a problem. Many "progressives" are as bad as Republicans. That is, some liberals think that Obama’s election means that they can go to the file cabinet and pull out a moldy old list of "progessive reforms" that they have been sitting on for years and simply present them to Obama as Action Items, whether or not these supposed "reforms" have anything to do with current problems.
These people are just as bad as the Republicans who keep shouting "Free Market! Free Market!" as the economy blows up, or the GOP goofballs who whine about "tax and spend liberals" while the Bush Administration and Congress okay a $700 billion giveaway to "rescue" financial markets.
A lot of old lefties haven’t quite gotten the message that there is a new generation in charge, looking for new answers to their most pressing problems.
There are fools on the right — and fools on the left — who love to argue about ideology and ignore hard reality that is kicking them in the ass.
Quick example: Even though the last "economic stimulus" did not accomplish a damn thing, House Speaker Pelosi is arguing about the need for another "stimulus package." She is kinda like a wacky school nurse pulling out a box of band aids even though you’ve got a broken arm. Her heart is in the right place, she wants to help, but she missed the step of determining the right solution for the real problem.
Obama’s hardest job may be having to convince Democrats that a progressive approach to government does not automatically mean simplistically adopting every item on the progressive agenda.
Jay B.
Obama will be better than Clinton by a country mile. Not only because I think he’s more liberal (but not enormously so), he’s also tremendously more disciplined AND he’ll have a better Congress (one not filled with lazy Democrats who had been in the majority for 40 years and whose committees were led in the main by Southerners) with which to work on things that they were elected to do.
I would love to see Joe Stiglitz on the council for Economic Advisors, but that will not happen.
Maybe. Maybe not. He’s got Robert Reich on his economic transition team.
Jay B.
Sorry to hijack but Reid just announced that Lieberman is being stripped of his Chairmanship.
Link? Couldn’t find any announcement.
J.
Re LARRY SUMMERS, unless you all know something the NYT and MSNBC don’t, he isn’t Secretary of the Treasury elect yet, so why all the fuss? How about waiting until Obama announces his team before handicapping them? For the record, I am not a Summers fan, at least of his time at Harvard, but Obama could do a lot worse for Treasury Secretary. Just because a guy isn’t likable doesn’t mean he isn’t competent.
demimondian
@Barbar: There are a number of systems theory based techniques for recognizing excessive fluctuations in a market. I’ll be happy to point at papers on the topic, if you *really* want them.
Yes, some of us really do understand what we’re talking about here.
HyperIon
With respect to liking Summers because he’s brilliant, I’m not really sure we need brilliant for Sec Treasury. I prefer stable and down-to-earth. After all, the folks who dreamed up CDOs and CDSs were probably REALLY smart..and look how that turned out. Good for them. Not so good for us.
HyperIon
only you, demi-god.
but thanks for not mentioning it.
Brachiator
@demimondian:
You can easily find 3 grifters, 4 con men, a Circus barkey, 2 Vegas pit bosses and a couple of MIT grads who could explain the statistical basis of derivatives all night long. This has nothing to do with understanding the economy, and absolutely nothing to do with the hard business of dealing with the country’s present problems.
Amen to that. The presidential debates did not explicitly bring out the degree to which the Bush Administration has been an exercise in corruption, incompetence and cronyism. The way that he waged such an effective campaign is a sign that Obama will be a huge improvement over Dubya in this regard.
Barbar
I’m honestly interested — maybe not so much in the systems theory, but in the relationship between excessive fluctuations and our current crisis. My relatively uninformed impression is that the crisis is the result of a kind of unhealthy feedback loop. You don’t observe the excessive fluctuations until the crisis is happening — before then, everything looks pretty stable, even though it’s all an interconnected house of cards. So AIG is making boatloads of money selling a certain type of insurance and then suddenly the company is basically bankrupt. Is my impression wrong? I would honestly appreciate knowing what you mean.
libarbarian
@Brachiator
Really?
I think she just figures that as long as daddy has his wallet open she might as well demand money for her backers.
Her heart isn’t in the right place at all – shes buying favors with our money and damn well knows it.
libarbarian
Shorter Pelosi: "Massive government bailouts, when lots of money is flying all over the place, are the perfect time to sneak in payoffs to my favorite donors".
Joshau Norton
I don’t think it’s a done deal yet. Reid will probably send it to the Dems caucus to vote him out.
demimondian
@Brachiator:
You could indeed — and all of them, particularly the pit bosses — would have a signal lack of confidence in the current regulatory framework.
Lawrence Summers made the same statistical error in talking about women’s performance in science as he made in regulating the derivatives market: he concentrated on one tail, while ignoring the other. When Summers made his alleged claim about "the same mean, but broader tails", he ignored the distasteful fact that there’s no significant excess presence of women among the top flight of scientists, which his argument would strongly predict. That *small* fact means that his argument is…umm…nonsense. When he proposed and supported minimal regulation for derivatives, he focused on accretion to value, while ignoring the other tail, in which there could be rapid loss of value.
That kind of systemic bias has appeared several times in his career, and it’s a disqualification, in my eyes.
Ash Can
@Comrade Jake: Exactamundo. I’ll be the first to admit that I’m going to be cutting President Obama (damn, it felt good to type that) obscene amounts of slack, especially at the outset, because he’s proven abundantly that he knows better than me. I don’t expect anyone in the Obama administration to pass any of my own personal purity tests, and that includes Obama himself, for the simple reason that it’s impossible. There will be days when people will be running around the BJ board with their hair on fire shrieking about something Obama did, ZOMGhowCOULDhe, and I can guarantee that I’ll be among them on occasion. Context, however, is everything, and the fact is, it’ll be a calm, sensible, and indecently brilliant constitutional expert doing whatever it is that will be making me cry in my beer, as opposed to someone who is either a stupid jerk or a fucking asshole, depending on whether he’s having a good day or a bad one. And that in and of itself will help me get over myself in a hurry.
As for the appointment of Rahm Emanuel, I like it a lot. I really like the idea of Obama setting up a good-cop/bad-cop scenario. Simple and effective. I’m imagining some recalcitrant Congressional leader, from either party, sitting in front of the big desk in the Oval Office, with Obama turning on the 400-megawatt smile and saying, "Thank you so much for giving this matter your consideration." Then, said Congresscritter gets up and turns to go, and sees Rahm Emanuel standing by the door with a scowl on his face and a tire iron in his hands. Works for me.
Maybe Emanuel should get himself a T-shirt printed up with, "You heard the man, just fucking DO it" and wear it to work every day.
Barbar
Summers’ argument about tails and scientific ability was nonsense because probability distributions are descriptions, not determinants, of outcomes. If you take his argument further you would think that the number of men in prison has some important bearing on the number of men on the faculty at CalTech, simply because both figures reflect the "volatility" and "fat tails" of the distribution. And so, you know, maybe educating potential male criminals might have some harmful effects on scientific achievement.
However, I’m not sure why you think the broader tails "argument" is contradicted by the absence of women among the top flight of scientists. Doesn’t that just depend on the what the cutoff is for the top flight of scientists?
tavella
Er, I’m quite aware that Obama is center-right; there is a reason why I didn’t vote for him in the primary. I expect him to essentially be Clinton redux; competent at making government work, but continually disappointing me by wimping out and doing very little progressive. However, having someone not evil and competent is a hell of an improvement over the last eight years, so I was happy to vote for him and see him elected.
The Moar You Know
@Brachiator: We are on the same page, buddy. The world has changed. There are a lot of people who haven’t figured this out yet.
HyperIon
nice statement of your POV, tavella.
i share it.
Eli Rabett
Obama is careful and patient, but most here are deluding themselves about him being center-right.
demimondian
No, and that’s the point.
Assuming that the means of the "talent" distributions are identical, then the only way that Summer’s statement could be true would be true would be if every woman who was further out on the low tail was counterbalanced by one or more women who was above the mean. Now, for a skewed distribution, that would be as far as things go, but large samples from populations tend to be symmetric — and so there would need to be women further out the tails *on both ends*. As a result, there would be both more women than men who didn’t make any given standard below the mean and more women than men who exceeded any given standard above the mean. Taking as a given that those who make it as top flight scientists are above the mean, this would mean that there should be more top flight women than men.
We don’t observe that. Either Summers’ thesis is false, or there’s rampant sexism, which is exactly what he was arguing against, or both. No matter which of the three cases obtains, he’s still a fool.
Barbar
Demi, I still don’t know what you mean. Talking about the distributions is pointless because distributions don’t tell you about causality, which is the key issue. But your description seems to have men and women mixed up — Summers says there are broader tails for the men’s distribution, so naturally it’s men who are further out on the tails on both ends, we have more men than women not making any given standard below the mean, more men than women exceeding any given standard above the mean, more men scientists. This is exactly what he is saying. All you seem to be doing is flipping "men" and "women" and concluding Summers is wrong.
Any response to 156? It seems to me that you’re just saying "We should have had regulation because the financial crisis was a disaster and people lost a lot of money." Which is true, but doesn’t have anything to do with understanding statistics.
Tattoosydney
@boonagain:
@Joshau Norton:
I thought the Steve Benen analysis that was linked to in that TPM article was particularly insightful:
NonWonderDog (НеинтереснаяСобака)
This seems to be what you’re basing your argument on, but it doesn’t seem to disqualify his argument if Summers was contesting it. Furthermore, from his remarks, I can’t see that he is contesting it. He just says that the standard deviation appears to be lower among women, which would imply that men are more likely to be either very good or very poor in math than women. His seems like an uninteresting and pointless argument, honestly, and not anything to get worked up about either way.
redjellydonut
I’m a freaking soldier for the Comintern, they don’t come any more liberal than me, and I thought it was a brilliant choice. Emanuel is many things, most of them bad, but he is a nut-cutter par excellence and Dear Leader is gonna need someone like Rahm guarding the gates to the Peoples’ Palace. Viva la Revolucion!
wobbly
"Watching Republicans try to demonize him as some wild lefty over the next few years is going to be pretty damned amusing, especially since if anything, Obama represents a competent, nonthreatening centrism…."
Amusing? I don’t recall laughing when they did it to the Clintons.
mak
Last I checked, the only people "freaking out" over the Emmanuel pick were the righties who claimed he was hyper-partisan. Just the latest fake controversy, since the Chief’s job – unlike, say, the Speaker – shouldn’t be affected one whit by the partisanship of the CoS.
Must say, though, that I was a little put-off by the Emmanuel roll-out, featuring Rahm publicly pondering whether he’d take the job. Given the tight ship they’ve run so far, was a little surprised by that for a first move. Read somewhere that it was he himself who leaked it. Not sure I believe that, but if so, I’d be pissed if I were BHO.
Personal Designation
all this hot brilliant talk, oh my. . . you fellas sure are cultured ~fanning myself~
~BTO sounds better, and come to think of it, their politics totally rawk~
Nathanael Nerode
Actually, competence can be very threatening to incompetents.
And Obama is deeply competent. Calling it "unthreatening" is very wrong. Obama will implement stuff that works, and he’ll pass some bills through Congress even when most people think it’s impossible. This will cause large numbers of people to freak out.
He’s not going to try any radical untested experiments. Not his style. But whether a policy is called "center left", "center right", "conservative", or "liberal" means little to him. If it’s believed by the smartest people to be the best policy, relatively well tested, and he thinks he can get it passed, he’ll do it. And if he doesn’t think he can get it passed, he’ll work on the second-best policy. Etc.
Pastafarian
@Personal Designation:
I clicked on your name to see if you were a real troll or just a bad troll spoof. That website…Wow. Just…wow.
Krista
That’s a damn pretty picture you just painted there.
I think Obama is going to drive the wingnuts to levels of rage that Clinton could have only dreamed of, mainly because I don’t think Obama will even pretend to take any of their shit.
Brachiator
@tavella:
I will pay good money for someone to lay out — specifically — the supposed "progressive" agenda that Obama should be adhering to.
I will double down the good money for anyone who can demonstrate that "doing something progressive" actually matches real problems right now.
On the other hand, I think that the average American doesn’t give a rat’s ass about whether or not progressives might be disappointed with Obama. None of this entered in their decision for whom to pull the lever. Voters were pretty clear on this. The economy is in the toilet, and they aren’t waiting for Joe the Plumber to arrive. They are probably receptive to Obama’s agenda with respect to health care, jobs and the environment.
But I have not seen anywhere that citizens are yearning to measure Obama’s progress against a "progressive agenda" litmus test.
Steve S.
Myself, I’m not the least bit surprised at the Emanuel appointment, hence not freaking out, but let’s not pretend this has anything to do with "centrism". What an idealistic Obama supporter would find disturbing is not that he is moving to the "center", it’s that he didn’t even wait for the ink on the election certification to dry before appointing Clinton hacks to important positions, in direct contravention to his campaign’s central theme. Obama literally couldn’t wait to flush the most profound covenant with his supporters down the toilet. The glib dismissal of this plain fact on the lib blogs I frankly find amusing.
Like I said, I fully expected something like this, but one thing does surprise me. I thought Obama would at least bask in the glow for a couple of weeks before flashing the giant middle finger at the misty-eyed youngsters who got him elected.
gwangung
If these people are effective, then they’re not hacks.
You’re kinda stupid if you think that a new kind of politics would EXCLUDE politicians from other regimes.
And they most certainly are NOT in contravention to his campaign’s central theme.
Delia
I think John Boehner is just afraid Rahm Emmanuel is going to break his kneecaps.
Xecklothxayyquou Gilchrist
@Brachiator: I will double down the good money for anyone who can demonstrate that "doing something progressive" actually matches real problems right now.
Does progressive taxation count? Some of our problems could definitely do with a bit of revenue behind the solutions.
Comrade Stuck
Interesting take. What, exactly would you say was Obama’s central theme? I don’t know how many times Obama has looked America in the eye during the campaign and stated in clear and no uncertain terms that he is a pragmatist, first, last, and foremost. Any opining that he’s selling out a proclaimed progressive agenda is just not true.
Steve S.
I think you need to reaquaint yourself with the definition of the word.
It would by definition, unless you are suggesting that the input of hacks from "other regimes" would be combined in some novel way.
With all respect, your memory is short. Think back to late 2007 and early 2008 and why Obama gained traction against the "inevitable" Hillary Clinton in the first place. Ironically, he’s got a good head start on installing the same administration that she would have.
Zuzu's Petals
Myself, I can’t wait until it’s just normal, and we can all complain as we like over what he said today, or why didn’t he veto that bill, or whatever. Just because it’s completely normal to have a President Obama.
Steve S.
Hint: It begins with a "c" and rhymes with mange.
Since "pragamtist" means, in political terms, "relax, elites, I’m one of you," I think you are in error. Or maybe I missed the rally with tens of thousands of people holding up "Pragmatism we can believe in" placards.
Who has proclaimed that he ever had a "progressive agenda"? Certainly not him or me. The only people he sold out are the stupid bastards who caucused for him in Iowa based on the fact that he was not Hillary. Turns out he is.
Comrade Stuck
The feeling we are being led by idiots will take a while to go away. Watching Obama’s press conference today was almost surreal. I can’t yet wrap my head around the fact we are soon to have a president and a government that doesn’t speak in wingnut riddles. No more Clear Skies Initiative that means more pollution, or Healthy Forest Program meaning more trees to be clear cut, and endless other examples of doublespeak. I hope to gradually reduce the number of times I need to pinch myself just to make sure it’s real and not a dream
Comrade Stuck
No, pragmatist means doing what’s necessary to solve a problem, devoid of ideology. And choosing someone who was part of a successful presidency is not what I call selling out. And the change theme of his campaign wasn’t directed at the Clinton’s, it was directed at George Bush and republicans. You sound like your here for a little concern trolling or maybe even some ratfucking. It means nothing to us, especially when it’s done poorly.
slightly_peeved
No he isn’t. Like we said, the dude is competent.
Key to the change message was a politics based on issues, rather than stupid identity issues and distractions. Another part of the change he delivered was a unified and assertive Democratic Party.
The first change is not affected by the hiring of Clinton ‘hacks’; it’s controlled by the campaign message and the message he gives, neither of which has changed. The second requires people like Emanuel to be hired. Successful parties of any ideology, anywhere in the world, need someone willing to hit another guy in the balls with a 7-iron.
Besides which, kicking out the hacks isn’t change, it’s more of the same. Kicking out the people who supported Hilary, regardless of their competence, is the politics of the last 8 years. Keeping the people who are competent, regardless of ideology, is very much part of Obama’s change.
Steve S.
No, "pragmatist" is beltwayspeak for one of their own. There are many thousands of perfectly qualified managerial types kicking around the country, but the one who got chosen just happens to be a political crony of both Obama and the Clintons. WHAT A COINCIDENCE!!!
Wow, Americans really do have short memories. Uh, yeah, the change theme was directed at Hillary. Look it up if you don’t believe me. You’ll have to go back to ancient history, the primary season, but it’s there.
Paranoid much? I’m relieved that the incompetent and mendacious Bush Bunch are about to be shown the door, but this is a blog and there is no requirement that we be mindless cheerleaders for Obama.
Steve S.
Huh? Hillary isn’t/wouldn’t be? I think you’re getting things a little mixed up. Hillary ran on the competence theme, Obama on the change theme. Obama won, then didn’t even wait 48 hours to heist Hillary’s theme. Myself, I don’t particularly care, since this is what I expected all along, but I can understand the consternation of the idealists.
Staunchly pro-Israel, to the point of serving with its military: check.
Investment banker and board member of Freddie Mac: check.
One of the leaders of the most unpopular congress in history: check.
Yes, Emanuel has a history of hitting people in the balls with his 7-iron. Unfortunately, they weren’t members in good standing of the status quo. Quite the opposite, in fact. Can Obama retrain his pit bull? We’ll see.
Comrade Stuck
Every major candidate in the same party primary, and minor, tries to paint themselves different than their opponent. Even when their policies are nearly identical. Every argument you make Steve, is based on a false premise. It’s how wingnuts argue, and is nothing new. Not paranoid, just tired of sub par trolls.
While it’s true this is basically a pro Obama blog, it is more true it’s an anti-GOP one. In this very thread, there are conflicting opinions on the staff picks Obama has made thus far, from people who basically support him. It is also true that when a troll shows up for the sole purpose of finding fault with Obama, that person comes with an agenda, and when those arguments are one sided rants using false premises, then we cal them concern trolls. You sound an awful lot like a concern troll named P. Luk. A guy who resides in his own little world of conjured factoids, that are almost always unsound. If your not him, you are identical in about every way.
And pragmatist does not equal one of those beltway types, or one of their own . Those guys and gals don’t know the meaning of pragmatism. They are the exact opposite in fact.
Steve S.
And that false premise is…?
You snipped the part where I suggested that you simply Google up a few quotes from the primary season. In a matter of seconds you will find instances of Obama tying the "politics of the past" to Hillary Clinton. It’s simply not even an arguable point. Obama did not campaign on, "I’m only a tiny bit different from Hillary and will use most of her advisers if I get elected."
Still waiting for that "false premise".
You might want to consult the following