Reply #4: I look at it a couple of ways ...

[RoyGBiv]

He's going to get enough shit from Republicans no matter who he chooses. He doesn't need it from me. And in any event, I'm not going to have much of an influence on a *cabinet* appointment. Pick your fights and all that ...

The other thing I think about is Lincoln. Now, I know these comparisons are reaching the point of being overdone, so I'll keep it toned down, and I'm not making a direct comparison. However, there are some interesting parallels. Lincoln put people in his cabinet who were flat out opposed to everything Lincoln wanted ... save one, preservation of the union. Some were even borderline incompetent and none of them had any real level of respect for Lincoln. They had this idea they were going to control his naive fool from Illinois who had no experience in DC.

Well that certainly turned out differently, didn't it?

Lincoln's basic idea was he had a lot of division to deal with, and not just North vs. South. His own party was all over the board with different, often incompatible ideas of what kinds of things needed to be done and/or how to do them. Then there were the Democrats, who hated him and everything he was about. So, he thought, I'll put representatives of all my enemies in my own cabinet, keep an eye on them, force them around to my way of thinking whether they like it or not, and get some things done.

This is why the idea of keeping on Gates doesn't even cause me pause. Gates isn't incompetent. Compared to Rummy, he's a flippin' genius. And Obama can use him, or Gates can resign.

So, yeah ... whoever he wants.