Reply #53: For the question you are asking, "WHO" doesn't mean squat. WHO I would nominate is irrelevant, and

[trayNTP]

I don't NEED to have a name. What matters is the pattern behind Obama's appointments. The "WHAT" and the "WHY."

"WHO" I would appoint in the fantasy of me as President adds nothing to the conversation, therefore it is a waste of time. I described for you what a "Jobs" panelist doesn't need to be, and groups where one could have been selected from instead of from an outsourcing company.

You're not making a point by asking me a pointless question, so you may as well drop it, because I'm not playing that foolish game. Learn to focus on an issue for once, instead of a freaking individual. You want a name, so you can flip the judgment to "ME", the "OP", well you may as well move on.

Discuss what we know has been done and why, or don't discuss anything at all.