Reply #37: He'll never do that

[DFW]

As DNC chairman, he took enough flak from all the candidates for not taking sides.

He wouldn't budge, taking his job as impartial party chair seriously. Rightly so.

As a private citizen now, albeit a very known one, he feels it is not his place to lobby
for a cabinet spot, but rather the choice of the sitting president to make his own choice,
whomever that may be. Howard has always stuck to principles, and he isn't about to change
now. I have nothing but admiration for him for that, and no matter how badly I want him
to get this post (and that's VERY badly), neither I nor he would want him to get it by
groveling for it. It's Obama's call. If Obama lets himself be swayed by Rahm and Rahm's
personal grudge, it's a stain on Obama and Rahm, not Howard. I would hope Obama sees it
the same way, but that's several layers removed from us peons.

I'm sure it hasn't escaped Howard that both Senators from his state plus Tom Harkin and
one congressman have spoken out in his name. I haven't been in touch with him since
Geneva, and obviously only stuff that's on the record will appear in a post here, but
what we need is for a couple of dozen Senators to speak out. Howard is not one to try
to collect a political debt, but the fact is that several sitting Senators owe their
seats to Howard, such as Claire McCaskill and Jean Shaheen, Jim Webb, the new woman
from NC, etc etc. THEY are the ones that owe a debt to Howard, and if they have no other
preferences for HHS, they might do a good turn to the hand that fed them. Being Washington,
they probably already have forgotten whose 50 state strategy it was that got them where
they are, but we are certainly permitted to remind every one of them of OUR preference.