No "Individual" is Owed a Cabinet Post, but...

[Truth2Tell]

Maybe no "individual" is owed an Obama cabinet post, but... certain constituencies do deserve consideration - particularly if he ran for President by making particular promises or outlining particular priorities - which he did.

I start with the proposition that a long list of highly qualified candidates can be made for every cabinet post. Certainly a baseline level of professionalism, knowledge, experience and competence is called for. No Brownies need apply. But within that range there are certainly more than a few who qualify. And from that group it is OK - in fact it is imperative - that other factors be applied. Two examples:

1. Philosophy/Ideology - if Obama ran on a platform of cleaning up the environment then it stands to reason that he choose a Secretary of Interior who believes the environment needs to be cleaned up. If he ran on a platform of re-visiting NAFTA and other trade deals with an eye for labor, the environment and social justice, then it stands to reason that he appoint a Commerce Secretary who opposes open-ended, condition-free trade agreements. Etc etc etc.

2. Loyalty/Reliability. As an employer I've learned from experience that it's often better to hire employees with less knowledge of the particulars of the job, but whom I can be sure will arrive at work and follow direction, rather than the opposite. This is not to say that Obama should follow the Bush model of patronage, but simply acknowledge that accomplishing goals does indeed require loyal, trustworthy and committed troops.

President Obama is about to undertake a reformation of American political orthodoxy on our behalf. So I disagree with the proposition that his cabinet appointments should depend exclusively on resume, or simple measures of professional competence. Rather, he should prioritize choosing a team that shares his values, believes in his agenda, represents his constituents and is ready to loyally fight on behalf of the new paradigm he has promised us.

[Muttocracy]

1. one of the things that impressed me most about Obama was his campaign management

picking excellent people and striking a good balance between stepping back and letting them do their jobs and making decisions himself. The Newsweek articles after the election about that were fascinating to me. I hope the same carries through the transition and new administration.

[Truth2Tell]

2. He certainly knows how to pick good people.

I made this post because I can see what's coming. My guess is that Obama is going to appoint some right-wing Dems and/or Republicans to his cabinet. The establishment apologists will then roll out the predictable rationalization that Obama is simply choosing the "most qualified" people and behaving in a "post-partisan" way, blah blah blah. In reality he will likely do so to appease or co-opt elements of the corporate right who have the power to derail his agenda or even destroy his Presidency. The apologists will lecture liberals that no one "deserves" a cabinet post and that they should be driven by competence and not "politics", when in fact the RW choices will be made for reasons equally or more politically craven.

[TheWraith]

3. "Certain constituencies"? What does that mean?

I don't recall Obama campaigning on a platform that he'd staff the place like Noah's Ark. And while you might find a long list of qualified people, usually there's only one on there who's going to be the BEST.

[mondo joe]

4. I've interviewed for a number of positions, and I have to say I've never found two

applicants to be equally qualified. There's always been a standout.

Maybe a lot of equally UNqualified people.

[sutz12]

5. Noah used quite a bit of nepotism when he staffed the ark.

Oh....you're talking about the animals. :sarcasm:

;)

[Truth2Tell]

6. I elaborated in the post.

"Certain constituencies" means those ideological groupings consistent with the values on which he based his campaign.

"the BEST" is an objective judgment. I just explained some of the criteria I think he should use to define "the BEST". You have also explained the ones you would use. I'm guessing you will use those same criteria to rationalize his more right-leaning picks. And we will likely continue to disagree.

[TheWraith]

7. Actually, you really didn't.

You just talked about a compatible team--which I suspect is the main criteria for his picks, since I can't imagine appointing someone to high government office who disagrees with everything you're about. But when you talked about "constituencies" you seemed to suggest that there were specific demographics which required representation.

And "his more right-leaning picks"? For crying out loud, the man hasn't even chosen a single cabinet member yet.

[Truth2Tell]

8. I do think specific ideological demographics deserve representation.

These are political picks. It would be silly to pretend that cabinet officers are simply technocrats, or that their choice is comparable to hiring, say, a computer technician or a plumber for your house. There is nothing at all wrong about including politics among the criteria for appointees to highly political positions. In fact, it's imperative that it be a major factor, IMO.

[MN Farmer]

11. That is where you're dead wrong....

and why our nation is facing the issues it is-playing partisan politics.

We need the best PEOPLE, not the best DEMOCRATS to lead our nation. We need people of high ethical content (to prevent abuse of power), high work ethics (so that they do the best job they can) and a working history of the cabinet post they are about to fill.

It's kinda dumb to appoint someone who was a great fundraiser in the campaign that is a big wig in entertainment to the Sec Def position-chances are, that person knows next to nothing about how the military operates. A better choice would be someone who has served in the military (preferably as an enlisted person) for a length of time and understand what it's really like.

We need the best people qualified for the position, not our brother in law who needs a job. Doing something like that would be no different than a Harriet Miers or that doof who was in charge of FEMA for a while.

Do we really need to make those mistakes again?

[Truth2Tell]

12. We are facing the issues we are

because of REPUBLICAN politics. It is now time for a CHANGE. That means DEMOCRATIC politics. Not REPUBLICAN LITE politics.

Or maybe you didn't get the memo? :shrug:

It went out November 4th.

[MN Farmer]

13. It's not a popular thing to say here.......

But there are good people who are more than qualified for the positions and bad people who aren't qualified to handle the tieing their own shoes on both sides of the aisle.

We are facing the issues we are because we play petty games instead of working together as a nation to iron out the problems.

The best and the brightest need to come together to make this nation as strong as it can be. Playing partisan politics will just wind up being another 4 years of wasted time.

Playing partisan politics accomplishes nothing more than anger and angst. We need to quit playing petty childish games and do what is best for this nation in it's time of need, and that means appointing the best and the brightest people, regardless of their affiliated parties.

I will agree that we should avoid those who are Bush cronies, that goes without saying.

[aquart]

16. How about the best Democrats?

Or do you really believe our skills and knowledge and smarts are inferior to the Republicans?

[Donald Ian Rankin]

9. It's more important to pick people who will represent the interests of consituencies than members.

From the point of view of poor people, for example, John Kerry would be a better pick than Joe Wurzelbacher, even though he's not one of them.

[Truth2Tell]

10. True indeed.

Although someone like Robert Rubin (just for example) would neither represent the interests of the poor, nor is he poor. Although he may have a great resume.

[aquart]

14. He's doing very nicely so far.

I've had none of those horrible attacks of wanting to shriek and throw things so common to me in the last eight years.

[Truth2Tell]

15. I think he is doing OK

Buy it's way to early to really know anything. I'm just playing the speculation game.