It may not be his top concern, but Barack Obama is still having problems with Florida’s Cuban community. They are not thrilled by two advisors (including VP vetter Eric Holder) who participated in the Elian Gonzales episode and the ultimate decision to return the boy to Cuba.
On a broader issue, it is not clear where Obama is now on meeting with Raul Castro. Obama has spent much effort backpedaling on unconditional meetings with Ahmadinejad. But does he still favor such meetings with Raul Castro?
From the February Democratic debate:
BROWN: Senator Obama, just to follow up, you had said in a previous CNN debate that you would meet with the leaders of Cuban, Iran, North Korea, among others, so presumably you would be willing to meet with the new leader of Cuba.
OBAMA: That’s correct. Now, keep in mind that the starting point for our policy in Cuba should be the liberty of the Cuban people. And I think we recognize that that liberty has not existed throughout the Castro regime. And we now have an opportunity to potentially change the relationship between the United States and Cuba after over half a century. I would meet without preconditions, although Senator Clinton is right that there has to be preparation. It is very important for us to make sure that there was an agenda, and on that agenda was human rights, releasing of political prisoners, opening up the press. And that preparation might take some time. But I do think that it’s important for the United States not just to talk to its friends, but also to talk to its enemies. In fact, that’s where diplomacy makes the biggest difference.
Hillary Clinton later in that same debate had a different view:
Well, I agree, absolutely, that we should be willing to have diplomatic negotiations and processes with anyone. I’ve been a strong advocate of opening up such a diplomatic process with Iran, for a number of years. Because I think we should look for ways that we can possibly move countries that are adversarial to us, you know, toward the world community. It’s in our interests. It’s in the interests of the people in countries that, frankly, are oppressed, like Cuba, like Iran. But there has been this difference between us over when and whether the president should offer a meeting, without preconditions, with those with whom we do not have diplomatic relations. And it should be part of a process, but I don’t think it should be offered in the beginning. Because I think that undermines the capacity for us to actually take the measure of somebody like Raul Castro or Ahmadinejad and others.
Whether Obama is going to add this issue to his list of flips may depend on the degree to which he believes that Florida is in play. If it is, one can imagine that Obama will be sounding a lot more like Clinton on this one, and soon.
Let’s face it – the most likely reason BOTH the Republican and Democratic Senators are indifferent to Daschle’s corruption is because he isn’t doing anything they haven’t done or are currently doing. Our country is run by people (elected and unelected) who pretty much constitute a separate social class with an internal culture hostile to ordinary people and their interests and values.
Why do you think Newt Gingrich believes in Global Warming? He’s too smart to buy that load of baloney – he’s just conforming to the value system of his peers.
The motto for Republicans on these matters should be: “faithful with little, faithful with much.” This is a bit of solid wisdom from our shared Judeo-Christian heritage that Americans will understand: only the person who shows himself trustworthy in minor responsibilities should be entrusted with major responsibilities. It’s not petty to ask for a high standard of integrity from the people to whom we are entrusting the people’s money and government. It’s not petty to ask the Obama administration to nominate men and women who have not chosen to fudge the numbers (and break the law) when no one was looking.
It has to do with the use of power, and the interconnectedness of our decisions. If you abuse your power when the stakes are small, you’ll do the same when the stakes are large. This is because your behavior, especially in seemingly insignificant matters, when no one is watching, reveals the person you really are (not the person you claim to be). How you behave when ten chips are on the table tells me a lot about how you’ll behave when a thousand chips are on the table. Decisions made over the course of time shape our character and establish patterns of decision-making. No decision is isolated, and these guys got caught making decisions to save themselves money at the cost of their integrity and their duty to country.
Or, on a lighter note, Republicans can make a chart on how much our budget deficit would be reduced if Democratic politicians and administration bigwigs would stop “forgetting” to pay their taxes. Or maybe we should all just pitch in to get a better accountant for Rangel, Geithner and Daschle.
#2 Ahitophel writes “If you abuse your power when the stakes are small, you’ll do the same when the stakes are large.”
This is what Mayor Giuliani called “the broken windows policy.”
Yes, nice parallel. You could call it “the Broken Windows Theory of Political Appointments.” If they broke windows yesterday, tomorrow they’ll steal cars.
“Let me say it as simply as I can: Transparency and the rule of law will be the touchstones of this presidency,”
–President Obama, January 21, 2009 (his first full day in office).
I guess the Era of Transparency and The Rule of Law are over.
There’s been change in everything else, we’ve been promised change by BHO, so let’s have some real change. This isn’t 1802, it doesn’t take a week in a stage coach to get from Boston to Richmond. We don’t even need to rely on the postal system. Communication of ideas is now, just as I am doing it, pixels at the speed of light. The House and the Senate don’t need to go to Washington to do the nation’s business. In fact, they would be more informed of their constituents’ conditions and desires if they went to an office every day in the district they represent. The idea that these public servants need to congregate in Washington, D.C. is a legacy of a bygone age. They can get and give all the information that we do in a similar manner. Let Washington be a ceremonial hub and the president’s residence. Let the Congress stay home where they belong.
This thread so far has been blessedly free of trolls and full of sense. Let’s see how long it takes for a troll to insult Jennifer Rubin rather than address her points. 3…2…1…
Daschle doesn’t surprise me a bit – people were talking about his wife’s lobbying when he was Majority Leader (and about DiFi clearing the path for her husband’s company, but I digress …).
I agree with the sentiment that ALL these people (to some extent, great or small) think the rules are for everyone else. Where Democrats are concerned, though (my personal bias here – so be it), the rules are there to keep the evil Republicans in line.
Because, you see, Democrat hearts are pure and their motives impeccable, so any resemblance between their actions and corruption is COMPLETELY coincidental.
Whereas “we all know” the evil which lurks in the hearts of Republicans ……
What’s equally amazing is that the Democrats believe, or claim to believe, that the odds of getting health care reform of the sort they envision will be advanced by having Dr Daschle. Now he’s managed to turn himself completely into one of Them, a completely incredible spokesperson for the public rather than special interest, but apparently, the Obama analysis of the Hillarycare fiasco remains that the effort collapsed as a result of Bill & Hillary’s failure to consult adequately with the Democrats who at the time also controlled both houses of Congress, rather than the fact that the government takeover went down the popular gullet like a tablespoon of salt. As for those depending on Obama’s approval ratings as ultimate trump card, I recall that, after Bill’s masterful speech to Congress and the nation on behalf of his plan, complete with prototype Health Care Credit Card, he or at least the plan were just around 70% approval, too.
Let’s see how long it takes for a troll to insult Jennifer Rubin rather than address her points. 3…2…1…
Challenge accepted. JR is just wrong! There you go CFB. Take that!
#7
Jennifer Rubin is really dishonest when it comes to making arguments about honesty.
For example, here she is:
“They didn’t know enough to stay away from Blago, nix Bill Richardson, stick to their own lobbyist rules, dump Geithner and now lose Daschle.”
Except for they did stay away from Blago. And they came out smelling like a rose for doing so. In fact, it seems clear that they made the case against Blago. And they pulled the plug on Bill Richardson well before his confirmation, even though he has been accused of nothing. And Republicans overwhelmingly supported Geithner’s nomination.
So your list of grievances is growing kind of short. I’m sure if I check the Commentary archives, I can find tons of articles on clean government and ethics for all of the Bush years. No, you say? It’s sort of a new passion of Jennifer Rubin’s? I see.
Steele endorsed Holder. Just sayin’,
Michael Steele, so perfectly attuned to The People that he claimed government has never created a single job.
Daschle clearly omitted key information or lied on the vaunted 60-question Obama vetting form.
If something like that happened in the corporate world, such a candidate would be turned down, or fired, if they had already been hired. No questions asked, and without any fear of a wrongful termination lawsuit.
Is it hurl hurling into busted pipe or vice versa?
Yeah, I thought we were supposed to be amazed by the thoroughness of the vetting process employed by Obama. Do you think the media is going to erupt with questions about whether Obama’s repeated nomination problems cast doubt upon his judgment? No, I don’t either.
@ #15 -
“Is it hurl hurling into busted pipe or vice versa?”
Alexander A-Hole if you can’t say nice things about people who disagree with your opinions then I’m gonna keep on trolling…….
Zeus hath broken wind in fury.
This post is right on the money, of course. But I kinda think you missed the worst thing about Daschle: his unctuous, sanctimonious attitude. If you ask me, he –actually and incredibly– may be worse than Jimmy Carter.
There’s been talk of casting Tom Daschle as the lead in the new Terminator movie series.
This Senate is collegial in the same sense as Animal House.
“Make no mistake, tax cheaters cheat us all, and the IRS should enforce our laws to the letter. ” Sen. Tom Daschle, Congressional Record, May 7, 1998, p. S4507.
I like Daschle and think he would make a good appointment, but JR has a good point. Obama fans and loyal democrats won’t raise a stink about this, but the continued perception of tax evading cabinet appointments will continue to chip away at the facade of change that was promised in regards to DC culture. Obama and team are currently insulated by good PR, press and poll numbers – but the passage of time and 24/7 scrutiny of little stuff like this will only provide good fodder for GOP pundits to declare hypocrisy. Oh well… Obama will have to stick by his man in this case. He’ll lose either way whether he rescinds the appointment or keeps it going, so he might as well keep it going. Daschle will get a public reprimand from his old buddies in the senate (both dems and republicans) and then get approved. I’ll bet money on that. After all, every single one of our upper crust law-makers have these types of things in their histories that have been overlooked by thier accountants at one point or another. For the GOP, this is a good thing since it will only be a matter of time before some decent senators on the right get busted for similar petty stuff. Reprimanding and then approving Daschle will buy some credit for some pending scandal – kinda like a get out of jail free card.
Another thing that is puzzling is why Obama wasn’t more outraged by Daschle’s behavior. Here I’m referring to Daschle’s attempt to pull a fast one on the vetting committee, and indirectly Obama. Of course, the tax chiseling was bad enough. But in distinction with the Geithner case, who from all reports was upfront with the vetting committee, Daschle lied to Team Obama.
I would think that the message Obama could send to his administration by dumping Daschle is more important than keeping him: “You lie to me or my key aides, and you’re fired!”
Instead, it’s now out there that you can roll POTUS, if you’ve got enough friends.
If you want to be perceived as the most powerful person in the world, you got to act like it.
Obama and his cadre didn’t “stay away” from Blago at all — except in the sense that the press has categorically refused to delve into the ties between Obama, Emanuel and Blago. Obama and Emanuel endorsed and campaigned for Blago in his last election in 2006. This is “staying away”? Only if you’re the Lord Most High Barack Obama, who — along with the besotted media — has the magical power to change his corrupt cronyism into a seven-year-old’s First Communion.
And #19, Daschle isn’t the only one with the santimonious attitude. Does Obama ever say anything without superciliously pointing to his own purity, his own brilliance, his own sagacity and the stupidity, venality, immorality and ignorance of his political opponents?
If Obama came out of the Blago thing smelling like a rose, it is because of the French bath that the press has given him. But spraying perfume on a rotting corpse only works for so long.
One by one the lefty trolls are going to get tired of defending his hypocrisy. This is why there was 4 billion for ACORN. We are soon to be post democratic. Our national elections to be decided “the Chicago way” Then it simply won’t matter what those who disagree with Obama think.
I’ve never given this a try, but I think it’s about time I do.