A word on Obama’s picks

/

Aside from then inevitable micro-screening and idiotic commentary from the MSM regarding any and all of Obama’s picks, there has also been a significant amount of hand-wringing in the progressive blogosphere. Rahm Emmanuel, WTF? But, Dean’s 50 state…..Hillary, WTF? Their one big disagreement was foreign pol…..and so on.

I have a slightly different take on it. This post starts with a comment that I left over at Comrade Physioprof’s post expressing his concerns with the Gaithner pick.

I think Obama has shown during his campaigns that he knows not just how to put together a decent plan but also how implement it brilliantly. One way of looking at the current crises is that it may be damn near impossible for an outsider to correct things given how fucked up they are. There is very little time, and it may be best to get people somewhat familiar with the filth to begin changing it. I'm not worried about Obama's players as much as I'm concerned with his game plan. I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt for the first few months. He is one smart fucker---the Lieberman bailout for instance was, in my opinion, a superior move. This change is not gonna come in a flower and rainbow-filled isolation dome that is absent of politics. Rather, it has to come from right in the midst of the mire.

I think Obama can get Rahm, Hillary, Gaithner or anyone else to do what he wants them to do, instead of what they may have previously wanted to do. In an ideal world, Obama could bring in an army of fresh faces and minds and change everything to everyone’s fucking satisfaction. But there isn’t enough time to have newbies get accustomed to the game now. There is another important point regarding the economic crisis---Read Krugman’s column Lame-Duck Economy---The financial crisis needs to be dealt with fast and with some sensitivity, because the greatest crisis is the one in the credit markets. Whether you like it or not, this vague and annoying phrase “confidence in credit markets” is ruling shit right now. This is a terrible problem---Obama’s administration has to change things in a financial sector where a lot of powerful fuckers don’t want anything to change. The only way to achieve this is from inside out, not outside in. The person in charge here needs to be someone familiar to the easily-spooked, one who can hold their hands, caress their heads and tell them everything’s gonna be OK while gently but swiftly changing the way things are done. Let’s be clear on this---things are not going to change because someone comes in and smacks people around and enforces his or her will. Not gonna happen. Like it or not, most of these crises have been created by politicians and you cannot address them successfully without a superior political strategy.

To me “change we can believe in” involves progressive change in fucked-up systems. I don’t give a flying fuck who is involved in making that happen, as long as it is made to happen. If things can be changed with the same people, and the people's views be changed positively alongside, better and better. I think Obama has the vision for progress and the guts and strategic skills to implement it. He knows he has a mandate and knows that he doesn’t have to claim it on TV to use its awesome leverage. I have no doubt that he knows how to use it discreetly, as and when necessary, to get his plans implemented. I’m willing to sit back a bit and give him some time.

/

Print this post