Obama: The New (Old) Washington Politician

Charles B Reynolds
In an Associated Press article by Stephen Olemacher, it is being reported that Barack Obama might use his executive order privelege the moment he is installed in office. "There's a lot that the president can do using his executive authority without waiting for congressional action, and I think we'll see the president do that," Obama's transistion cheif, John Podesta said. "I think that he feels like he has a real mandate for change. We need to get off the course that the Bush administration has set."

The executive order use is not at issue, as many past Presidents have used them to reverse orders put into place by previous administrations which they disagree with. However, what is disturbing is that the types of changes Barack Obama is going to use them for and the fact he believes he has a mandate from the people.

The fact of the matter is that Barack Obama was not elected to office by such an overwhelming majority as to confirm any mandate. Even though the Electoral vote count was 364 for Obama and 162 votes for John Mccain, this is very decieving. The real vote count, the popular vote count, the one that would establish a mandate for anyone is much, much closer.

Barack Obama recieved 52.56% of the vote, which comes out to 65,431,955 votes. John McCain recieved 46.14% of the vote, coming out to 57,434,084 votes. And then the third party guys/gals brought in 1,359,341 votes.

Sure, 52.56% of the vote is a pretty commanding thing. But there are almost 59 million people out there that did not vote for Barack Obama. 47.44% of the American voting public did not vote for the current President-elect. Nearly half the country does not want the change he is planning to effect. Hardly a mandate by any stretch of the imagination.

If Barack Obama intends to follow such sweeping reversals as Joh Podesta is suggesting (stem cell research overturned, stopping oil and gas drilling in Utah), then he is going to feel major resistance and draw sharp criticism from the part of the American public that did not vote for him.

He is already beginning to draw raised eybrows from those that did vote him into office.

His selection of Rohm Emmanuel as his chief of staff may have some questi0oning his campaign statements of bipartisanship. Emmanuel is one of the most partisan Democrats in Washington and is a former member of Bill Clinton's Administration.

Also, his list of possibles to fill cabinet positions is begining to look like old hand Washington. Not really sweeping change that was his campaign slogan for the past twenty some months.

John Podesta, who leads Obama's transition team was once Bill Clinton's cheif of staff. There is talk of Hillary Clinton for Secretary of State. Robert Rubin and Lawrence Summers, who were Clinton economic advisors, have been sought out byu Obama, testing the waters for possible return to office. Could Eric Holder, former deputy attorney general be tapped for Attorney General under Obama? Or Richard Holbrooke, fomer UN Ambassodor under Clinton be returning to his old job?

Valerie Jarrett, transition co-chairman for President-elect Barack Obama, spoke to reporters and said Obama wants a "cross section of America," including people from different political parties. Unfortunately, all there seems to be on the list (from such people as herself, Emmanuel and Podesta) are Democrats. And most of them from the Clinton days. Even though the leader and co-chairman of his transistion team say that he isn't going to become a rehash of the Clinton administration, the people under current consideration look exactly that, a third Clinton term.

All this leads one to wonder exactly what Obama meant by changing Washington, changing the status quo (a term he once used about the Clinton administration during his campaign). Did he simply mean he was going to change who was in charge now? Was he merely referring to his hope to change the taxation of the wealthy and the building opf a subservient poor?

Either way, it does not really look like much of a change is shaping up. It just looks like Washington politics as usual, just under a different name.

Sources:

Obama To Use Executive Orders For Immediate Impact - Yahoo! News

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081109/ap_on_go_pr_wh/obama

Published by Charles B Reynolds

Published author, political junkie, and lover of the written word. Writing workshop and seminar instructor. Journalist at Examiner.com and Imperfect Parent.com. Blogger of the internationally read “Thinkin...  View profile

3 Comments

Post a Comment
  • Sheryl Young11/11/2008

    Yeah - his appointments are turning out to be same ol' same ol' instead of "change"! I'm sure he will throw a bone to show he's using a "cross section", he'll give one or two Repubs or Independents some unimportan lowly posts.

  • Charles B Reynolds11/10/2008

    Agnes, I sure hope he doesn't try to do EVERYTHING he said he would during his campaign speeches. In regards to the economy, most "independent" economist say his plans will deepen the recession and possibly send us into a depression. As for such rhetoric as bringing George W up on war crimes, this would be an embarrassment for this country and something that could spiral into an open civil war. Lets just hope he limps along like most Presidents do, so we can elect someone else in 4 or 8 years.

  • Agnes Farside11/10/2008

    I think Obama will try to do everything he said he would. He wants another term in 2012.

Displaying Comments

To comment, please sign in to your Yahoo! account, or sign up for a new account.