The Obama Presidency - 2008 & 2012
 

Just read that Obama is considering Hillary Clinton for Sec of State. Assuming there can be a good working relationship between the 2 and Hillary can wait her turn in 8 yrs, I think she would be great. This brought me to ask what has Condi Rice done lately and honestly, without doing some deep research, I don't think she has been in the news or produced much of anything.

This got me thinking about the Obama presidency as a whole. Going into the election and reading post-election comments, there are extremely high expecation of what Obama will accomplish ... from righting the economy, ending the war in Iraq, capturing OBL, having the world love us again etc.

Outside of the economy which seems to be on cruise control to somewhere, what are your hopes and predictions?

My hopes are

1. Some massive overhaul for healthcare to fix the problem. Not sure if socialized 100% coverage is the right solution but something beyond $5K tax credits needs to be done.
2. Serious Energy program. Encourage alternate fuels etc. Not sure what the solution is but with gas back down to < $2, I am concerned this will no longer be the focus.
3. Stabilize Iraq. Militarily for sure, not sure about politically. Refocus on Afghanistan and get that SOB (preferably dead).
4. Improve world opinion of the US. I think Hillary and Bill and accomplish this!

More of what we have now...For all the talk of change, I'm seeing mostly faces who were associated with the Clinton administration.

I think we stay in Iraq for at least another year, maybe two, although with Obama in command, the coverage isn't so negative. Still might rile up the anti-war ranks, though.

Since Obama is already talking about canceling Bush's drilling initiative executive order...so much for energy independence. Once OPEC gets its act together, we'll see $4-$5 per gallon gas prices again someday.

If Obama and Dems cut the military, like they're already talking about, I think Afghanistan falls back into Taliban hands as we simply decide the lumps just aren't worth taking if we don't plan on securing victory and pull out like the Russians did in the 80s. Osama Bin Ladin, if he is still alive and reemerges, becomes a messianic figure to Muslim radicals around the world for defeating the western Satan.

I think the Dems try to make a massive grab at nationalizing just about everything not already nationalized and it blows up in their face (like Healthcare in the 90s did) as the economy stays in a funk for the next two to three years. They'll lose their grip on at least one of the houses in Congress. If Obama governs as a centrist, he probably wins reelection. If he he goes hardcore left, he is essentially the black Jimmy Carter, and is a one-term president.

:banghead: DOMESTIC OIL DRILLING DOES NOT EQUAL ENERGY INDEPENDENCE!!! HOW MANY TIMES DO I HAVE TO SAY IT!!!

EPIC MOTHERFUCING FAIL!!! :banghead:

Let me rephrase, Independence from foreign supply, or at least supply from sources not necessarily friendly to our interests.

OBAMA WANTS TO REDISTRIBUTE UR MONEYZ!

If the economy starts to snap out of the funk it has been in by 3 years from now, Obama wins in a landslide beyond this one in 2012.

you obviously missed my rants on this in the election threads during the debates.

offshore domestic oil drilling would not provide a drop of oil that would find its way into american gas tanks within something like 10 years. the problem is that we don't have the rigs and drilling supplies to exploit offshore oil fields at the moment, and producing and deploying them then doing the drilling and refining would take that long.

now it IS true, and i do admit, that there is oil in ANWR that we could access sooner than that. I will also admit that I am not up to speed on exactly how much oil is up there and what type of effect it would have on gas prices in the short/intermediate term, but my impression has been that it's not massively significant (although let me state again, i don't know, so feel free to post objective scientific research proving me wrong). I believe i've heard scientists say it would be a drop-in-the-bucket compared to what we currently use, and certainly not a long-term answer.

the solution to energy independence is not drilling (either offshore or ANWR). It lies principally in the domestic (and later military) use of alternative energy sources.

Iraq: Withdrawal within 2 years, with many of these troops shifting to Afghanistan. We declare complete and total victory and move on.

Defense: One long-term new weapons program gets scuttled along with Star Wars as the Administration is forced to reallocate resources towards more basic procurement and readiness issues. Otherwise we'll just have some neat gizmos in the pipeline with no actual capacity to fight a war. Anyone who thinks we will be cutting defense spending in the near future after a withdrawal from Iraq is letting Rush do their thinking for them.

Health Care: Within the first 100 days, Congress passes an expansion of SCHIP that will cover just about every child. Next year, Congress tries to fix the outstanding problems left with the half-assed prescription drug benefits the GOP approved a few years back. They declare complete and total victory and leave the rest of the health care problem until the second term, when they hope to have more money to effect greater change.

Education: Modest revision of No Child Left Behind Act takes 2 more years, but leaves the testing regime fundamentally intact with more carrots and less stick. They declare complete and total victory and move on.

Energy: In addition to what has already been done, next year additional tax breaks and other federal incentives will be passed to encourage the development of alternative energy sources. Contrary to popular belief, the ban on offshore drilling in extremely sensitve areas will not be restored because they do not have the votes in Congress to sustain an effort by the President to renew it.

Foreign Policy: Our relationship with Russia worsens, more their fault than ours. We continue to favor the Israelis in pretty much everything, but gain enough credibility with the Palestinians and other actors in the region that we can attempt to broker negotiations, but success is very unpredictable. Talks with Iran are sluggish and ultimately produce little because the Russians and the Chinese screw us, just like they have been for years. Chavez loses some regional traction, discovering that Obama doesn't generate the same bad feelings that Bush did.

If you could wave a magic wand and put an active platform over every spot where we believe there to be oil AND oil was actually in that spot, we would improve domestic supply from approximately 33% of our consumption to, optimistically, 36%.

If you wave your magic wand and put up working platforms on the spots where we believe to oil exists and oil companies already hold leases but haven't troubled themselves to start working on, you might reach 45%. Meaning that they have a lot more oil in hand already than they would get by digging up ANWR.

thank you sir. I do appreciate your insight. Do you have a source for this, because I am constantly having to have this conversation with people IRL as well as online and would love to have a source.

didn't i see some bumper-sticker that was like "drill baby drill - start in mccain's 7 backyards" ?

Online, no. I sat in on a briefing by the Minerals Management Service, the federal agency that the government and the oil companies use to figure out what resources we have where. You might be able to find the briefing materials or some such on their website at mms.gov.

that's hot. i'm just going to quote "a friend who sat in on a briefing by the minerals management service" then.

I lost two IQ points just reading this.

But this sounds more likely.

Oh, and I love the people slaming Obama for Clinton appointees. Who was going to get, Bush's people? Clinton was slammed (and rightly so after the first two years) for hiring people with no experience. It caused a good many problems early on. So Obama is picking some people who know the White House and what is needed (and had worked for a very successfull President). Of course this is politics. If he makes a dumb move, slam him. If he makes a smart move, slam him by making it look dumb.

I just read SFLCat's posts in order to find out what Rush and his ilk are spouting.

Well, I expect a good portion of Oprah's money to be given to me.

I want my President check.

Pay my mortgage and put gas in my tank.

Unclusterfuck. Please.

Oh uh. Going downhill fast.

*Stem cell research executive order reversed. I hope this is the first thing he does.

*Gitmo closed. End of human rights abuses.

*Lots of liberal justices on the federal courts.

*A more thoughtful foreign policy. Listening to a wide variety of opinions instead of just a select few.

*Strengthened middle class that powers us out of the recession.

*More qualified people in important posts like FEMA director.

I agree with both these.

Also, Wisconsin plays in a Rose Bowl or two.

On the serious note, I hope he'll be much more proactive than the Bush administration was on a lot of common sense issues. The Bush administration bungled way too much shit.

Destroy the Patriot Act and No Child Left Behind.

I'd love to see affirmative action die off too, but I know that won't happen.

Make some inroads to lowering the high costs of health care and higher education.

Edit: National decriminalization of marijuana. Pipe dream, I know.

1. Probably not. Scaling back the Patriot Act and increasing funding of NCLB is much more likely.

2. Not gonna happen.

3. My guess they will take a swing at both of those. I don't know if they'll be successfull.

4. Definite pipe dream. Re-thinking the whole "War on drugs" would be a good thing, but it isn't likely to ever happen.

So just because its a dissenting opinion, it makes your intelligence drop? I'm thinking maybe those two points had already gone away when you decided not to even consider opposing viewpoints. This is why I hate even wading into these threads. Nobody on either side has respect for the others point of view, it just has to be stupid.

A pipedream for now as in being able to go to the local convenience store and buying a pack of Marlboro Joints, but decriminalization is occurring in plenty of places in America. As in, possessing small amounts of marijuana is not a criminal offense.

The District Attorney in Dane County, Wisconsin (which contains Madison, of course) decided last year that he will no longer actively prosecute possession of less than 25 grams. Municipalities inside of Dane County can and do implement their own ordinances against possession but these usually amount to petty fines.

I live in a neighboring county to Dane, and possession inside of my county is classified as a misdemeanor. But municipalities have their own ordinances which are the same small fines. So in essence, if you're going to get caught, it's better to get caught in a municipality with their own ordinance because they you don't have to go through the misdemeanor charges which you'll likely need to go through probation to get it expunged (ie: piss tests!).

Paying a small fine is no big deal if you ask me. If you happen to get caught I guess it's pretty much like paying a tax. But the government would do better in collecting that tax by legalizing, regulating, and taxing it. Right now the government is losing money (through imprisonment and enforcement) on something they could be making money on.

Use the tax revenue to stop the real problems out there like meth.

Ummm...no? Because the comments have no bearing realism and facts. I have a feeling if Arles or some other person with an opposing view point posted, I wouldn't have made that comment. I respect most people that have an opposing view point. It doesn't mean I can't call an idiot post an idiot post.

There are plenty of good posters on all sides of the issues. And then there are idiot Kool-aid drinkers on all sides as well.

Interesting news on one of my top issues - healthcare reform (hopefully 'real' and comprehensive as opposed to the $5K tax credit). Looks like Daschle is going to be the person driving it.

Obama aides say Clinton 'on track' for secretary of state job - CNN.com

Daschle as HHS secretary demonstrates that Obama is serious about the health care issue. Not because Daschle has any particular knowledge in the area. But because he can actually get things through Congress.

I imagine that Obama and a bunch of guys in green eyeshades will actually write the plan, and Daschle's one and only job will be to get the votes on the hill for it.

Oh, and as for hopes, I'll be happy with lots of non-neocon judicial appointments and a restoration of the Executive Branch as a co-equal branch of government subject to (and not above) Constitutional restrictions.

I predict many more opportunities for the people who enjoy the intensely political threads at FOFC to continue getting off.

I hope to personally be strong enough to steer clear of them, as my own involvement has rarely contributed anything positive for me, and likely for the "discussion," either.

Not true at all on at least the part you contribute role. You are always one of the better posters to read.

It appears Hillary has accepted Obama's (informal, right now) offer to be SecState:

Clinton to Accept Secretary of State Job - The Caucus Blog - NYTimes.com

If Obama makes the executive less powerful, I will be the first to stand up and applaud. I don't have high hopes on that... not many men refuse the power available to them.

I'd like to see you substantiate this claim.


Just out of curiosity, what kind of figure do you think OBL is now to muslim radicals?

John Podesta, who is overseeing the Obama transition team, is a former Clinton White House Chief of Staff.

Rahm Emmanuel, who will serve as Obama’s Chief of Staff, is a former Clinton aide.

The president-elect’s choice for Attorney General, Eric Holder, served in the Clinton administration as deputy attorney general under Janet Reno.

Peter Orszag, who has been picked to head Obama’s Office of Management and Budget, worked at the Clinton White House as a special assistant to the president at the National Economic Council.

Robert Reich, Former Secretary, U.S. Dept of Labor under Clinton, is a high-level economic advisor to Obama

Bill Richardson, a former Clinton Secretary of Energy was considered for Secretary of State and seems to now be a leading candidate for Secretary of Labor

And then, of course, there’s Hillary. The former first lady and current junior senator from New York has been asked about the Secretary of State position. And if she gets the job, I guess we get Bill back by association.


Oh, he's something of a messianic figure now, no doubt. But imagine how much more he would be if he could claim, "Not only did I kick the a$$ of the Godless communists in Russia, I've also whupped the great Satan of the West, the USA, and driven them from Allah's land."

Heh. Bob Woodward doesn't like Hill as SoS

Woodward Knocks Clinton SoS Choice

Rahm Emanuel new Chief of Staff - Former Clinton Advisor

Eric Holder new Attorney General - Former Clinton Deputy Attorney General

Janet Napolitano top choice for Homeland Security Director - Former Arizona Attorney General appointed by Clinton

Tom Daschle tapped as Secretary of Health and Human Services - Former Senate Minority Leader and Clinton sock puppet.

Bill Richardson is top choice to be Secretary of Commerce - Former Clinton Ambassador to the United Nations and later Secretary of Energy as well.

Hillary Clinton new Secretary of State - Well

Again, you'd be hard pressed to find a qualified Democrat over the age of 35 that hadn't been appointed by Clinton to some position while he was president. Again, if he appointed people with no experienced, he would be killed (like Clinton was), but if he appoints people with experience, then he's just bringing in "Clinton people." Who'd you think he'd tap, Bush's people?

I'm not sure why this is a problem. It seems reasonable that a CoS from the most recent Democratic administration would have a big advisory role in this transition. There's a ton of nuts-and-bolts stuff to sort out.


Emmanuel is the pick because of his tactical legislative record in the House, not because of his ties to Clinton. You're seeing what you want to see here.


Heaven forbid we pick someone who is qualified for the job.


Again, a nuts-and-bolts job - it's a good idea to give it to someone who can hit the ground running and obviously you're not going to give it to someone from the Bush Administration. Plus, this is the guy who's run the CBO since 2007. Sounds like an ideal choice.


Virtually every high-level advisor to Obama on important issues has been in the Democratic forefront for some time, so it's ridiculous to expect they wouldn't have some ties to Clinton. Besides, Reich in particular is defined as considerably more than just Clinton's former Secretary of Labor.


The guy who stabbed Hillary in the back to endorse Obama? This is your example?


If you're going to disqualify every attorney general appointed by Clinton, you're going to disqualify a lot of really good candidates.


Now you're just making shit up.

Face it, you guys are seeing what you want to see.


Besides, the fact of the matter with most of these appointments is that for these, at the highest organizational level, you want people with name recognition and connections, so they can get to work in Washington (or wherever their remit is) as soon as possible.

If you really want to see change, look at the lower level, the people who are going to do the work behind the scenes and the meritocrats who are actually going to run these organizations. Austan Goolsbee, Arne Duncan, Joel Klein, Valerie Jarrett, Robert Gibbs, etc....

I notice you both fail to mention Tim Geithner. Is the president of the New York Fed unqualified because he worked as an aide to both Robert Rubin & Larry Summers?

Or is he perhaps missing from your lists because you've copied those lists from right-wing blogs in the hours before Geithner was announced as the new Treasury Secretary? ;)



Afghanistan is "Allah's land"?

Go team go!!!!

Well, if you want to get technical about things, the whole world belongs to Allah. It's just so happens most of it is currently in the hands of us infidels.

Naw...I see a lot of Democrat insiders who were there during the Clinton administration. So, instead of change you can believe in, the campaign slogan should have been -- more of the same...only with OUR guys.

I'm just hoping that Bill is appointed to, say, ambassador to the U.N.

The apoplexy would be fun to watch.

You asked him to substantiate his claim that the people Obama are putting in are Clinton people and he did so. No need to go moving goalposts just because you got shown up.

Now if you said it didn't care, that's one thing... but you told him "prove it" and he did.

It will never happen, but... white house press secretary would be most amusing.