View Full Version : So who makes up the Obama cabinet?
TexasJack
5th November 2008, 08:09 AM
Any predictions?
Sword_Of_Truth
5th November 2008, 08:22 AM
Not a single republican (not that McCain would have nominated any democrats, of course).
Obama has precisely zero record of any true bipartisanship, he's not likely to change when he doesn't have to.
Sword_Of_Truth
5th November 2008, 08:25 AM
EDIT: Double post.
ImaginalDisc
5th November 2008, 08:34 AM
I'm betting there will be some Republicans in his cambinet, and he'll appoint some Republican judges, and he'll include Republican law makers in dsicussions about policy.
Maybe the Republicans can learn from his example how to behave when they win.
Vorticity
5th November 2008, 08:39 AM
Sec of State: Bill Richardson
Darat
5th November 2008, 08:39 AM
Sarah Palin as Secretary of State, with her experience it's a cert.
ZirconBlue
5th November 2008, 08:55 AM
Sarah Palin as Secretary of State, with her experience it's a cert.
I hear Sarkozy has already given her a call.
drkitten
5th November 2008, 09:04 AM
Deleted
Sword_Of_Truth
5th November 2008, 09:06 AM
I'll take that bet. $100 US, loser to publically apologize and donate the money to the JREF?
I don't gamble.
You may feel free to bump this thread and mock me mercilessly should I end up being wrong, however.
EDIT: You appear to be ill able to afford a gambling habit as I am. Given how slow you are on that delete button, I'm not suprised. ;)
drkitten
5th November 2008, 11:03 AM
EDIT: You appear to be ill able to afford a gambling habit as I am. Given how slow you are on that delete button, I'm not suprised. ;)
Oh, I can afford it, but I didn't want to force you into an embarassing admission.
Given that you decided to make that admission after all, however.....
Sword_Of_Truth
5th November 2008, 12:57 PM
I'm betting there will be some Republicans in his cambinet, and he'll appoint some Republican judges, and he'll include Republican law makers in dsicussions about policy.
Why would he want to? Here's a guy who surrounds himself with people like Ayers, Pfleger and Wright, laments the fact that the courts followed the constitution rather than Das Kapital and just fought a bitter campaign against a man with a real record of bipartisanship and we're supposed to believe this has spawned a textbook perfect centrist moderate democrat?
Why does he need to? Through Pelosi, Ried and company, he effectively owns the legislative branch. The republicans are in no position to threaten him. The party that roared back to claim the house and senate in 1994 is long gone. The current republican party is in near total disarray. Furthermore, a party which comes into power at the start of a depression historically gets alot of slack from the electorate as they percieve the crisis to not be the fault of the guy who just got started. There's nothing that the republicans will be able to make stick for quite some time.
And then there is the fairness doctrine... if that gets pushed through, it will cut off the one part of the media that isn't deliberately, viciously and blatantly hostile to republicans. If their ability to get their message out is crippled, the republican party is done for a generation, maybe more.
Obama is in a near perfect position to create a one-party state.
Maybe the Republicans can learn from his example how to behave when they win.
What example?
Sword_Of_Truth
5th November 2008, 01:39 PM
Oh, I can afford it, but I didn't want to force you into an embarassing admission.
Given that you decided to make that admission after all, however.....
What did I admit that was embarrasing?
webfusion
5th November 2008, 02:41 PM
Rahm Emanuel Chief of Staff (is that a Cabinet position?)
A Zionist. Interesting.
TexasJack
5th November 2008, 02:56 PM
Rahm Emanuel Chief of Staff (is that a Cabinet position?)
A Zionist. Interesting.
It sure is a cabinet position, and rumor has it that he has been offered and accepted the job.
dudalb
5th November 2008, 03:42 PM
It sure is a cabinet position, and rumor has it that he has been offered and accepted the job.
That will send MaGZ into a hissy fit.
I work for the Dept. of Interior, and the rumor mills for the new secratary are in full blast.most of whom I have never heard of.
Sword_Of_Truth
5th November 2008, 03:44 PM
That will send MaGZ into a hissy fit.
Because he was totally OK as long as it was just a "token black" in the White House. :p
dudalb
5th November 2008, 03:45 PM
It sure is a cabinet position, and rumor has it that he has been offered and accepted the job.
I don't think it is officially a Cabinent position, but White House COS has more power then many "Official" Cabinent positions.
fishbob
5th November 2008, 08:21 PM
Obama is in a near perfect position to create a one-party state.
Why would he want to?
The reason the Republicans were such big losers yesterday is that they have been so busy trying to consolidate power that they sort of forgot the needs of the country.
Back to the OP: Colin Powell. Let the man actually use some of his capabilities this time.
MIKILLINI
5th November 2008, 08:59 PM
Not a single republican (not that McCain would have nominated any democrats, of course).
Obama has precisely zero record of any true bipartisanship, he's not likely to change when he doesn't have to.
Not exactly true;
The Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 was introduced by Democrat Senators Obama and Tom Carper along with Republican Senators Tom Coburn and the "Maverick" John McCain on April 6, 2006.
Kthulhut Fhtagn
5th November 2008, 09:13 PM
Not a single republican (not that McCain would have nominated any democrats, of course).
Obama has precisely zero record of any true bipartisanship, he's not likely to change when he doesn't have to.
Yeah...those bills he introduced with Tom Coburn, John McCain, and Richard Luger were figments of my imagination. :rolleyes:
geni
5th November 2008, 09:44 PM
I'm betting there will be some Republicans in his cambinet, and he'll appoint some Republican judges, and he'll include Republican law makers in dsicussions about policy.
Cabinet perhaps if only to keep the ex-clintons under control. Judges less so. Policy discussions depends rather on the Republicans.
boooeee
5th November 2008, 10:14 PM
He is apparently considering Robert Kennedy Jr. to head the EPA.
Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_F._Kennedy,_Jr.)
Kennedy authored a June 2005 article in Rolling Stone alleging connections between the mercury-containing preservative thimerosal in inoculations and childhood autism.
Separate thread here (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=128178).
WildCat
5th November 2008, 10:32 PM
All I can say is his picking of Rahm Emmanuel for CoS and Bill Daley to help in the transition is making me nervous. The Federal prosecutor here, Patrick Fitzgerald, has been working his way up the corrupt ladder of Illinois politics and is very close to indicting Blagojevich and possibly top people in the Daley Admin. I hope he doesn't "promote" Fitzgerald to get him out of the way as a favor to his buddies, and appoint someone compliant and ineffective like his predecessor, a hack named Lassar who was Clinton's guy and could never seem to see any of the corruption that was right under his nose. All he managed in his entire time here was a few indictments of some lowly aldermen.
Get a new prosecutor and maybe Rezko et al won't feel the need to cooperate any more, especially if they think they can score a pardon later on.
Sword_Of_Truth
5th November 2008, 11:20 PM
Not exactly true;
The Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 was introduced by Democrat Senators Obama and Tom Carper along with Republican Senators Tom Coburn and the "Maverick" John McCain on April 6, 2006.
...along with 43 other senators from both sides of the aisle. Hardly a risk-taker when it comes to bipartisanship.
Sword_Of_Truth
6th November 2008, 03:42 AM
Why would he want to?
So he and his democrat successors could ram their agendas through without any meaningful opposition (was that a serious or rhetorical question?).
DevilsAdvocate
6th November 2008, 04:26 AM
Sec of State: Bill RichardsonI think that would be an excellent choice.
Pickens would be interesting for Secretary of Energy, but I think he has his own thing going.
Secretary of Education will be interesting. I would expect someone from Chicago. Maybe Ayers. :rolleyes:
Secretary of the Treasury is probably the big position.
ZenFountain
6th November 2008, 09:05 AM
Not a single republican (not that McCain would have nominated any democrats, of course).
Obama has precisely zero record of any true bipartisanship, he's not likely to change when he doesn't have to.
Oh really? (http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2008/08/the_obama_record_on_bipartisan.html)
Curious that Chuck Hagel and Dick Lugar's names are being kicked around for high level positions (state, defense) among other Republicans for lower positions. Also, I heard Gates and Paulson were offered transition positions so they can see through important policies they have been intimately involved with rather than kicking them out the door and getting Obama yes people in.
The final shape of Obama's administration is far more likely to frustrate liberal Democrats than moderate Republicans.
Vorticity
6th November 2008, 09:06 AM
Secretary of Energy: Jeff Bingaman (http://bingaman.senate.gov/)
TexasJack
6th November 2008, 01:59 PM
Rahm Emanuel Chief of Staff (is that a Cabinet position?)
A Zionist. Interesting.
It's official
http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/20081106/rahm-emanuel-accepts-obama-039-chief-staff-offer.htm
Hokulele
6th November 2008, 02:05 PM
I am guessing Jon Corzine for Treasury.
dudalb
6th November 2008, 05:23 PM
Richardson is being mentioned for both State and Interior.
Rahm Emmanuel is being described as "Tough Minded", which is a polite euphamism for "He can be a real Son Of A B---h".
Which is perfect, since one of the main jobs of the White House COS is to be the President's S.O.B., since kicking butt is often the only way to get things done in Government, and it is Undignified for the Pres to do so himself.
TexasJack
6th November 2008, 05:32 PM
Secretary of the Treasury is probably the big position.
I agree, and with a diminishing economy, one that he should fill quickly.
drkitten
6th November 2008, 05:40 PM
What did I admit that was embarrasing?
That you couldn't afford a $100 bet.
drkitten
6th November 2008, 05:42 PM
...along with 43 other senators from both sides of the aisle. Hardly a risk-taker when it comes to bipartisanship.
So your "zero record of bipartisanship" was either a knowing lie, or you're completely ignorant of his record and unable to have an informed opinion.
Which?
drkitten
6th November 2008, 05:46 PM
Why would he want to?
Because he wants to run the country successfully?
Here's a guy who surrounds himself with people like Ayers, Pfleger and Wright, laments the fact that the courts followed the constitution rather than Das Kapital and just fought a bitter campaign against a man with a real record of bipartisanship and we're supposed to believe this has spawned a textbook perfect centrist moderate democrat?
Well, certainly, if we believed the massive untruths in the first part of that hypothetical, we're in no position to disbelieve the second. In fact, if we were dumb enough to believe the massive untruths in the first part of the hypothetical, we'd demonstrably be dumb enough to believe anything.
Why does he need to?
Because he wants to run the country successfully?
Even if only through self-interest, one-party states have not been successful in the long-term; they tend to get trounced at the polls two years later.
aerosolben
7th November 2008, 01:00 PM
Live blog of the transition press conference #1 (http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/11/live-from-chicago-transition-press.html), on currently. May answer some questions about cabinet positions (or give more hints).
More notes:
Marc Ambinder argues Rahm is not an ideologue (http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/11/why_rahm_a_message_to_and_from.php). More pro-Rahm from The New Republic (http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_stump/archive/2008/11/06/rahm-was-the-only-choice-not-just-the-right-choice.aspx).
Thoughts on energy secretary (http://i-r-squared.blogspot.com/2008/11/highlights-of-obamas-energy-proposals.html). Possibilities:
Ed Rendell
Arnold Schwarzenegger
Bill Richardson
Drewbot
7th November 2008, 02:04 PM
Errrr. Ruh-roh. He names Jennifer Granholm Governor of Michigan, as an economic advisor? If you want someone who is good at ruining a state's economy, I guess she is the right choice.
WildCat
7th November 2008, 03:19 PM
Errrr. Ruh-roh. He names Jennifer Granholm Governor of Michigan, as an economic advisor? If you want someone who is good at ruining a state's economy, I guess she is the right choice.
Her policies have been an economic boom for Indiana! Seems taxing gross revenues tends to send businesses over the nearest border.
AWPrime
7th November 2008, 03:41 PM
Obama has precisely zero record of any true bipartisanship, he's not likely to change when he doesn't have to.And you seem to forget his time as president of the Harvard Law Review. He was very fair there and less progressive then some of the left wanted.
Why does he need to? To effectively rule. I expect him to add many smart moderate republicans. But he won't select any social conservatives, they mess everything up.
dudalb
7th November 2008, 04:30 PM
The Guvanator will not accept a cabinent position if offered. He has his eyes on the Senate in 2010.
TexasJack
8th November 2008, 11:05 AM
To be honest, the only republican I can see being in Obama's cabinet is Colin Powell
notheist
8th November 2008, 11:28 AM
Bring back Richard Clarke as anti terrorist czar
MaGZ
9th November 2008, 09:27 AM
That will send MaGZ into a hissy fit.
I work for the Dept. of Interior, and the rumor mills for the new secratary are in full blast.most of whom I have never heard of.
I’m not surprised by this. When Obama spoke at AIPAC the writing was on the wall.
MaGZ
9th November 2008, 09:30 AM
I am guessing Jon Corzine for Treasury.
Another Jew, why not?
MaGZ
9th November 2008, 09:32 AM
Live blog of the transition press conference #1 (http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/11/live-from-chicago-transition-press.html), on currently. May answer some questions about cabinet positions (or give more hints).
More notes:
Marc Ambinder argues Rahm is not an ideologue (http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/11/why_rahm_a_message_to_and_from.php). More pro-Rahm from The New Republic (http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_stump/archive/2008/11/06/rahm-was-the-only-choice-not-just-the-right-choice.aspx).
Thoughts on energy secretary (http://i-r-squared.blogspot.com/2008/11/highlights-of-obamas-energy-proposals.html). Possibilities:
Ed Rendell
Arnold Schwarzenegger
Bill Richardson
How can a Zionist not be an ideologue?
MaGZ
9th November 2008, 09:34 AM
And you seem to forget his time as president of the Harvard Law Review. He was very fair there and less progressive then some of the left wanted.
To effectively rule. I expect him to add many smart moderate republicans. But he won't select any social conservatives, they mess everything up.
I doubt Obama did a **** thing at HLR.
MaGZ
9th November 2008, 09:42 AM
The Guvanator will not accept a cabinent position if offered. He has his eyes on the Senate in 2010.
I would say the President of the United States of America. If Obama can be born in Kenya and elected President it only stands to reason Schwarzenegger can be elected even though he was born in Austria.
MaGZ
9th November 2008, 09:44 AM
Why isn’t anyone responding to my posts?
Hokulele
9th November 2008, 10:40 AM
Why isn’t anyone responding to my posts?
Because the Membership Agreement forbids the most appropriate responses.
MaGZ, who do you think should be in charge of the Treasury?
Dr Adequate
9th November 2008, 10:53 AM
Why isn’t anyone responding to my posts? Oh, come now, you don't need our help to make a fool of yourself.
AWPrime
9th November 2008, 12:26 PM
I doubt Obama did a **** thing at HLR.
What makes you say that? Does it have any concrete basis?
p.s did you forget to add *** at the end of ****?
Policenaut
9th November 2008, 01:17 PM
Why is Corzine up for anything? He's done his best to screw New Jersey.
twinstead
9th November 2008, 01:23 PM
Why isn’t anyone responding to my posts?
Oh this is priceless.
It's because nobody has the guts to stand up to your irrefutable logic, fierce intelligence, and wholesale grasp of the truth, dude. Why even ask?
Drewbot
10th November 2008, 12:44 PM
I would say the President of the United States of America. If Obama can be born in Kenya and elected President it only stands to reason Schwarzenegger can be elected even though he was born in Austria.
Obama's citizenship upon birth is not questioned, his mother was a US citizen.
The actual argument of the 'Obama is not a citizen' crowd, is:
If he was adopted by an Indonesian, he must become a citizen of Indonesia.
Indonesia did not allow dual citizenship
But wait he was a minor! he can't decide that!
Right, upon his 18th birthday he must declare an oath of allegience to the United States, then he regains full stature.
So if you are going to bring OBAMAS citizenship into it, at least use the proper argument. Now your Ahnold thing looks kind of silly doesn't it?
Just thinking
11th November 2008, 06:30 AM
Why is Corzine up for anything? He's done his best to screw New Jersey.
Exactly ... I didn't think there were any drugs out there that could get one high enough to consider this idiot for anything!
But then again, the voters of NJ just re-elected Methuselah's grandfather for senator.
drkitten
26th November 2008, 09:41 AM
I don't gamble.
You may feel free to bump this thread and mock me mercilessly should I end up being wrong, however.
May I mock you mercilessly? (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1108/15986.html)
GreyICE
26th November 2008, 11:11 AM
Haha, wow. Apparently people are actually listening to Sean Hannity and pretending what he says is truth.
I wonder how Sword will spin this one...
Gurdur
27th November 2008, 12:31 PM
I would like to see William Ayers convert to Judaism, and then be appointed to the Obama cabinet, just so I could watch the exploding heads of MaGZ, Cicero and BAC.
It's a pity I can't think out a quick practical way to make William Ayers a black lesbian as well as make him Jewish, but maybe Grace Jones could have a bat mizvah, join the Commies for a month, and be appointed to cabinet, that would be fun.
:)
© 2001-2009, James Randi Educational Foundation. All Rights Reserved.
vBulletin® v3.7.7, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.