Obama's National Security Team
 

In his pre-Election campaign, Obama said he'd be seeking advice from all spectrums of the political establishment. And while 130 members of the House and 23 members of the senate voted against the war in Iraq, Obama hasn't chosen one of them for his National Security cabinet. So is packing his cabinet solely with advisors that voted in favour of the war really an example of the 'change' he was touting?

he's getting people who can get his shit done., e.g. pull of of iraq. kucinich sure is a sweet guy, but could he get the pentagon off his ass & moving? hm.... i doubt that. obama is to set the mission and his cabinet is to execute it. so you want good performers here, not ideologues.

his national security advisor is a tough ass marine who's against the iraq war. hillary, i am not a fan, but she's got the international prestige. janet napolitano has experience with immigration issues. gates is respected by the military, he just needs a new mission to execute.

best of all, obama's brought the awesome samantha power back on board at state (ok, i confess a crush on the woman) even though she called hillary "a monster". ha ha haha.

He's put together quite a disappointing foreign policy team. They're a bunch of globalists and oil men.

hmmm we'll see. jones was actually a lobbyist for the u.s. chamber of commerce in one of these fake grassroots organizations for "21st century energy" which seeks development of alternative energies (as well as increase in domestic exploitation of oils). on the other hand he was an early critic of the iraq war. but again, we'll see what they do when they do...

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php...James_L._Jones

How does voting for the Iraq war resolution in 2002 guarantee that these people are still in favor of continuing the war? In 2003, after President Bush's State of the Union, only 27% of the American public opposed military action in Iraq. In all likely hood, you or at least the majority of the left who voted for Obama supported the war under false pretenses five years ago. American politics are far more intricate than a vote for or against the resolution. All spectrums of the political establishment are not represented on the yay or nay of the 2002 resolution and assuming that each side voted so for the same ideological reasons is preposterous.

http://i3.democracynow.org/2008/12/2...re_of_the_same


On the board of Chevron - yeah - he's going to do things in our best interests.

it's some unique and overall good choices, the last thing you want are yes men and strong differing personalities should really be the best way to get as many options as can be put on the table

and besides, this isn't Bush, Obama is a much strong willed person, and he will be making the final call, and to have him at the left of his advisers is a good thing

Napolitano is a very wise choice, the immigration issue will very soon become a big deal, what has been happening in Tijuana and the murders in the drug trade (which have already crossed over into parts of the southwest) will start to seep into an issue of national security, which is why i think she was picked

Clinton was a bold move, but certainly better then Bill Richardson (i know you disagree !@#$%!) and certainly better the John Kerry, her international reputation can certainly help, although i will be curious to see where Biden shall be in the scheme of things

"Zbig said in endorsing Obama: “What makes Obama attractive to me is that he understands that we live in a very different world where we have to relate to a variety of cultures and peoples.” Obama’s alleged global approach and trans-ethnic, trans-racial allure are right out of Zbig’s university textbook."

Laughable. Should Obama be be ignorant of different cultures and people?

if i read or hear mentioned american politics once more i think i might die of vomit suicide.

can you do it on a webcam?

i think you should know that marleypumpkin is a follower of american isolationist ru paul, i mean ron paul! ru paul knows about trans-everything; ron paul is afeared of non-whites.

yours

you'd have to get a ticket to america in order to do that, and you body might catch fire upon entering american airspace.

do it in yours, we'll watch.

like this

I don't have reply for something so boring.

you want quality answers for your suicide offers?

garbage in, garbage out

 

Well aware. I just find it bizarre that all these resentful Republicans and tinfoil hat Libertarians aren't really arguing against policy but instead are trying to undermine the Obama's platform of change by calling the change into doubt. Has Rovian politics really become so natural to political discourse?

I'm not an isolationist, I believe a citizen of any country, can do what ever they feel is right for the world, but don't force foreign policies & beliefs on others.

& in case you don't know Zbigniew has done more to create the crisis over seas than Bush.

pbradley:

I believe he's the President of the United States, not the world. He will be sworn to uphold the Constitution, which he never talks about doing.

I heard Canadian politics have gotten pretty interesting.

i dont know, i was looking forward to see richardson at this job, he's an effective diplomat who's negotiated cease fires and hostage releases and nuclear talks, while hillary only ducked under sniper fire in bosnia (chuckles), but let's see what happens. obama needed to do something with hillary-- i'm still not a big fan of her.