Dear Mr. Obama,
I am seriously interested in working in your administration. The lack of blue-collar workers on your staff shows me that someone like me is definitely needed. The white-collar government has lost touch with the blue collar America that financially supports it. The loss of so many blue-collar jobs brings to point that you need the opinions of your average blue-collar family supporter. Who, by the way, still doesn't feel like they are being heard. Your average blue-collar worker works and earns barely enough to keep home and food for their families. Mean while you have corporate officials making enough to run a small country.
Who better would know the questions that need to be asked than a blue-collar worker would? What do you think would be the reaction of these CEO’s?
I grew up to a family on the welfare of the sixties. At the age of 12 I struck out on my own and lived on the streets of Pueblo until I was 17 when I started a family with a abusive husband. My husband, having come from more than modest means, farmed my cleaning services out for years until I finally broke free from him in 95. I professionally worked my business and got some good breaks in 2000 when I picked up some larger contracts. My new husband and I work together and have managed and even expanded during the Bush years. We even expanded enough to have employees for a short time until the NAFTA and The FTA of 2002 caught up with us. Then the rubberstamped visa’s started taking away our work.
Seeing that I have started (literally) at the bottom of the food chain, I have clawed and chewed my way up to a position where I might feel comfort and security. This puts me with a unique perspective and a lot of questions that are on every working class family’s mind.
Do these CEO’s or even people in your administration worry about there own health care? NO!
Do the same people worry about putting their children through college? NO!
How many cleaners have these people asked their opinions? Most don’t even speak to their maids much less a lowly cleaner. We are the last to get paid and the first expense to get cut.
This makes me believe that I am qualified because you need someone from the bottom of the food chain, in you pursuit on changing America back into a Country " For the people, By the people".
This is not a joke! This is a very serious request to be a member of your administration.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Rebecca A. DeRosia
The news pundits and blogs are full of suggestions and criticisms of Obama's picks for his cabinet. From the cacaphony of ranting about his "enemy" Hillary to the murmurs that the cabinet is not the left-wing cabal that was promised. Missing in all these notions is the reality that Obama was elected to LEAD. His victory was as much his ability to bring together a coalition of disinfranchised nonpolitical citizens as about his stellar rhetorical skills. Now that he is the president-elect can't we expect that the same abilities will come to the fore? Can't the country stop for a moment from the addiction to the drama of negativity to look at his building of an extraordinary cabinet and see that he is again bringing together a coalition to do something else extraordinary?
Is this same group of people complaining about his appointments of people with experience those who complained that he would bring in a bunch of radicals and turn the country into a socialist mecca? Are the radical left really worried that Obama is bringing in centrists and abandoning his principles?
I count myself as a pretty liberal person (one online test said I was a socialist) and while I am not sure that some of the appointments are on the face of it as liberal as I would have liked, the reality is that these people are charged with carrying out the policies of the President, not their own agendas. That they are not in lock step with Obama in my mind is a good thing. Just as long as they, too, are open to new ideas and real discussions of alternatives. I voted for Obama not for his political experience, but for his intellectually curious mind and his way of looking at problems without ideology. I think his cabinet picks so far have shown that he is willing and able to surround himself with people who know more than he about complex issues, but he's not afraid of being overshadowed. I am pretty sure he won't be another Bush letting Libby, Cheney, Rove et al run things.
I am waiting until they are in office and begin their work together to give my opinions on the choices. I wish them all well.
Leading up to the election, foreign newspapers were filled with expressions of hope that Obama would be elected as President of the United States and put forth a "New Face for America".
There are several reasons Clinton would be a disasterous selection Secretary of State: 1. Clinton represents the same old face of America, albeit not as much as Bush the Lesser does.
2. During the primaries, Clinton expressed herself time and time again as antipodal to Obama's foreign policy positions.
3. Clinton is a limelight seeker and would detract from the importance of both Obama and Biden on foreign affairs issues.
4. Over half the Democrats and all of the Republicans have expressed that they don't trust her judgment on foreign affairs issues.
5. Clinton can do more in the Senate working for Universal Heath Care.
6. Clinton has a history of mistaking little girls with gifts of flowers as machine gun fire and the need to duck into airplane hangers. (If she lied about that, ...)
Give us a list of people to vote for to fill yor cabinet. Look at the votes then decied.
Ms. Rice
Mr.Powel
Mr. Buffett
Mrs. Clinton
I would like to work with you doing something.
Just to name a few.
Secretary of State Bill Richardson
Secretary of the Treasury Jim Webb
Secretary of Defense Gen. Wesley Clark
Attorney General Kenneth Lee Salazar
Secretary of the Interior Colin Powell
Secretary of Agriculture Stephanie Herseth Sandlin
Secretary of Commerce John Kerry
Secretary of Labor Rep. John Conyers
Secretary of Health and Human Services Hillary Clinton
Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Sanford Bishop Jr.
Secretary of Transportation Chaka Fattah
Secretary of Energy Al Gore
Secretary of Education Caroline Kennedy
Secretary of Veterans Affairs Admiral Robert Williamson
Secretary of Homeland Security Brig. Gen. Larry Gillespie
We're only a few weeks away from the election. And it's becoming more and more apparent that Barack Obama will likely be the next President of the United States.
I find myself wondering, what about McCain? Does he just return to the Senate and keep right on doing what he's been doing? Which admittedly is very good work, but the way he's flipflopped on some things just to try to bring in the Republican base, makes me wonder what he'd do in the White House.
My wife and I were talking about the campaign on our way to work the other morning, as we often do. And it occured to us, that given Barack Obama's statements that he will build a bipartisan cabinet, that John McCain would make a fine addition to that cabinet. Particularly, I think he would make a top notch Secretary of Defense. Then he could make sure that this country was properly defended, and would see to it that our veterans were properly cared for. McCain is a man of honor and a true American Hero. Nobody disputes that, least of all Barack Obama. I think he would do an excellent job as President Obama's Secretary of Defense.
PLUS we would have the added benefit of having Barack Obama in a position of authority over him to keep the "maverick" in check.
I welcome your comments on this idea.
Jeff
As long as the subject of Obama cabinet appointees has come up (Jamie Dimon, JP Morgan Chase for Treasury), may I suggest one existing Bush cabinet member should, emphatically, be asked to remain at his post:
Defense Secretary, Robert Gates
Although I am no expert, as a citizen, and based on my limited visibility of specific actions he has taken in the job since Rumsfeld left, he's the best Secretary of Defense I've seen in my 50+ years. He's serious, he's honest, and he's devoid of the arrogance that has been the signature of the Bush administration. Another thing I like: he's not afraid to fire high-level subordinates if they don't perform. Strong executives tend to do that. The weaker they are, the less likely they are to risk firing a subordinate.
President Bush has promulgated the idea that he is "fiercely loyal to those who work for him...", which is one of the reasons given as to why Donald Rumsfeld was allowed to stay on as Defense Secretary, long after it was clear his vision of the Iraq initiative had been a disaster. Unfortunately, the "loyalty" label is often used as a cover story for the real reason: the incompetence of the guy at the top. Given the number of ex-Bush administration officials who have gone on to write tell-all books which have an incompetent President as their common thread, it's pretty easy to see why Bush would be reluctant to fire anyone.
Given the results of his tenure so far, I would say a President Obama could save himself a ton of time trying to find someone better able to deliver on this difficult job. Between Gates and General Petraeus, I'd say it's a toss-up which of the two have been the most instrumental in turning things around in Iraq.
By Dan Balz The next president will take the oath of office on Jan. 20, 2009, with hands tied. Abroad and at home, the agenda for John McCain and Barack Obama has now been defined and it is far more daunting than either imagined when the campaign began.
Abroad are two wars of uncertain future, conflicts to be won or wound down in a way that brings stability to those regions while retaining public confidence in the next commander in chief. At home, the cost and complexities of resolving the economic crisis have put the government on a new footing and are likely to sharply limit the next president's domestic maneuvering room.
Presidential campaigns are exercises in big dreams and grand ambitions. This campaign has turned into a case of watching those ambitions chipped away by events. McCain or Obama will inherit a mess by any definition and will have to spend the first year of his presidency, at least, consumed with these problems.
There are now questions that both candidates should be asked in the upcoming debates about how their thinking and agendas have been affected by these events, how this may shape or reshape the way they put a government together, how it may change their priorities and how they might use the situation to enhance prospects for bipartisan governance.
McCain and Obama are more than bystanders as Congress and the Bush administration move this week toward enacting some version of the proposed $700 billion plan to rescue the nation's -- actually the world's -- financial system. But they don't quite have a seat at the table for decisions that will affect them far more than they will President Bush.
What has played out on the campaign trail over the past week is a kind of kabuki dance by the candidates. They have tried to stay abreast of events and offer public demonstrations of how they might deal with such a crisis if they were actually president, all in an effort to show they have stuff that the public is looking for in a new leader.
They have had few good options politically. McCain zigged and zagged last week, on the state of the economy, on the AIG bailout, on more regulation versus a history of less regulation. He issued a rescue blueprint of his own as Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson was forging ahead with something more audacious.
McCain became the angry populist, railing against greed on Wall Street and calling for heads to roll in Washington -- or at least one head, that of SEC Chairman Chris Cox. McCain's critics pounced on him for rash behavior while supporters described him as strong and decisive.
Obama adopted a different approach. According to one of his economic advisers, Obama delayed issuing a rescue plan of his own at the request of Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson. He held a highly visible meeting with a battery of economic advisers but over the weekend he was restrained in either fully endorsing or criticizing what the administration was doing. His critics called him tentative, indecisive and political. His supporters said he showed calm and good judgment.
The crisis has played to the Democrats' natural advantages, but how voters are marking their scorecards on the leadership of the two candidates is anybody's guess in such an environment. The upcoming debates should provide more clarity on that question.
There are plenty of questions for the candidates now that go beyond whether they support or oppose the administration's rescue plan. After all, in just 43 days, one of them will be starting to put together a new administration. This is not idle campaign rhetoric any more. Assertions by either that they know how to do this are not enough.
In coming days, both are likely to provide more details about dealing with the financial mess, and in particular the kind of oversight and regulation each envisions in a new system. But much more remains for inquiry.
Obama has argued that what ails the economy needs far more a financial system rescue plan, that ordinary Americans need help from the strain of job losses, threats of foreclosures and the increased costs of gasoline, home heating oil, medical care and college tuition.
He wants to cut taxes on the middle class and raise them on the wealthy. He wants to spend around $100 billion a year on a health care plan. He has penciled in $15 billion a year for investment in alternative energy. He says he has a fiscally responsible way to do this, but in light of what's happened recently, he needs to be pushed harder to prove it.
McCain's domestic agenda includes tax cuts, tax and market incentives for expanding health care coverage, an all-of-the-above approach to energy independence. He too must be pressed to explain how he can pay for this, whether he can accomplish what he claims.
McCain, too, should be asked to explain how his proposal to move the political affairs office out of the White House into the Republican National Committee represents anything other than a symbolic act. Does he mean there will be no one in the White House who has any contact with party officials at the RNC?
Bigger questions include staffing the next administration. The choice of a Treasury secretary has now become far more significant than ever, given the likely powers that will be invested in that person under the bailout plan. What checks might McCain or Obama put on that person through the creation of an overall economic team? What qualities are now needed in a Treasury secretary?
The same goes for the departments of Defense and State. Who are the models for Obama and McCain as they weigh these choices? What kind of experience, history, ideology and vision are they seeking to implement their stated policies in Iraq, to deal with the changing and increasingly dangerous situation in Afghanistan and Pakistan and to repair relations elsewhere?
The default position of the tone of the campaign has been pettiness and small-mindedness, lipstick and Britney. Events, however, keep reminding voters that these are extraordinary times. Will the candidates rise to meet those challenges, not just when one of them takes the oath next January, but in the final weeks of this incredible campaign?
Today, one Blue Dog Democrat, from the Yahoo! group by that name, which is not connected to mybarackobama.com pointed out that Dewey might have lost in 1948 because he named a Cabinet, but Dewey didn't lose that election solely because he named a Cabinet. That was 60 years ago. Times have changed. Many other factors beat Dewey...
Things are more urgent in 2008; the need for Cabinet level perspectives is paramount, and would precipitate a lot of voters to Obama's side, if he did it in a non presumptuous way, and made it clear that he was opening up the discussion in a fair and egalitarian way.
Personally, I believe we are in such an infernal mess internationally that the Secretary of State job has taken on more importance than the Vice President, and that we need a diplomat with a lot of international exposure, experience and track record. That would be New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson, by a long shot....
Attorney General is another vital one: California Attorney General Jerry Brown, by a long shot, in my opinion. His record vis a vis Consumer Protection is stunning and is also sterling. Edwards is out of the picture (maybe like Eliot Spitzer is out of the picture, because of that Southern Male Brain?)
Health Secretary or FDA Commissioner? Very vital. FDA reports to Secretary of Health, and I believe strongly, if he would take the job and wouldn't see it as a step down, DR. Howard Dean III, M.D. would be the best; this is someone I trust a lot, especially at FDA to oversee fully 25% of the US Economy, which is either food or drugs. The corporate manipulation of FDA is killing America and big chunk of the rest of the world.
Even if Obama's top advisors are too scared of announcing Cabinet choices or a range of Cabinet choices, which they should not be at all, we can still talk about them, while we are not convincing fence sitters to vote for Obama.
The best tool I know of are his speeches, like the Berlin Speech, which has convinced many of my fence sitter friends, and for the devotees in Santa Fe, they in turn have printed it out and used it to convince other fence sitters. I managed over great difficulties to publish the entire Berlin Speech in the Santa Fe Sun News, of which I am the Managing Editor. When I was hunting down the precise complete text thereof, I couldn't even find it at mybarackobama.com, so I published it here a few blogs ago....
I am a member of about 70 different Obama groups, and I have noticed a tendency for the most active members to wallow in self congratulatory B.S., nitpick over what should be psychoanalytic conjecture, hairsplitting, noshing, chatting, and mere linguistic controversy, means that all doing this are entirely missing the point that we have an election to win.
All of the yukking-it-up in the world is not going to win it. It means take the time to pound the pavement, take literature that you yourself print out from various sites, and take it door-to-door in your neighborhood.
If we don't do this, we can still easily lose this election in November. Make no mistake. It is only about 90 days away, our supreme test!
Stephen Fox, Managing Editor Santa Fe Sun News
PS: There is much more meaningful dialogue about Campaing Strategies and Tactics going on in some of the groups not connected with barackobama.com, like ObamaBrigade, a Yahoo! group and SecularHumanist, another Yahoo! group. I recommend you join them to be closer to the cutting edge of the Obama Campaign.
