The Obama Administration / State of the Union Address

I am not casting any aspersions just an observation. I hope they are effective and wish them well, but have doubts.

By the same token I really would like to see Bush and Co end their days behind bars.

Obama picks his Treasury Secretary - Timothy Geithner, head of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.

Quote :

Nov. 21 (Bloomberg) -- President-elect Barack Obama picked Timothy Geithner, head of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, to be his Treasury secretary, with Lawrence Summers getting a senior White House role, a Democratic aide said.

Obama is also likely to nominate New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson as Commerce Secretary, and to announce his picks on Nov. 24, the person said on condition of anonymity.

Geithner has helped lead U.S. efforts to combat the deepest financial crisis in seven decades, helping oversee the decisions this year to intervene in American International Group Inc., rescue Bear Stearns Cos. and leave Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. to fail. Summers was Bill Clinton’s last Treasury secretary, and is now a professor at Harvard University.

Bloomberg

This is a Democratic Dream Team and it's brilliant! It's like 1998 all over again. The Clintons had a great government and this one is already shaping up to be a stunner. Farewell Bushies and thanks for nothing!

Should have just voted for Hillary.

Ard-Taoiseach wrote:

This is a Democratic Dream Team and it's brilliant! It's like 1998 all over again. The Clintons had a great government and this one is already shaping up to be a stunner. Farewell Bushies and thanks for nothing!

I would have thought, Ard, that you would have leaned slightly more towards the Republicans than to the Democrats. I am not as taken with the Clintons as you seem to be but I am glad to see you can speak so enthusiastically about the "Democratic Dream Team". After 8 years of President Bush-Cheney, any Democratic administration is a dream team.

Slim Buddha wrote:

Ard-Taoiseach wrote:

This is a Democratic Dream Team and it's brilliant! It's like 1998 all over again. The Clintons had a great government and this one is already shaping up to be a stunner. Farewell Bushies and thanks for nothing!

I would have thought, Ard, that you would have leaned slightly more towards the Republicans than to the Democrats. I am not as taken with the Clintons as you seem to be but I am glad to see you can speak so enthusiastically about the "Democratic Dream Team". After 8 years of President Bush-Cheney, any Democratic administration is a dream team.

After Bush a slightly animated tub of cream cheese would be better.

Anything from philadelphia is always lovely...

Slim Buddha wrote:

Ard-Taoiseach wrote:

This is a Democratic Dream Team and it's brilliant! It's like 1998 all over again. The Clintons had a great government and this one is already shaping up to be a stunner. Farewell Bushies and thanks for nothing!

I would have thought, Ard, that you would have leaned slightly more towards the Republicans than to the Democrats. I am not as taken with the Clintons as you seem to be but I am glad to see you can speak so enthusiastically about the "Democratic Dream Team". After 8 years of President Bush-Cheney, any Democratic administration is a dream team.

I dislike the fact that they took a highly successful economy with high growth rates, budget surpluses, controlled inflation, rising real incomes, reasonable debt levels, manageable current account deficit and a strong currency and utterly wrecked it. The Republicans under the Bushes and Reagan do not hold a candle to Clinton in terms of social and economic advancement. I would've considered John McCain to be a reasonable choice on the Republican side had he picked someone like Charlie Crist or Colin Powell to be his running mate and actually stood by the record he had built up as a Senator. Unfortunately he picked Sarah Palin who, although attractive, was not the ideal and said to me that he would perpetuate the failures which were replete during the Bush years. If we lived in an ideal world, Hillary would be president-elect now, but, unfortunately, that is not the case. Barack Obama is the pragmatic choice in these circumstances and there is still every possibility for Hillary Clinton to run in either 2012 or 2016 and carry on the great work started in 1992.

johnfás wrote:

Anything from philadelphia is always lovely...

Especially the sound of Gamble-Huff. A match for HDH any day.

Regarding the Obama administration, I am prepared to wait 6 months to see how it shapes up. While I am delighted that the Democrats control Congress and the White House, I am of the belief that the problems are so enormous that there is only about a one-minute honeymoon period after the Inauguration Ceremony available to the President-Elect before he starts the job in earnest. Within 6 months we will know the extent to which he will remove some of the more regressive legislation wirtten by David Addington and implemented by the Bush-Cheney Presidency. Maybe youngdan is right, maybe Obama will keep all this stuff in place. We shall see.

http://www.breakingnews.ie/World/mhidqlqlmhmh/

There is some sharp criticism coming from the US that Obama has appointed an economics/finance team who are deeply implicated in the present crisis. There is perhaps a dilemma, in that everyone with any high level experience is probably equally implicated. Did he have any better options?

I would imagine that is pretty much the case cactus. That or you bring in someone from the 1970s who is now about 80. The Americans have a great way of putting people who are well past retirement age into key positions. I am not agist or anything but there must come a stage where it is better to have people a little younger in positions.

johnfás wrote:

I would imagine that is pretty much the case cactus. That or you bring in someone from the 1970s who is now about 80. The Americans have a great way of putting people who are well past retirement age into key positions. I am not agist or anything but there must come a stage where it is better to have people a little younger in positions.

Well, Obama himself adds balance, I suppose.

It should be obvious to all that Obama is doing what he is told by now.

Slim, you can bet your bottom dollar that things will be the same as with Bush but worse.

youngdan wrote:

It should be obvious to all that Obama is doing what he is told by now.

Slim, you can bet your bottom dollar that things will be the same as with Bush but worse.

I would prefer to think otherwise, youngdan, but the pragmatist in me leans very much to your assessment of things.

Schiff thinks Geithner will be irrelevant to the plummet of the dollar. Our beardy friend themodernmystic also feels it will explode with banking and other bailouts totalling an equivalent of the U.S. annual GDP or at least a huge fraction of it - around 7 trillion in bailouts in the pipeline when the U.S. GDP is about 14 trillion.

Part 1 of 3