Got A Question For John Podesta?
Got A Question For John Podesta?
During the past three months, Center for American Progress President and CEO John Podesta has taken a leave of absence from his position here to serve as co-chair of Barack Obama’s transition team.
Outside observers have described the Obama transition as “among the smoothest in history,” “mostly error-free,” and “almost seamless.” President Obama recently told the Washington Post, “He doesn’t like to get credit, but John Podesta deserves credit here in terms of having helped structure our transition in an outstanding way.”
Now that the transition is over, John is assuming his prior duties here at CAP.
Do you have questions about how the transition was run? Some of Obama’s early moves? The future direction of the administration? Ask John directly. He would like to hear from you and respond to your thoughts.
So here’s how it will work: over the next few hours, please submit your questions in the comments section below. We will take questions from there only. Even if you don’t have a question to ask, please consider voting for other submitted questions by pressing the green “recommend” button (an option available to registered commenters when logged-in).
Later this afternoon, I’ll sit down with John and pepper him with as many of your questions as we have time for (and questions from our commenters only). We’ll video-record the interview and post it on ThinkProgress tomorrow.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Am I awesome because I posted a question first, or do I just goof off at work too much?
January 28th, 2009 at 9:55 amIn regards to the stimulus package, we’re seeing stories of Obama cutting a new provision everyday. How much is Obama willing to cut to gain republican support? Is he afraid some of these cuts will weaken the overall package?
January 28th, 2009 at 9:57 amdeebaser – you goof off at work too much – just kidding!
January 28th, 2009 at 9:57 amI just couldn’t resist!
Philosophically, Obama appears to be of the opinion that, in order to move forward, we must learn from the mistakes of the past. This means scrutinizing and investigating the Bush crimes and includes war crimes, treasonous outing of a covert agent, an illegal war based on lies and fabrications, illegal wiretapping of US citizens, etc.
The reichwing extremists are using the “moving foward” talking points in an attempt to excuse these crimes.
I believe that there is NO WAY for us to move forward WITHOUT knowing how we got into the myriad of messes we’re presently in and prosecuting those responsible.
January 28th, 2009 at 9:58 amA legitimate question for Obama might be: Are we a country based on the rule of law and adherence to our Constitution or not? This should be the opening question for him.
January 28th, 2009 at 9:58 amWelcome back John! Excellent job!
I’d like to know what it was like working with the Bush Administration during your transition. How were you able to get a man who has usually been so divisive to work together in order to meet your goals?
Thanks!
January 28th, 2009 at 9:59 amWhy is President Obama giving up so much to try to appease the conservatives? They’ve already proven they’re not interested in working with Democrats. They would rather have America fail than President Obama succeed. America voted President Obama into office because we want a complete break from past policies, not a compromise.
January 28th, 2009 at 9:59 amMr. Podesta congratulations on the recent progressive sweep of leadership.
Many people feel that the Bush administration used 9/11 as a crisis to push an unrelated agenda in Iraq. And that it was in that atmosphere of crisis that we made hasty decisions, without adequate debate.
Over the past months, there has been a bipartisan rush to spend money on a stimulus package. Is there jeopardy that the economic crisis is being used by government to act without deliberation? And even if it is unintended, are we in jeopardy of acting with such haste on the matter, that we will make poor decisions? Even in the current climate, isn’t there opportunity to ensure that the people know where the money is being spent and that it is being spent wisely?
Good luck in your endeavors and, again, congratulations.
January 28th, 2009 at 10:02 amThank you for your seamless transition efforts, Mr. Podesta.
My query is how President Obama reacted to Senator McCain seemingly wandering around aimlessly in front of the cameras during their last ‘debate’.
January 28th, 2009 at 10:02 amMy question:
What’s your fave color, and what do you like in a girl?
January 28th, 2009 at 10:03 amJohn,
Firstly, congratulations on a hugely successful and smooth transition process. I know that you had already given a lot of thought to how the inherent instability of a Presidential Transition can be overcome, and that careful study really showed in the systematic approach you guys took.
My question is this: did you exclusively approach the process by looking at the list of jobs and searching for candidates, or did you also look at the structure of cabinet level positions to maximalise efficiencies? For example, I know that a decision was taken to elevate the UN Ambassador position back up to Cabinent level, but did you ever consider scrapping or massively reorganising Cabinent level positions? Specifically, did you consider eliminating the Department of Commerce and subsuming its responsibilities under other departments? What about breaking the Department of Homeland Security back into its constituent parts? What about combining the Energy and Environment portfolios?
Were you thinking along these lines at? Why or why not?
Many thanks,
Karin
http://www.obamalondon.blogspot.com
January 28th, 2009 at 10:03 amwhat do you like in a girl?
—-
Can I answer this one?
January 28th, 2009 at 10:05 amHi Faiz/John –
What are the most important ways the stimulus bill addresses the problem of poverty and building opportunity?
Thanks in advance,
Mike from New Jersey
January 28th, 2009 at 10:09 amdbadass Says:
what do you like in a girl?
—-
Can I answer this one?
I think I know where you’re going with this, but please, go ahead…just don’t upset the Princess.
January 28th, 2009 at 10:09 amWhy was rick warren chosen to deliver a prayer at the inauguration, essentially legitimizing his polarizing perspectives?
If president obama wished to “extend an olive branch”, wouldn’t a more subdued event been a more prudent choice?
January 28th, 2009 at 10:12 amI want to know why Obama continues to trust Republicans to discuss issues and craft legislation in good faith.
Don’t get me wrong — I have NO desire whatsoever for Obama and Congressional Dems to do what the GOP did and just run roughshod over the process. I understand the need to come to consensus and get input from all corners.
But people like Boehner and McConnell and King and numerous others have proven, time and again, that no matter what Dems do, the GOP will complain and obstruct.
They wanted more tax cuts in the stimulus, so the Obama and the Dems did that. But then it was family planning money to states. So Dems and Obama took that out. Then is was whining about the National Mall (despite the fact people will be employed doing the work), so the Dems have now stripped that out.
What’s next? Removal of all the spending and just leaving it with tax cuts only?
What I don’t think you all realize is that America is sick and tired of doing it the GOP way. They want bold action, and most are even willing to tick off a few Republicans in the process, so long as things get done.
So why hasn’t the Obama team realized that yet? Why are they still putting their trust in people who have done nothing to earn that trust? At what point will you all realize that nothing you ever do will get the support from the far right?
And how long after that will you decide to go for it without them, deciding that taking the country forward is worth leaving them behind?
January 28th, 2009 at 10:13 amWhat discussions if any took place concerning the place of the Department of Homeland Security? Given the failures of the this recently created agency during the previous administration, will this Department likely be restructured or dismantled?
What direction will this agency take in the Obama Administration?
January 28th, 2009 at 10:16 amWhat are the ways for citizens in communities to help President Obama?
January 28th, 2009 at 10:16 amI suspect the question on most of our minds has been asked several times already here: why is a Democratic president with a solid Democratic majority in both houses so willing to back down from confrontation with the Republicans, when they are so obviously just being obstructionist?
“Give ‘em an inch and they’ll take a mile” has never been so clearly illustrated.
January 28th, 2009 at 10:16 amSince the primaries Obama has always struck me as more of a moderate in the mold of Bill Clinton, what progressive causes in particular seem to you to be at the forefront of his agenda?
January 28th, 2009 at 10:18 amWhy stand by Timothy Geithner when his excuses for his tax issues seemed to be contradicted by others who worked there?
With all the admirable restrictions on lobbyists, why was William Lynn III, the top lobbyist at Raytheon, chosen for Deputy Sec. of Defense?
Why is Obama siding with Bush on domestic spying?
Also, please give Mr. Podesta my thanks for the great work in support of Obama and our government.
January 28th, 2009 at 10:19 amMike Lux, Progressive Liaison to the transition, expressed yesterday on OpenLeft his approval of the Administration’s unflagging efforts to win over Republicans. However, he reminds us that, given historical and current trends, conservative Republicans are going to oppose progressive legislation no matter the carrots Obama tosses in for them. Vigorous debate always accompanies big changes, and “if Obama is going to play conciliator-in-chief, someone else on our side is going to need to play the attack dog”.
Who will play the part of that progressive attack dog? How much is Obama willing to water down his legislation to appease unappeasable conservatives? How do you reconcile the post-partisan philosophy with your own status as a progressive?
January 28th, 2009 at 10:21 amWould that be your question to Mr. Podesta? ;)
January 28th, 2009 at 10:23 amI agree with many of the questions posted here today, but I want to take it a step further. If Obama believes that making concessions up front will help him avoid problems with the Republicans, and they are willing to stick together in gridlock mode, why can’t we scrap this weak stimulus bill with tax cuts and actually put in one that will work for the American people?
If the Republican’s feel that they are well served by standing up in unison against any Obama initiative, then screw them. Nothing they want needs to be in the bill. It seems like a waste to give up so much for so little in return. I’d rather see a purely Democratic bill, with infrastructure, family planning, and other job creation – it’ll do much more for the country, the Republicans can’t say they had anything to do with it, and then we get total credit and build a larger movement into the future.
January 28th, 2009 at 10:25 am1. The world saw the disastrous impact of executive incentive pay on America’s financial sector, why spread “pay for performance” poison to health care and education?
2. Poor quality imploded Wall Street. Tainted peanut butter killed eight and sickened over 500. What will the Obama adminstration do to remove “buyer beware” from the forefront of Amerian consumers’ minds?
3. Why did the Chamber of Commerce job multiplier disappear for a decade, as jobs went to China by the millions? It made its magic return with the government stimulus package. Why does government money wash through the economy creating jobs, while corporate money shipped to Asia enables the dollar to buy more via imported cheap goods? Which story line is true?
4. Why are taxpayers giving billions to companies laying off tens of thousands of workers? Why spend citizen’s money on reverse economic development?
5. Given America’s crisis of quality, when will American business and governmental leaders learn profound knowledge as taught by quality guru, Dr. W. Edwards Deming?
January 28th, 2009 at 10:25 amCongrats, John on a job well done. I enjoyed your frequent emails during the campaign updating us on issues.
January 28th, 2009 at 10:27 amIt goes without saying that many of us are wondering why Minority Leader Boehner appears to be the tail wagging the dog. The media continue to frame the debate as the conservatives have framed it. Is there a plan to use the bully pulpit for more than conciliation?
January 28th, 2009 at 10:27 amThis is a stupid question and should not be considered.
January 28th, 2009 at 10:29 amAmericans have witnessed the obstructionist tactics of the GOP firsthand this week. They’d issued a directive to vote down everything Obama wants one hour before they’d even met with him. If this is not obstructionist, I don’t know what is.
These rethugs quite obviously have no intention of bipartisanship and instead look like a bunch of whining babies who have shown their constituents how inept as representatives they truly are.
I believe that Obama’s intentions were altruistic in seeking bipartisanship but now that the country has seen firsthand that the GOP is nothing BUT partisan (and for partisan’s sake), how long will Obama make these concessions before he loses the support of the american public?
January 28th, 2009 at 10:31 amJohn,
Congratulations on a fantastic transition, and welcome back to CAP.
President Bush has admitted during his exit interviews that he committed War Crimes by authorizing the waterboarding of KSM. My question is, “Will President Obama honor his oath of office and prosecute the former president and those in his administration who authorized war crimes, or allow them to be prosecuted by international agencies? Or will he ignore the will of the people who voted for him and allow the criminals to get away with impunity?”
John, we want the Bush Adminsitration held accountable, in a court of law, for their crimes. Because if they all walk away without even a formal charge being brought, then we will vote for a new president who will enforce the rule of law. That is the change we voted for. A return to the rule of law, and holding law breakers to account for their deeds.
January 28th, 2009 at 10:32 amMr. Podesta, thank you for making it clear that it ispossible for strong leadership, good management, and superb organization to (a) exist and (b) produce good results. I only hope this efficient approach survives the vagaries of Washingtonian cabals.
He’s such an astute politician that I hope that President
Obama simply is using a strategy to hoist the disloyal opposition
by their own petard. As a political naif, I often think
“Why is he doing that?”–only to find out that
he uses superb jujitsu to use others’ attacks to redound upon them. However, what can we do to remind him that he was elected because the country doesn’t like what the Republicans were doing, that–as he said–he won? The right seems to perceive
any attempt to compromise, work together, and be nonconfrontational simply as weakness. Even if his agenda isn’t as progressive as I might like to see it, I do
want to see him lead/push to where he wants to go without kowtowing to those who value party over country.
And please encourage someone to use tape and transcripts of Republicans’ own words to remind them that they once were for what they now are fighting.
Onward!
January 28th, 2009 at 10:32 amIs Obama pulling a “Mattews” on the GOP?
We’ve all watched in awe as Matthews permits the guests he knows are frauds indict themselves before all of america by permitting them to ramble on and essentially hang themselves by their own noose.
Now that the GOP has hung themselves collectively (Boehner,Cantor, et al) and jeopardized their chances for re-election, when can we begin to ignore their lockstep obstructionist techniques and move forward to bring relief to the people?
January 28th, 2009 at 10:34 amHow long is it going to take for Obama to realize there is no appeasing Republicans?
January 28th, 2009 at 10:34 amFred Says:
This is a stupid question and should not be considered.
January 28th, 2009 at 10:29 am
_____________
I disagree. It should. The Shock Doctrine applies equally to Democrats as well as Republicans, and it’s certainly worthy of consideration. Perhaps a better question would be “exactly how is the government going to ensure transparency and accountability in the spending of ARARA funds?”
January 28th, 2009 at 10:34 amA shorter version of my screed: stop begging and start beating.
January 28th, 2009 at 10:35 amJudging by the ‘Recommend (0)’ next to it, i think the general consensus is a resounding ‘no’ .
January 28th, 2009 at 10:35 amWhy was Admiral Blair nominated for DNI, since he supported the Indonesian armed forces massacring civilians in churches in East Timor in the run-up to a UN-sponsored free election?
January 28th, 2009 at 10:36 amWe’ve watched Reid and Pelosi lose the support of the american people when they promised to hold this administration fully accountable for the crimes they’ve committed and then totally cave to the pressure of blackmail by Bush’s illegal wiretaps. This is not news to many of us that even the impression of having been wiretapped will imprison the truth.
Does Obama NOT risk his popularity right now and the mandate of the people who elected him by ignoring the obvious: bringing Bush & Co. to justice swiftly?
It didn’t take the country very long following the Midterm elections to realize that they’d been lied to and defrauded by Reid and Pelosi.
How long do you think the people will tolerate the possibility of “being duped again” – this time by Obama?
January 28th, 2009 at 10:37 amIRAQ!!!!!!!!!!!
I spent my money, time and energy to get Obama elected. I did so mainly because of the idiocy of the Bush administration which wanted to solve the world’s problems by killing. Please, please, President Obama, end this insane approach to producing an Orwellian peace. Let’s get out of Iraq. NOW!
January 28th, 2009 at 10:37 amOf course, Mr. Podesta deserves congratulations for a remarkably smooth transition. But given the depth of the economic crisis (a crisis whose magnitude and near-intractability have not yet been adequately described to the American people,) I am going to limit myself to a comment in the form of rhetorical questions: will CAP (or the White House)quickly provide an item-by-item description of each proposed expenditure in the stimulus legislation, together with a precise description of how that expenditure will either alleviate the effects of the recession or stimulate economic growth? Even more importantly, will CAP provide a point-by-point rebuttal (in the manner of the Obama campaign’s “Stop the Smears” website) to the Republican attacks on individual spending items? The conservative line of attack is now set as a daily ridicule of individual line items – rebuilding the National Mall, $50 million for NEA, reproductive rights grants, etc. We really need specific, nearly real-time rebuttals to the kinds of arguments made on today’s WSJ editorial page and soon to be repeated in the conservative echo chamber. Sorry, Mr. Podesta, but you surely understand that right now this is much more important than reflecting on the transition.
January 28th, 2009 at 10:38 amCongratulations on a beautiful transition, Mr. Podesta.
Looks like Obama is taking on Limbaugh and Hannity. This could be fun! What do you know?
January 28th, 2009 at 10:39 amWill the Obama Administration give an honest ear to Sibel Edmonds and follow her allegations WHEREVER they lead to?
January 28th, 2009 at 10:40 ambackup Says:
are we in jeopardy of acting with such haste on the matter, that we will make poor decisions?
This is a stupid question and should not be considered.
This isn’t a stupid question. However, it probably has only one answer: we can do it now and get it as right as possible, or wait until it’s perfect and never get anything done.
January 28th, 2009 at 10:41 amWill the Obama Administration give an honest ear to Mark Klein and follow his allegations WHEREVER they lead to?
January 28th, 2009 at 10:42 amMr. Podesta, congratulations on a transition job well done. As the new Obama administration settles down to work, my question is this –
How much of the flurry of regulation weakening and last-minute government appointments done by Bush in the closing days of his administration does Obama expect to reverse?
Second question — how does Obama feel about the amassing of power in the Executive Branch done by Bush and Cheney during their administration? How likely is it that Obama will give any of that back?
January 28th, 2009 at 10:42 amIs Single-Payer, Universal Health Care off the table? I heard Zeke Emmanuel’s (Rahm’s vrother) explanation of what he says the administration is planning. It is insurance-based, and with the goal of phasing out Medicare and Medicaid. It was a terrible plan, with the only advantage going to insurance providers, who simply function as gate-keepers and who make profits for contributing nothing.
Please understand that many many of Obama’s supporters believe that Single-Payer is the only way to have every health care dollar going to health care. It would provide a stimulus to small businesses. There is no evidence anywhere that insurance-based health care is better, and plenty of evidence that single-payer provides not only better outcomes, but also a better financial value.
Please, please — reassure me that this is NOT off the table.
January 28th, 2009 at 10:42 amMy question(s)
Will President Obama push for tough election reform, making paper trails mandatory? (And if the republicans obstruct, will he dig in his heels and properly rake them over the coals?)
Will President Obama prosecute the bush administration for war crimes and violations of the Constitution?
Will President Obama push for a truly Universal healthcare plan rather than keep the pharma and insurance industries front and center and ensuring their continued disastrous policies?
Why did President Obama really vote for the unconscionable telecom immunity FISA bill, which allowed the telecoms and bush to elude subpoenas and exposure of the extent of the illegal activity?
Will President Obama insist on an aggressive accounting of exactly where our taxpayer $$$ have disappeared both in the bailout program and the administration expense accounts?
There’ll be more as soon as I think of ‘em. Thank you.
January 28th, 2009 at 10:42 amWe’ve seen how intelligent Obama is, including his recent jabs at Rush that have left the pundit sidelined and a pariah to some prior supporters. There are numerous other examples from the campaign.
1. Are we seeing the same sort of strategic thinking in the limited concessions to the House Republicans now? Reducing their ability to legitimately oppose the bill and thus being able to sideline them eventually?
2. Do you agree with the decision to keep all of the current US AGs on board for the time being, considering how they were screened before being hired by the Bush Administration?
January 28th, 2009 at 10:42 amTax breaks for the wealthy over and above the tax breaks they’ve been enjoying for 8 years is also included in the tax package. This is something they don’t want us to know. Tax breaks on top of already vulgar tax breaks for the big corporations is NOT a platform Obama campaigned upon. What gives with all of the tax breaks for those who do not need or deserve them as Obama so eloquently stated on the campaign trail?
The corrupt Republicans know where their reelection bread is buttered and are pimping for their corporate co-conspirators right now with the tax break meme. “enough if enough” – imagine how much money we’d have for infrastructure right now if these corporate tax loopholes and tax breaks for the top 10% were not in effect?
January 28th, 2009 at 10:43 amI think it’s condecending and it’s purpose is to distract.
January 28th, 2009 at 10:44 amDoesn’t the ongoing bombing using aerial drones in Pakistan undermine Obama’a claim that Muslims shouldn’t see Americans as their enemy?
January 28th, 2009 at 10:44 amHow can it be possible that Dubya, the Little Dick, Rumsfeld, and the crew could conceivably not be tried for War Crimes?
January 28th, 2009 at 10:45 amNow that the Republicans have shown their true colors, isn’t it time to slam the door in their faces?
He won/they did not. The american people have spoken and his promise of bipartisanship has been patently rejected in full view of the american public.
I’d say that the GOP honeymoon is over, wouldn’t you, John?
January 28th, 2009 at 10:45 amIt seems that the United States using monetary policy as a substitute for trade policy has not been effective. And while, we seldom hear any trade discussion in the United States without an absolute adherence to free trade being a prerequisite; other nations have comprehensive trade policy to protect domestic industry and encourage growth in domestic employment markets. Has there been any discussion about a more pragmatic and functional trade policy within the Obama administration, especially within the context of economic recovery?
January 28th, 2009 at 10:47 amMr. Obama has said that he is opposed to gay marriage but supports civil unions.
1. Would “full faith and credit” apply to those unions?
2. Isn’t that a venture back to “separate but equal?”
January 28th, 2009 at 10:49 amAlthough the lure of imperial power and unparalleled executive privilege has been the hallmark of the past currupt presidency where legal barriers have been crossed, what will Obama do to resist the obvious advantage the past president has had in “knowing all” – that is, having wiretapped information on everyone in congress and every opponent to use as blackmail (or even the prospect of being blackmailed which has silenced Bush’s critics)?
January 28th, 2009 at 10:50 amI just have one short question: Why are there no openly gay people in President Obama’s Cabinet?
January 28th, 2009 at 10:50 amI understand that Obama wants to focus on the future, but I am concerned about losing sight of the transgressions that have occurred in the recent past. Far too many people believe that Bush committed no great crimes and that everything which happened in his administration also happened under Clinton and will happen again under Obama. Obama has pledged to restore the rule of law and to be more transparent. I hope that he will apply that same policy to the actions of the previous administration. Does Obama plan to create some kind of commission to look into past abuses of our obligations under both domestic law and foreign treaty?
January 28th, 2009 at 10:50 amWhy does private equity, with billions on the sidelines, need another tax break?
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123310671578422199.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
Senator Max Baucus D-Montana included a provision in the stimulus package allowing companies to defer income taxes triggered when they repurchase their own troubled debt at a discount. Another $26 billion in corporafornication. Why?
January 28th, 2009 at 10:53 amThere can be on “focus on the future” without unraveling the precise errors and violations which have created the mess we are in currently. There is no progress forward without using the past as a barometer and learning device.
I’d recommend that the Obama administration curtail the use of the trite misnomer of “looking forward” particularly when it connotes in the people’s minds the obvious: brushing crimes under the rug.
Nothing wrong with being altruistic or idealistic but there comes a point where the concept falls flat on it’s face and the reality becomes obvious to everyone.
January 28th, 2009 at 10:53 amWhere does President Obama identify the limits of “bipartisanship” in dealing with an intransigently partisan GOP?
January 28th, 2009 at 10:53 amnaturalmystic8 Says:
Has there been any discussion about a more pragmatic and functional trade policy within the Obama administration, especially within the context of economic recovery?
January 28th, 2009 at 10:47 am
________
Great question!
I’d like to add a coattail to this: have there also been discussions about fair trade policies – including a healthy reexamination of farm subsidies – to ensure that our trade policy does not increase poverty and migration in the developing world?
January 28th, 2009 at 10:58 am1) Campaign finance reform is obviously the root of the corruption in Washington where lobbyists and corporations have bought our representatives. Does Obama plan to remove the lure by reforming our campaign finance system?
2) Election reform – Just this week 440 hidden ballots have been unearthed in Florida. This is occurring everywhere. The people recognize now how easy it is to hack a DRE and have absolutely no faith in our paperless voting machines. We KNOW beyond a shadow of a doubt that they have been and will be hacked (thanks, Diebold and Kenneth Blackwell!).
What does Obama plan to reinstate the faith of the electorate in terms of election fraud and voting machine fraud?
January 28th, 2009 at 10:58 amIt’s my understanding that it’s preferable to limit highway/freeway construction projects, and to push for inner-city infrastructure projects instead, to maximize the positive effects from the economic stimulus plan. How important is this consideration in choosing which shovel-ready projects to include in the package?
January 28th, 2009 at 10:59 amWhat I am interested in is how soon was planning started? I mean I can only assume planning on who to bring on board to help with the transition started even before Obama won the general.
Of course Obama had DoD, foreign affairs, health care, and economic experts on staff for most if not all of the campaign, back a year plus from the general election.
But how were they able to bring transition people on board for NASA, EPA, FDA, or any number of other smaller agencies (and sub-agencies) that most of the public (myself included) are not even aware exist?
As somebody that deals with complex issues for a living, I can’t even begin to wrap my mind around trying to transition on department, like the DoD or State Department, much less the entire Federal Government.
This would be a topic I’d be very interested in hearing a lot more about.
January 28th, 2009 at 11:01 amThanks from a grateful citizen.
In addition to the comments I am in total agreement with above:
2, 4, 16, 19, 24, 27.
May I just emphasize that too much appeasement, regardless of the highmindedness of bipartisanship, may be seen as weakness by the opposition and empower them to obstruct progress even more.
As for justice, I accept the facts that this issue is extremely complicated, but the Bush adminsitration’s blatant disregard for law and the Constitution, in addition to outrageous executive orders and assumptions of power must be addressed and held into account: the American people must feel that the intentions of our sacred documents will be restored.
I recognize the enormity of the tasks we have charged President Obama to do, and I am very willing to give him time to move the nation forward. I appreciate his demonstration of working with the opposition, but I worry about what may be seen as obsequiousness, which is neither necessary nor flattering.
Finally, the media.
January 28th, 2009 at 11:02 amI recognize their role, and reluctantly accept that, despite the abysmal failures they have shown in the past decade.
However, the opposition seems to have a grip on their attention, and the opposition is benefiting from what passes for journalism today. Republicans have their memorized sound bites and domineering demeanors; Democrats appear weak and uncertain in their on camera appearances. Please see about putting strong voices on camera and in print to further the Obama programs and policies, inform the public, and more effectively counter the opposition.
Fred Says:
I think it’s condecending and it’s purpose is to distract.
It’s backup. What else can you expect?
January 28th, 2009 at 11:02 am1. One thing that seems consistent in Obama’s successful efforts is surprisingly effective organizational structures and team management. Could you describe any specifics you’ve noticed about the team-building and leadership methods he employs?
2. what all was included in the “big picture to-do list” for the transition? Any major chores the outside observer might not appreciate?
January 28th, 2009 at 11:04 amMr. Podesta, congrats on a great job with the transition. In you opinion, will the Pres. support even tacitly making the Bush admin. people who apparently committed criminal acts–Rove, Gonzo, Addington, etc.–face the citizens in court?
January 28th, 2009 at 11:04 amThanks.
Two questions, both stated previously and more eloquently:
Why enable the Repugs by conceding to them?
Are we a country of laws or not?
January 28th, 2009 at 11:06 amDoes Obama recognize that his failure to investigate and bring to trial those who authorized,initiated and participated in war crimes, such as torture, makes him copable under international treaties?
January 28th, 2009 at 11:08 amHow many members of the Obama administration have dual citizenship with Israel?
Does President Obama intend to continue the horror of U.S. involvement in Somalia?
Doesn’t President Obama risk being an accessory to to war crimes by failing to prosecute Bush/Cheney?
Why don’t we just expand Medicare to cover all U.S. citizens since the program is already in place and very successful?
January 28th, 2009 at 11:20 amI know a record number of progressives backed Obama, however there’s not a whole lot of progressives among his staff. Obama has never exactly been a progressive, but how do you help us to reconcile what we want with what we’ve got as far as his administration is concerned? Do you think he and his admin will take progressive into consideration?
January 28th, 2009 at 11:21 amI would like to recommend to fellow posters to limit your comments to one potential question each. Make separate comments for separate, especially unrelated, questions. You might have one really, really good question, and several bad ones, and you won’t get the ‘recommends’ you need to get your question asked. Just a suggestion. I would hate to see a great question go unasked because it was lumped with some not as good and didn’t get the support it might have gotten alone.
It’s okay to comment a lot. This is a special kind of thread.
January 28th, 2009 at 11:26 amHow is it possible to be an honst broker for peace in the ME when the US , has toppled governments there ,gives more aid to Israel than all other countries combined , has shielded them from endless sanctions in the UN through our security council veto and condoned both the destruction of Lebanon and the raping of Gaza by virtually unanaimous resolutions.
BBC headline ,
January 28th, 2009 at 11:26 amAny Israeli soldiers accused of war crimes in the Gaza Strip will be given state protection from prosecution overseas, the country’s PM has said.
….
This is a very well documented atrocity covered live by al jazeera and I want to know how decent people can condone this and how our elected representatives Obama included ,can vote near unanimously in support of such horrific racism ?
Fleeing their home , the hospital is 1 kilometer away , feral cats attempting to eat the body of the 1 brother , the other bleeding to death in front of his father who is forced to lay there and the soldiers apparently knew the people and told their commanding officer they were harmless and attempting to flee .
http://www.democracynow.org/2009/1/22/part_ii_palestinian_us_college_grad
Do you agree with Jonathan Turley in that if Obama refuses to investigate/prosecute the previous administration for war crimes that he (Obama) could actually be seen as an accessory to said war crimes?
January 28th, 2009 at 11:26 amMr. Podesta,
I have never seen such transition in 30 years and you should get a lot of credit. I believe that the Anti-trust laws have been trampled on and are if not totally, in part responsible for our current economic situation. Competition is no longer possible by small business. Corporate greed is out of control because of Anti-trust laws being ignored or skirted around by mergers and smaller companies that are grouped into the larger company. I have heard nothing or very very little in the discussion of the economy about this. If one looks at history at the end of the 1800’s into the early 1900’s there are many comparisons to be made. Am I spitting into the wind?
Have studies been done this matter? Is the administration focused on re-writing laws to meet 21 century needs? Is means testing a possibilities to determine true monopolies?
January 28th, 2009 at 11:27 amTP, I notice some people have posted questions similar to other ones (just worded differently). Will you combine ‘votes’ for similar questions when you make your list for John? For example, several people have mentioned holding the Bush Adminsitration accountable for their crimes (especially their war crimes). Will you be combining all votes for all questions along this theme, so that the questions gets asked? Or will you go only by the votes any single comment gets.
I do believe that this particular area (Bush’s crimes) is one that must be addressed.
January 28th, 2009 at 11:29 amJohn: Isn’t the concept of “looking forward/not back” like practicing bad medicine – like prescribing a drug before diagnosing the problem/pathogen?
Many of us on the left know that the trite expression of “looking forward” is simply CODE for: Ignoring & sweeping it under the rug.
Can Obama afford this message to be relayed to the american people and not suffer his current support and base?
January 28th, 2009 at 11:34 amTP please keep in mind that the comments at the beginning of a thread ALWAYS get more recommendations !
January 28th, 2009 at 11:34 amPresident Obama is trying to marginalize Hamas and is pointing out how they shouldn’t be sending rockets into Israel (is there actually a recognized national boundary separating Gaza and Israel?). When will President Obama ask Israel to stop its gunboats from firing on the Palastinian fishing fleet and continuing to kill and wound people since the “cease fire” has been implemented? President Obama was willing to say that we should talk to Iran, when is he going to say he would be willing to talk to the freely elected government of Palestinians in Gaza?
January 28th, 2009 at 11:37 amQuestion: When does the post-partisan smackdown begin?
If democratic congresscritters give in to wingnut ludicrous demands and wingnut-in-charge Rep. Boner still says he wants to see 100% opposition to the stimulus package, can we smack them down now? Can we strike all the useless tax cuts for rich folks, put back the job creating items that have caused rightwing hissy fits, repeal the bush tax cuts and get on with passing a stimulus package that will help real people get out of this mess without them NOW?
Please?
More than willing to carry the Obama Smackdown Stick,
Posse
January 28th, 2009 at 11:43 amWhen do we really start to see that Obama won? Is his “I won” going to be forever emblazoned with the well remembered “I’m the Decider?” So far the stimulus package is beginning to look more and more like the repulsicans won the Presidency and will enact more of their useless tax cuts for the rich. President Obama may be practicing a political form of a martial art, but I want to know when it will show some results in the Win column. So far the “stimulus package” is looking more and more like a give away to the well connected and those who need help, the ones losing their homes and jobs, aren’t even getting a “thank you.”
January 28th, 2009 at 11:53 amI know that you and others might find this funny, but it is true, and a very serious question.
You are being touted on various radio programs and internet sites by people who believe that you will be instrumental in the government finally disclosing to the American public our government’s true relationship with extraterrestrial beings. This is to include that fact most UFO’s are alien crafts, as well as the fact that we have a scientific and business relationship with aliens who live in our midst, and have had one for decades. Apparently, several European governments are moving towards “disclosure” very rapidly, and if they do so before the US, we could miss the loss of control over the political, financial and technical benefits that would ensue to the nation that first breaks the news.
Will you push for full government transparency from the Obama administration regarding UFO’s, extraterrestrial beings, and alien scientific and technical advances?
January 28th, 2009 at 11:56 amQUESTIONS:
We never had a bona fide criminal inquiry into the crimes committed on 9/11 under the Bush Administration. Considering the fact that there is no statute of limitations for murder, will the Justice Department under the Obama Administration now launch a criminal investigation into those acts?
Will the Justice Department under the Obama Administration investigate allegations of War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity?
January 28th, 2009 at 12:01 pmJohn, as a citizen I thank you for your service in assisting the President take his first steps towards the change, security and vitality our country needs.
January 28th, 2009 at 12:02 pmMy question concerns the student loan debt which is a burden for many citizens. I understand this burden will be reduced to some degree in the future for those wishing a college education through increased grants. However, I wish to know if there are any plans or programs in development to lessen the burden of repayment for those of us who have completed our education and have begun repayment. What offices handle such program and how does one obtain information? I am also concerned about how easily my debt is sold or passed to different companies without my knowledge or consent. Is this an issue that will be addressed at some point? Thank you for this opportunity to send in a question, I have been most impressed with the Presidents level of organization, planning and consideration. Ellen Liberace, MD
John—how do progressives best help counter the hostile media environment for progressives that encompasses our political system, particularly for cable news?
January 28th, 2009 at 12:14 pmHaving looked at President Obama’s stimulus package as well as the previous stimulus (read bailouts) undertaken by President Bush, I am very concerned that the interests of the middle class are being set aside and only the extremes are seeing relief in this economy.
I would like to know if President Obama would be willing to support a program of student loan forgiveness?
It is my belief that by the government investing in the education of Americans, we can not only pay off the debt to lendors but also allow struggling middle class families to be relieved of a serious burden that is keeping them from giving back to the economy, their communities, and their country.
Many of us saddled with student loans are struggling to make ends meet and continue to be sinking under the interest. There is no end in sight. We cannot live our dream and put our education to use for the good of this country. We cannot start businesses. We cannot buy homes. We cannot have families.
I have started a Facebook Group, called “Stimulate the Economy — Forgive Student Loans,” dedicated to this proposition. I hope that all readers will join it to discuss this issue further.
I have also started a petition to President Obama that I hope everyone will sign.
But, my question to you is, “Will the President and Congress listen to the People and not the money lenders to free our educated masses from their insurmountable debt?”
January 28th, 2009 at 12:15 pmPresident Obama has indicated he will continue to fund the Office of Faith-Based Initiatives (with some yet to be elaborated on changes). Obama faces a program staffed and institutionalized by people trained in the Bush understanding of Compassionate Conservatism. It’s fairly common knowledge under Bush, this office was a tool for a powerful conservative Christian recruitment program. How exactly is Obama going to bring this office into compliance with the Constitution’s separation of church and state?
January 28th, 2009 at 12:15 pmIt looks like the biggest theme is about compromising with conservatives. This should be a sign to the president to start standing up for the people that elected him.
January 28th, 2009 at 12:33 pmWhy do you think the Congress approval rating is lower than Bush and Cheney? It’s because the Speaker took impeachment off the table and tried to cooperate with the conservatives. Does President Obama want his approval to be as low as theirs?
Conservatives won’t work with you unless they respect you. And they won’t respect you unless you stand up to them and put them in their place. Let them come to you asking to cooperate, not the other way around.
Here’s a good one from Tim F. over at Balloon Juice:
Deep Thought.
If Republicans plan to deliver exactly zero votes for Obama’s stimulus bill, then why does the bill still have compromises in it? Screw them. Put the family planning stuff back in, take the tax cuts out. If we know for sure that passing a crappy bill won’t win any more votes then just pass a better bill. They won’t scream any louder. The political cost won’t be any greater. Also, and pay attention because this is the important part, a better bill is more likely to succeed.
There is literally no longer any reason to weaken the bill with provisions that only exist because otherwise baby Rick Santorum might cry.
January 28th, 2009 at 12:37 pmonly got to 70… i’m sure there were very few i DIDN’T click on!
thank you, mr.podesta, and congratulations on a job well done!
thank you, faiz, for this thread and a great opportunity to vent!
may i suggest, when you go over these comments and evaluate their import, give consideration to the NUMBER OF TIMES a certain subject is noted.
i’d guess that accountability for probable bushco crimes tops that list!
and mine.
marie covered another of my greatest concerns with this:
… the opposition seems to have a grip on their attention, and the opposition is benefiting from what passes for journalism today. Republicans have their memorized sound bites and domineering demeanors; Democrats appear weak and uncertain in their on camera appearances. Please see about putting strong voices on camera and in print to further the Obama programs and policies, inform the public, and more effectively counter the opposition.
… i woke to the that miserable prune kristol on the TODAY show this morning… WHATTHEFLYINFOOCK was he doing there???!!!
WHERE ARE THE DEMS ?!? WHERE ARE THE PRO-DEMOCRACY SPOKES-PERSONS ?!!!?
there was a story recently about how obama was going to take his plan to the people.
IT AIN’T HAPPENING.
January 28th, 2009 at 12:40 pmMy question for Mr Podesta.
First, congratulations on a smooth transition. It was nice to see something our government attempted that worked for a change.
My question is about President Obama’s stimulus plan. While I agree with the idea of infrastructure job creation, what does he plan do to about the return of mortgage lending?
Our economy relies on the housing\building market which creates many more jobs than tax cuts, or infrastructure programs. In fact, a huge majority of our nations jobs rely on a strong housing market. Right down to the 7000 Home Depot employees who are being laid off. They’re being laid off because Home Depot cannot sell building materials. And Home Depot cannot sell building materials because home builders are not building homes. And the reason home builders are not building homes is because home sellers cannot sell those homes. And the reason home sellers cannot sell those homes is because home buyers cannot get a mortgage to buy those homes.
Its all tied together, so why are we focusing on band aid solutions that do not address the root of the problem?
Its simple. Return mortgage lending and you return home selling. Return home selling and you return home building. Return home building and home selling and you put millions of Americans back to work. From the Realtor, to the Mortgage Broker, to the Title Company, to the Home Inspector, to the Carpenter, to the Brick layer, to the plumber (Not Joe though), to the painters and plasterers, to the flooring installers, to the factory worker that makes the aluminum siding, to the Home Depot check out girl who sells the siding and the other materials.
Return lending and everyone goes back to work.
I don’t see why this concept is so elusive.
And to return lending, why give banks money and “hope” they’ll lend it? Why not set up a Federal Lending pool for mortgage loans to be written from? Why not take 250 billion or so out of the money we’re throwing at the problem, and stick it into a Federal Lending Pool fund?
Let mortgage lenders and banks “draw” on the pool for writing mortgage loans. Let them keep the interest and fees and the principal payments are returned to the pool.
Then, lenders can lend money without risk meaning the will actually start lending again, and making money themselves off the interest and fees, and home owners can buy homes again meaning home sellers can sell again and on down the food chain. Everyone goes back to work if you do this.
There’s no down side. We’re tossing billions away now and nothings happening and we’re not getting any of it back anyway. This plan ensures home lending returns immediately, which will immediately put the economy back on track by putting millions of Americans back to work immediately.
Think about it Mr Podesta.
The Federal Home Lending Fund. President Obama’s “Federal Home Lending Fund”.
It’s a sure fix and an easy one. It won’t solve all our problems, but it will put the economy back on track overnight.
Can’t he try something like that?
January 28th, 2009 at 12:47 pmregarding dolgre comment at #91:
Sounds very much like when Clinton’s tax increase bill passed with no Republican votes at all. The economy flourished, jobs were created and the next administration was handed a budget surplus.
January 28th, 2009 at 12:49 pmWill President Obama support the investigation and prosecution of the Bush Administration for all possible crimes they may have committed?
We the People want the truth – and we can handle it. We strongly believe that holding those who committed crimes accountable will do much to restore our international reputation as well as our national spirit. And the added benefit will hopefully prevent the disaster of another future BushCo from happening again. Thank you.
January 28th, 2009 at 12:52 pmWhat is President Obama doing to shore up his support in Congress from congressional Democrats? In the face of the stern and stubborn opposition from Republicans, and in the face of their “he must fail, so we can win” strategy, will he be able to marshall strong support for the important legislation to come?
January 28th, 2009 at 12:57 pmFirst off, I think the transition screamed “competance” and “we intend to get things done”. I think Obama has earned the right to put his choices in his administration.
That being said, I am a huge fan of Howard Dean and give him much of the credit for Democratic success the last 4 years. Why has he seemed to be ignored and possibly even slighted by th Obama people?
January 28th, 2009 at 12:58 pmI would like to know how Obama plans on funding this program since it includes tax gifts for the wealthy
tax reduction does NOT stimulate the economy UNLESS it is targeted at struggling industry or a sector we need to grow, for instance clean alternative fuel and climate change
when you reduce taxes with a broad stroke programs become underfunded and jobs suffer
FDR almost made the mistake it looks like Obama is determined to make, FDR was almost not bold enough
Obama is trying to appease the very people who caused the problem with the strategy they suggest even though it is that strategy that created what we have to fix
so the question is, how on earth does obama plan on recovering the revenue already lost under the republicans redistribution of middle class assets to their coffers strategy and why on earth is he giving this clearly failed policy any play what so ever
if obama wants to lower taxes he needs to show where that money is comming from and he needs to be clear which programs are cut when he gives those gifts to the wealthy
January 28th, 2009 at 1:14 pmRepublicans still behave as they though they’re in the majority, threatening to filibuster bills if they don’t get everything they want.
How long will this be allowed to continue before President Obama and Congress call their bluff?
January 28th, 2009 at 1:23 pmMr Posdesta, thank you for taking part in a transition process, which was, frankly, awesome to watch from here in Europe.
My question:
Will President Obama re-sign the Rome Statute for the International Criminal Court and push for ratification of same?
January 28th, 2009 at 1:24 pmPresident Obama appears to be a man we can actually trust to admit America’s mistakes without while refusing to give in to those who blame America for all the world’s ills. His commitment to bi-partisanship and his willingness to compromise are refreshing qualities in a politician.
Are you confident that President Obama can maintain his positions in the face of opposition from those at the extremes of the political spectrum?
January 28th, 2009 at 1:24 pmThe only extremists are the obstructionist republicans. They are being allowed the opportunity to get on board. If they fail to take this opportunity that is being offered, they will dissappear into oblivion.
January 28th, 2009 at 1:39 pmJohn,
Congratulations to you and the whole team, we needed this badly, now for the hard work.
My question is something that continues to nag at me all the time. What is President Obama’s involvement with the Bilderburg Society, what is that group’s objectives and why is it all so secret? Many progressives have been wondering what is going on there anyway?
January 28th, 2009 at 1:39 pmThanks,
nedlog
______
Fred Says:
The only extremists are the obstructionist republicans. They are being allowed the opportunity to get on board. If they fail to take this opportunity that is being offered, they will dissappear into oblivion.
January 28th, 2009 at 1:39 pm
______
Thanks, John!
January 28th, 2009 at 1:45 pmHello John Podesta,
Do you support Chairman Conyers’ “Medicare For All” bill? If so, how will CAP play a role in supporting it?
Thank you,
- Tom
January 28th, 2009 at 1:52 pmWAYNEBRO Says:
Excellent post! Your idea seems reasonable and doable.
January 28th, 2009 at 2:34 pmLate chiming in. All great questions! One issue, however, seems not to have gotten as much attention as I think it needs: that is, universal healthcare. Due to my own career experience in both the medical and pharmaceutical field for many years, and also working as an analyst of both, I can honestly say that “competition” in provision of medical care does NOT lower costs, it increases them across the board. I’d like to see the for-profit nature of managed care organizations (including GPO’s, etc.) taken away. When the shareholders needs are always the first considered, the patients will come last. And they do. Regarding pharmaceutical companies, having worked for one of the very largest for 15 years (retired in 2003), I can also state categorically that their focus is NOT on patients, but on profit. And power. I saw that naked truth, more clearly than ever before, during the creation of the Medicare Part D law. My company was not concerned about what was actually best for the elderly…they WERE very concerned about how their bottom-line was affected. Hence, the demand that the government not be allowed to negotiate drug costs, as the VA and DOD currently do. My experience in these fields led to one conclusion: single-payor healthcare, (expansion of Medicare) is the only way to go. The managed care organizations/insurance companies need to be, at least, partially nationalized. And pharmaceutical companies like to rationalize the high cost of drugs (in the U.S. especially) because R&D is so expensive. Well, they spend a good deal MORE on promotion and advertising then they ever do on R&D, and that includes salaries in the sales divisions.
A number of European countries have nationalized healthcare systems that work very well, provide excellent care, cost LESS than our for-profit systems, and certainly don’t result in people dying because they don’t have medical care or going bankrupt because they simply cannot afford their care. Americans have been propagandized for years that the provision of this type of system is that scary word, “socialism” which leads to communism and totalitarianism. England, France and the Netherlands, among others, have this socialist system for medical care (education, as well), yet are still free, capitalistic systems. Americans need to be reeducated about this, and the far-right, which has controlled this dialogue, needs to be strongly countered. The time is NOW.
January 28th, 2009 at 3:54 pmHow did the Podesta Group’s lobbying revenues grow so much in the past year? What are they projected to be for 2009?
Do you care to comment on the article in BusinessWeek titled “The Uber Lobbyists of Washington”? Mr. Podesta’s family is prominently mentioned.
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/09_04/b4117048416966.htm?chan=magazine+channel_the+new+power+networks
January 28th, 2009 at 4:16 pmMr President,
Why have you turned your back on the $5 supporters, grassroots activists and bloggers that got you elected?
January 28th, 2009 at 4:17 pmWhen will the Obama team put some pressure on the big oil companies to start contributing to programs to help poor people get heating oil, so we can thank more than just Joe Kennedy and the people of Venezuela for helping? It is freezing up here in a large part of the country. In this wealthy country no one should be without heat.
January 28th, 2009 at 4:27 pmSadly there is only one mention of investigating 9/11. That was the event that allowed Bush&Co. to destroy our Constitution and our country. But almost no one wants to go there.
If, and I stress if, it were an inside job, and attack planned and carried out by Americans on Americans for the sole purpose of concentrating a huge amount of power in the Unitary Executive, don’t you think we’re entitled to find out? Yet we continue to operated on the assumption it was carried out by a conspiracy between rag-tag group of “Islamic extremists.” The only “proof” we have to go by is a questionable video tape and “confessions” elicited through the use of torture.
January 28th, 2009 at 4:51 pmWill President Obama suffer the destructive behaviour of the likes of Bush loyalist General Craddock for long?
January 28th, 2009 at 5:48 pmJohn,
Great job! My question is rather simplistic, how does one get a job with our new administration. I have a friend who is a Dean of a school for a University about 250 miles from DC. She is really one of those forward looking PhD.’s that could add a lot to the higher educational policy area. If there is a person that you could suggest for her to send her CV, that would be great. I also think CAP would love to have her working for them! You can contact me at filter at midlifecrisis dot com.
Don
January 28th, 2009 at 7:05 pmPlease give Sibel Edmonds a real opportunity to tell what she knows. Please put a real investigator on to look at 9/11/01. I just want to echo what some others have said.
January 28th, 2009 at 9:32 pmDear John
Many people around the world are starting to realize a very sad truth about your country. For sixty years your country has kept the truth about extra-terrestrial contact with Earth hidden from the human population. It is becoming increasingly apparent that the world is choking in carbon dioxide and other pollutants simply because secret government, military and corporate groups have suppressed the use of free non-polluting energy technologies, some of which were derived from the reverse engineering of crashed extraterrestrial craft.
It is a very sad situation where the Earth is on the verge of dying because your country has allowed these insane groups to usurp control away from orthodox political structures. It is almost incompressible that the democratically elected president of your country does not have sufficient security clearance to access these Unacknowledged Special Access Programs, especially considering it is very likely these programs hold the keys to solving the current global warming crisis.
If your government were to confess the truth about extra-terrestrial visitation this would eventually lead to the inevitable question of how these extra-terrestrial peoples arrived here. What powers their craft? I’m sure it’s not petrol or for that matter solar cells!
Zero Point Energy has the capacity to provide cheep, pollution free transport. It also makes possible the economic removal of pollutants from our industrial processes. Is it true that your country is hiding technologies which can save the planet?
Could you please tell me if you have any plans to release the truth about extra-terrestrial visitation and related technologies?
Will you allow the people who know the truth about these Unacknowledged Special Access Programs to be released from their security oaths so they may testify and reveal the truth about suppressed Zero Point Energy technologies?
Yours sincerely,
Dr. Bruce Alexander
January 28th, 2009 at 11:36 pm(AUSTRALIA)
John,
What are your opinions regarding “compromising” with the Republicans? I believe that you don’t compromise with Wrong. It’s one thing to say, “This is what we are going to do, and these are the areas we are going to spend the money in. Do you have suggestions about how we might best spend in the areas we are choosing to spend it in?” It’s entirely possible that they might be able to say something like, “If you put the money toward infrastructure now, the other areas will cost less later.” You know, helpful advice.
It’s a completely different thing to say, “In order to get your vote, what do we have to give up, or let you have, or both, in order to get your support for this bill?” Why does this have to be how you “compromise” with the republicans?
We tried it the Republican way, and this is where we are. Why do we need to “compromise” by giving up what we want in exchange for or, even worse, in addition to, giving them what they want, when they are wrong? You don’t compromise with Wrong, so why do you give them what they want?
And are you forgetting that they lost, and lost big last November? The country has decided that their way doesn’t work, and we rejected it loudly and clearly. Why do you have to give them what they want? You don’t compromise with Wrong.
January 29th, 2009 at 12:42 amJohn.
Thank you for what you’re proving for the world. Which I believe to be integrity, fairness and the people’s voice in politics being heard.
When I met with Obama and then his senate staffer he was clearly not for the embargo on Cub;a and for sure against the current direction of our U.S. Policies with Cuba.
Is President Barack Obama going to abolish the U.S. Embargo on Cuba or continue the failed 50 years of high-jacked U.S. Laws toward Cuba by the minority in Miami? If yes, by when?
Luis Moro
January 29th, 2009 at 9:12 amCuban exile, American Citizen.
http://www.EveryThingCUBA.com
The Republicans are leery of Stimulus plan, all say Higher Taxes to pay for it.
He stated all that in his campaign, he said it to John Boehner, Yes but I won!
Leader Boehner says too many hundreds of millions in the present plan are not what the Stimulus was originally designed to do…create jobs.
My thoughts (repercussion) the even bigger picture and what people really need to know is the deeper reality TRUTH. MAJOR INFLATION as the end result. Not one in Congress has addressed inflation.
January 29th, 2009 at 9:14 amThe entire plan as I understand it will reach there about… $ 2 Trillion. This is 100 % guaranteed to cause double digit Inflation; Why is no one addressing inflation result?
In the past few years, all of the major Democratic constituencies (environmentalists, women, labor, LGBT, ethnic and racial minorities, city-dwellers) have come around to new, holistic vision for the country identified as the “green” agenda. This includes:
*Public transportation and high-speed rail
*More efficient and less polluting energy sources
*Urban, mixed-use living in new and old metro areas
*The technological transformation of our government and other large-scale systems, like health care and education
*Local, sustainable habits, like local food and waste reduction
*Increased investment in the knowledge economy
These are all popular agenda items, would be the fiscal and idealistic equivalent of the Cold War, the space program or World War II, and would secure our country’s prosperity through the 21st Century. Many of these spending items are already in the stimulus, and those that are underfunded (like public transit) will be considered in future bills.
Why hasn’t President Obama articulated these agenda items as a single, interconnected package that the country is so hungry for? I think Americans would love to see a New New Deal of sorts, particularly if the funding is targeted to create new economies and industries, rather than propping up the old ones. Why can’t our car companies start making subway and light rail cars, so we don’t have to buy them from Europe? Why can’t we get a federal tax bill and eliminate FAFSA, instead of having to waste countless hours filling out paperwork? Why can’t we see our cities and new metropolitan areas as the same spaces of hope that suburbia was imagined to be in the 1950s?
Will we get this kind of vision from President Obama this term, or will it be another “Bridge to the 21st Century” that is underfunded and not delivered? I think the vision needs to happen now, as it won’t be realized otherwise.
January 29th, 2009 at 12:04 pmWith two questionable military actions, record debts, falling income , loss of jobs and a looming depression, why would we want to delay repeal of the Bush tax cuts, add more tax cuts, and fail to add tarrifs on imports to protect American manufacturing? It seems to me much of what is propose is simply running aroun a sinking ship instead of plugging the hole. Americans will get behind a move to create jobs, and hold accountable the crimes of the previous administration, you can not spin it as moving ahead if you do not establish the rule of law. Do you not think that failure to hold those in power accountable by past administrations (Ford,Clinton) has led to the present state of lawlessness and disrespect for the law by those in Gov’t and Corporate power?
January 29th, 2009 at 2:49 pmUsing TARP funds to lobby Congress’s favor over taxpayers and voter’s representation is wrong.
We need to have legislation put in place limiting them that they do not “Lobby” Congress for a specified amount of time.
I understand money is viewed as free speech. Yet, for these corporations to recieve Tax Payer money to lobby Congress that could or would in fact overturn the American peoples will of elected officials to represent them. Now using TARP money, they would use taxpayer money as free speech(lobbying) to overturn the peoples will on rules, regulations or legislation that would effect these Wall Street entities with favor over the American people. There is no way to tell if they are using TARP money to lobby or their own.
** Any Bank/corporation should be banned from lobbying, donating to political PAC’s, contributing to political campaigns, or even donating to charities. That recieved tax dollars shall not, for a specific amount of time in line with the American economic turmoil. Until the economy becomes sound again or until any bridge loans are repaid.
How can one get these issues heard and truly “considered”.
February 2nd, 2009 at 2:53 amIf there isn’t any visible response that concerns were taken.
Then it didn’t happen. Right? So how?