The Architecture For Change (An Interesting Start)

As Obama prepares to take office, the lingering issue of "The Economy" may be the last thing he will need to deal with. With the on-going controversy that has clouded Washington since the November election, I just keep telling myself, "Change Is-A Comin', Change Is-A Comin' ". I would think you would want to ride into the Oval Office on a white stallion, rather than an stench-ridden donkey, dragging baggage through the "foyer". And as we deal with a guy like Rod Blagojevich and the subsequent audacity of Roland Burris, I can't help but wonder, has "cloning" been legalized in Chicago? Given the circumstances surrounding Rod's selection; can the Democrats please appoint someone this year WITHOUT "baggage; just one? But, praise should be awarded to the Democrats, that chose not to play politics; and have stood up against the appointment of Roland. Lawmakers will be grilling Burris on several items, but most notably: contributions made to Mr. Blagojevich's campaign, how Rod's wife obtained a job with a group affiliated with Mr. Burris' business partner, and why the governor's criminal lawyer approached Roland about the Senate seat rather than a current staff member. Of course we can not assume, but anyone riding on the coat tails of Blagojevich, doesn't help their case for innocence. Again we may have proven that justice does not matter, and it is okay to undermine our Democracy; but let's give Mr. Burris his day in "court", shall we.

And without surprise, the "Ghost Of Blogojevich" doesn't want to depart so quickly: at least in spirit. When Bill Richardson was appointed to Obama's cabinet as Commerce Secretary, someone should have questioned this selection. And no, this had nothing to do with his "Tall-Tale" stories on the campaign trail about his National Guard death benefit legislation: when he stated that he was prompted to increase these benefits after talking with a mother of dead son killed in Iraq (which was not true). Now, that is a reason to question his ethics, but to Obama, certainly not a reason to reject Richardson as an appointee. The real issue is with an ongoing FBI investigation into his dealings with CDR Financial Services, which included questionable spending initiatives on transportation services in his state. Richardson decided to "opt-out" early; maybe he knew his appointment would be short lived, hhmmm. But I can say I am proud that a politician did the right thing, and did not run "amok" in the art of denial, ridiculing justice by waiving the flag of arrogance and self-righteousness. An oddity, I know. So, I admire his decision; well done Mr. Richardson. But unfortunately is does not end there, as recent developments about Tim Geitner (selection of Secretary of the Treasury) are coming to light. He seems to have a small tax problem; hello, he is not paying them! Of course he is citing some clerical mistakes, which I am sure will not effect his job in overseeing our monetary system and a current trillion dollar debacle? And despite the community at large that thinks this guy is a financial genius of sorts, I would have to chalk this up to another round of absurdity in the political arena. The fact that he worked for the IMF should at least give you some insights to the world of tax-free living; see IMF reimbursements for more details. Wow; now I know what it is like to be an independent contractor. Now, you would have thought someone would have first initiated a background check (a little vetting, please). Of course, any of these selection "mis-firings" will not directly tarnish Obama's image, but as citizens, we should be concerned about the "Status Quo" of the "Pay-To-Play" philosophy that is the standard practice in Washington. Obama knows all to well, he will never "Change" that; he is just another "Cog" in the problem (they all play it). And after a further investigation into Obama's current cabinet selections, there are enough controversial and questionable selections, there may be no hidden surprises. Pay attention to Hilda Solis (Labor Secretary) and Rahm Emanuel (Chief Of Staff) for the next four years. If you ran in fear of a potential "Marxist-Nation" and a complete takeover by the "workers party" red-revolution, Hilda may be your gal. And to discredit any notions that Barack was going to be "Pro-Arab", Rahm fits the political bill; but with his flagrant behavior and, less than acceptable social graces, he will be another pit bull (besides Joe Biden) on the White House lawn. This is a guy they nicknamed "Rahm-bo" for his "take-no-prisoners" attitude. So what if he mailed rotten fish to a former disgruntled co-worker after they parted ways. So what if he stood up at a celebratory dinner, after the 1996 elections, and rattled off a list of his betrayers, while stabbing a knife in the table shouting, "Dead!, Dead!, Dead!". What family man after a 80 hour work week, a nagging wife, and 5 bratty kids, hasn't said that 1,000 times in a moment of lapsed sanity. Personally, a guy who spent time working with combat units in Israel and is tough as nails get my vote; at least he understands how the world operates and does not join a current laundry list of pantie-wearing whiners in Washington. You think the critics blasted the Bush administration for prisoner interrogation (As for me, do what you have to do, we have lives to save), this guy will make "GITMO" seem like a ride through Disney World. Okay, maybe the "Pirates Of The Caribbean", but hey, it is still Disney! And you thought his past "Chicago" connections and invaluable "Freddie Mac" experience would be his political baggage. So, with all this controversy and questionable selections, I am trying to see past the minutia and envision a ray of endearing hope. But, maybe it was not about a faulty vetting process, but perhaps more about the political pecking order given the nature of Obama's freshman status. After hearing each cabinet selection pick, one after the other, I can not help but think; would this have been Hillary's cabinet; was it "Bill-Like"? Face it, there is a repetitive theme; is there not? Now, I thought change was about redirecting the nation from "Politics as Usual"? But can you blame Obama; you do need experience (whether good or not, or maybe not), but more importantly, you also have to "pay-to-play". There is no doubt, that the "Clinton Machine" was not going to be silent during Obama's cabinet appointments. Did you honestly think Hillary was "not" going to own something in this administration? Whether is was fear of retribution, or genuine consideration, Obama needed to "rope in" the Hillary sect to truly bring the Democratic party towards complete unity. As you know, it is all about party loyalty and paying back debts. And, agendas pass more easily, with everyone marching in "lock-step".

So, after a few skids and bumps, to go along with a lingering global financial crisis, Obama has enough on his plate. Mr. Blogojevich will hopefully face justice, Mr. Burris should fade away, Bill Richardson is gone (and maybe Mr. Geitner too), and only "time will tell" if the rest of the "Usual Suspects" will remain. But there is a reason to be doubtful, because until we "change" Washington, there is no reason to believe that the next administration's policies will be dictated by public interest, rather than politics. So, if I was Obama, I would hold off on "jumping-the-gun" to implement his current economic juggernaut, full of "bailout" bills and "stimulus" plans, and focus on selecting the correct team of leaders. He has plenty of time to "carve out" a name for himself, right now he needs to "carve out" the proverbial fat. He, at least, owes that to the voters that "believed" he could bring "change", if not the nation. I just hope that his leadership plan is far superior to his "vetting" process.