An early indication of whether he intends to pursue a
comprehensive radical agenda will be his key personnel
appointments. Obviously, Cabinet secretaries and agency heads are
extremely important, both substantively and symbolically. But the
workhorses of any presidency are senior White House staff, deputy
secretaries and deputy administrators, and assistant secretaries
and assistant administrators. If President-elect Obama fills these
positions with members of the professoriate, union activists,
environmental extremists and the like, then the country will be in
for a very rough ride.
Jim Burnley served as secretary of transportation in
the Reagan administration.
John H. Fund
American politics has shifted slightly but clearly to the left
in the wake of Bush administration failures. But exit polls showed
only 51 percent of Americans want government to do more for them.
One of the most striking successes of Barack Obama’s campaign is
that he was able to convince 19 percent of conservatives that he
was going to cut their taxes, while only 12 percent of
conservatives thought John McCain would do the same. Thus, even
some conservatives could find a reason to vote for change in the
person of Barack Obama.
As Democratic pollster Doug Schoen, who helped Bill Clinton win
reelection in 1996, puts it: “This election is not a mandate for
Democratic policies. Rather, it is a wholesale rejection of the
policies of George W. Bush, Republicans, and to a lesser extent
John McCain.”
If the Democrats govern as if there is no Republican Party, they
are likely headed to the kind of reaction that Bill Clinton faced
when he made the same misjudgment after the 1992 election victory,
following a meeting in Little Rock, Arkansas, with then Senate
Majority Leader George Mitchell and House Speaker Tom Foley. At
that point, Clinton decided to defer to Congress on key elements of
his legislative agenda, and the subsequent lurch to the left did
incalculable damage to his presidency.
That may be one reason why Barack Obama has chosen Rahm Emanuel,
a respected member of the congressional leadership, to become his
new White House chief of staff. Someone will have to tell Speaker
Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid that the first
two years of Democratic dominance of Congress after their 2006
sweep has left them with a Congress that has an approval rating
even below that of President Bush.
To the extent that Barack Obama is a successful president, it
will be in direct proportion to how much he remains his own man and
trusts the political instincts that have gotten him this far, this
fast.
John H. Fund is a columnist for the
Wall Street Journal and The American
Spectator’s Politics columnist.
Quin Hillyer
The conservative movement has been hobbled, badly, for quite
some time. Despite all of its influence, the Movement (I’ll
capitalize from here on for clarity) has not had one of its own at
the top of a presidential ticket since 1984. Worse, the Movement
now claims only a minority of elected officials at virtually every
level of government. Worse still, even some officials who are
considered Movement types are seriously lacking in their ability to
combine principle with practical politics. They just don’t know how
to meld the two. They don’t understand how practical politics and
principle are mutually reinforcing.
The central mission for the Movement, therefore, is to convince
candidates and officeholders alike of the enduring truth that good
principles (and good policies) are good politics. Here’s
how the Movement should pursue that mission: A grand coalition of
conservative leaders ought to combine forces for a Candidate
Recruitment Political Action Committee—with great fanfare. It
should use all its savvy and muscle to make its imprimatur
essential for any candidate right of center, and should make
crystal clear to voters nationwide why its candidates merit
support.
It should do so by promulgating a clear statement of principles.
(One model, perhaps too lengthy, can be found in the mission
statement at www.conservativecompact.com.)
It should then require every candidate who wants its endorsement to
attend a weekend-long training session, perhaps modeled after those
at the Leadership Institute, that would include an advance
assignment to read every word of the Declaration, the Constitution,
and the Federalist Papers, plus at least one
popular-literature account of the 1787 Constitutional Convention.
(Three good ones are Miracle at Philadelphia, by Catherine
Drinker Bowen; Decision in Philadelphia by
Christopher and James Collier; and A Brilliant Solution,
by Carol Berkin.)
It would not be a wasted exercise. No better example can be
cited for public servants trying to combine practical politics with
principle, under pressure, for posterity, than can the
Constitutional Convention.
Put that together with practical, hands-on training in modern
political technology, and with an acclaimed CRPAC panel at the end
of the training/selection process to make an endorsement in every
federal race (along with vast organizational and financial support
to go along with it), and suddenly you have a cadre of candidates
who are fit for office and readily identifiable by the public.
links of london sale | 9.10.09 @ 10:31PM
Thanks for your information, i have read it, very good!
links of london sale | 9.10.09 @ 10:40PM
Thanks for your information, i have read it, very good!
guo | 7.1.10 @ 5:05AM
www.wmvconverterformac.com