Originally Posted By markymouse After a woman came pretty close to being elected as our first woman President, and another had a shot at being our first woman Vice President, isn't it a heart warming sign of change to see four women in the cabinet, one of them an African American, and another, an Asian American? No, not Obama's choices for his cabinet. The current Republican cabinet. Ignoring "cabinet" positions like head of the EPA, ambassador to the UN, and the like, looking just at "real" cabinet positions in charge of a real department and in the line of succession, with only two names to go (Labor and Transportation), Obama has managed to name just two women and just one Hispanic. Note to Obama's team - Bill Richardson might not be the only competent Hispanic in the country. Bush managed to find Hispanic Americans for Commerce, Justice, and Housing and Urban Development. Of course, Bush's team might have been better at finding a cabinet "that looked like America" than Obama's folks. Bush managed to even find an Arab American, and a woman not just at Interior but also at Agriculture. Bush even managed a cabinet member who was a woman AND a minority - Elaine Chao at Labor. Obama on the other hand has gone with two (white) women, one Hispanic, one African American, two Asian Americans (a record in that category), and seven white men. And lest you think it's just the left that has cause for concern, Obama has only managed one Republican, and he's not registered as a Republican. And if anyone cares, there's also the issue of geographic diversity. If you count California and Hawaii as western, Obama has chosen westerners for Interior, Agriculture, Commerce, Health and Human Services, Energy, Veterans Affairs and Homeland Security. He has chosen Southerners for ... nothing. Why is my disappointment with Obama boiling over today? Google "Obama inauguration invocation" to see who will be leading our country in prayer as Obama is sworn in. If the name doesn't say anything to you, try googling it along with "Prop 8". Which side won?
Originally Posted By hopemax You are already out of date...just announced a Republican for Transportation secretary. Ray LaHood.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 Hey, it could have been Rev Wright leading the invocation - or another Chicago,Father Michael Phleger...the second of which would not have surprised me....
Originally Posted By markymouse "Is there a cohesive point to this thread?" The point to this thread - cohesive or otherwise - is that Obama's lack of diversity in his cabinet, the abundance of "centrists" and hawks, and his choice of who to give the invocation make him seem less forward looking than even the most recent Republican administration, at least on the issue of diversity. But mostly I'm just growing more and more disillusioned with Obama. He's a Democratic Leadership Council centrists who happens to have black skin and a black wife, who was lucky enough not to have been in the Senate early enough to have voted for the war. I figured that out a long time ago, but it still comes as a disappointment when his cabinet is less diverse than a typical Republican cabinet, and when his choice to lead us in prayer is an active supporter of Prop 8. I guess I should acknowledge where he has embraced diversity. Two Asian Americans in the cabinet is great. And clearly he understands some aspects of diversity - he kicked off his primary campaign along side a black homophobic evangelical and he'll be entering office along side a white homophobic evangelical.
Originally Posted By markymouse "Hey, it could have been Rev Wright leading the invocation - or another Chicago,Father Michael Phleger...the second of which would not have surprised me...." Or it could have been any of the thousands of pro-peace, pro-gay rights progressive ministers in this country. The right wing does not have a monopoly on faith. And the President had a chance to show that there are smart, moving, positive progressive Christians, that the choices aren't Wright or the right (sorry I couldn't help myself).
Originally Posted By Mr X **I think somebody forgot to turn off the radio.** lol. ***is that Obama's lack of diversity in his cabinet*** Hardly a "lack" of diversity just because it happens to be somewhat less diverse than the last guy. How does it stack up throughout history? Second most diverse? Third? Anyway, maybe he just didn't think about race when looking to fill the positions with the best people available. He certainly wasn't shy about hiring his former bitter adversary Hillary Clinton, because he believed she'd be the best Sec of State. Would you have preferred he went out if his way to find a multiracial, vertically challenged, cross-eyed Sherpa just to make sure and fill THAT quota? Oh, brother! ***the abundance of "centrists" and hawks*** Is "centrist" a bad thing now? Should we start complaining about all those lousy centrists ruining America? So hard to keep up! ***and his choice of who to give the invocation make him seem less forward looking than even the most recent Republican administration*** Meh. That guy didn't say anything more than most religious types on the issue. He's certainly not spewing vitriol on the level that lots of other evangelicals have. ***at least on the issue of diversity*** Except that he, himself, exemplifies the issue of diversity all on his own. Besides, if he'd hired "too many" minorities people would be moaning about THAT, wouldn't they? Perhaps he's trying to sooth the concerns all the freaked out dummies who think this terrorist socialist muslim is going to bring in all his evil cronies and destroy America.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder "But mostly I'm just growing more and more disillusioned with Obama. He's a Democratic Leadership Council centrists who happens to have black skin and a black wife, who was lucky enough not to have been in the Senate early enough to have voted for the war. I figured that out a long time ago, but it still comes as a disappointment when his cabinet is less diverse than a typical Republican cabinet, and when his choice to lead us in prayer is an active supporter of Prop 8." Nobody was more vocal about Prop 8 around here than me I'd reckon, but I'm not going to knock Obama for this choice. You might want to consider that there's something to be said for keeping your friends close, and your enemies closer. Moreover, it's often a sign of self-confidence that a person can surround himself with people who don't fit his own mold. He wants ideas, not yes men and women. Further, I'm not sure, given your scattered stance here, there would be much of anything Obama could do to appease you. Let's see how these people do before criticizing them. We've had enough of rigid right wing ideology for eight years. Centrists seem like a breath of fresh air to me.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder One more thing. Diversity just for the sake of it is never a good thing. I'd much rather Obama picked who he thought was the best person for the job regardless of race or gender. If he picked who he thought were the best people and they all looked like they came from Houston Mission Control I'd be alright with that.
Originally Posted By markymouse "Hardly a "lack" of diversity just because it happens to be somewhat less diverse than the last guy. How does it stack up throughout history? Second most diverse? Third?" Women just came really, really close to having their daughters grow up with a woman President. Obama has appointed two women to head cabinet departments. Second most diverse? Third? Lets see: Obama 2 women GW Bush #2 4 women GW Bush #1 3 women Clinton #2 4 women Clinton #1 3 women GHW Bush 1 woman Reagan #2 2 women Reagan #1 0 women Carter 3 women So, no, not second or third. Obama is tied with Ronald Reagan's second administration for sixth place in terms of women in the cabinet. Who wants me to run down the list to let you know how his 1 African American or his 1 Hispanic compares to the other Presidents in the last thirty years or so? I agree diversity isn't everything. But it is important. And if the crossed eyed Sherpas made up the majority of the US population and the vast majority of the Democratic voters - and came within a few dozen delegates of having the first crossed eyed Sherpa President in over two hundred years - and if the Republicans seemed to be really, really interested in taking away the crossed eyed Sherpa vote - then I'd be pretty tempted to give those cross eyed Sherpas their due. I don't think Obama will have a cross eyed Sherpa revolt next election - but if he loses to a woman with an Hispanic running mate, it might not be a total surprise.
Originally Posted By markymouse I do have to give Obama credit for a rather unique bit of diversity - his cabinet includes someone reviled by some Asian American activists for vilifying Chinese American energy research scientists AND a Chinese American energy research scientist. What are the odds?
Originally Posted By ecdc I'm incredibly impressed that Obama invited Rick Warren to give the invocation. I really have no love of those who use religion to advance an anti-gay agenda, so don't think of me as a Warren fan. Rather, I admire Obama for his true inclusivity. I admire him, as SPP said, for his clear-headed ability to include people that don't always think like him. For good or ill, Warren represents a large number of people in our country, and I'm glad they have an opportunity to feel included. This is real leadership. As for diversity, what allowed Obama to win was by not making race an issue. He stressed change and he stressed that he was the best man for the job. Obama is better than some affirmative action quota; so far he's been able to transcend our culture's small-minded need to look at everyone through the lens of gender or race, rather than their accomplishments. If, at the end of Obama's 8 years (yup, the 8 is deliberate) we're able to worry a little bit less about someone's race or gender or ethnicity, then we'll have him to thank for it.
Originally Posted By markymouse "Rather, I admire Obama for his true inclusivity." Let him invite a Buddhist, a Hindu, or, heaven forbid, a Muslim to pray at his inauguration, and I'll admire him for his true inclusivity. "Obama is better than some affirmative action quota; so far he's been able to transcend our culture's small-minded need to look at everyone through the lens of gender or race, rather than their accomplishments." I'm sorry to be in such an argumentative mood, it must be the WE vibe rubbing off. Obama was elected because of his accomplishments? Ask McCain, Hillary Clinton, Biden, Richardson or anyone else he beat if they think that he won because of his accomplishments. The Onion describes his top Senate success as "Being elected to the Senate too late to vote for the war." Prior to being elected President, Obama's biggest electoral victory was beating a right wing black Republican who didn't even live in Illinois. And as for race not mattering to Obama's election - I am thrilled that so many Americans of all colors voted for an African American for President. That is truly a great thing. But I don't pretend he is, as some say, "post race". If African Americans had voted for Obama at the same rate whites did in the primary, he never would have racked up so many votes in Southern primaries. Some brilliant politicos figured out the strategic viability of a black person who could sweep the black vote in the South without turning off moderate white voters elsewhere. Race was far from being a non-issue. It was the essential element. Do you think if his father had been an exchange student from Bolivia or Belgium, we'd have ever heard of this guy? Sorry to be so bitter. In the primary, 75% of gays in California voted for Clinton. My partner and I enthusiastically voted for Obama. And my enthusiasm has been slipping ever since. The last straw was realizing that if Clinton had been on the ticket instead of Obama, more young women would have voted in California and fewer African Americans would have, which probably would have been enough to swing Prop 8 the other way. I've been burned by Democrats on this before, and apparently its all come out on this thread. I'd tried, quite unsuccessfully, to get tickets to take our oldest to the inauguration. No chance with over 3,000 people requesting tickets from our local member of Congress. But I tried. But the thought of being there with my son, hearing a man who told his flock that fighting my right to marry was a moral cause. Ick!
Originally Posted By Dabob2 Okay, so now three women and another Hispanic? So that's as many women as Bush's first term? <Note to Obama's team - Bill Richardson might not be the only competent Hispanic in the country. Bush managed to find Hispanic Americans for Commerce, Justice, and Housing and Urban Development.> Note that the Justice head was one Alberto Gonzalez. Hispanic yes, but also a Bush toady from way back, incompetent, and quite possibly criminal. I'd rather have competence than "enough" of a particular group. However... <Or it could have been any of the thousands of pro-peace, pro-gay rights progressive ministers in this country. The right wing does not have a monopoly on faith. And the President had a chance to show that there are smart, moving, positive progressive Christians, that the choices aren't Wright or the right (sorry I couldn't help myself).> I'm with you on that one. Warren may have been a canny choice to placate evangelicals, but it leaves a semi-bad taste in my mouth. He certainly could have chosen a progressive Christian; perhaps someone not well-known who would therefore alienate no one, but who would instantly garner interest and might even have used the notoriety to turn Americans on to the fact that, as you say, "the choices aren't Wright or the right."
Originally Posted By markymouse Three women, two Hispanics, and two Asian Americans isn't too shabby. While they aren't REAL cabinet positions, he does have African American women at the EPA and at the UN. Still, I think having only 3 women in the cabinet, after everything that Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin accomplished in the past year or two, falls short.
Originally Posted By Mr X What did Palin "accomplish"? Nothing. She was picked (foolishly) by one guy. She got no votes, she was a complete unknown until McCain tapped her.
Originally Posted By markymouse < Yeah, I actually did hesitate a minute on that while I searched for another way to say it, because of exactly the point you raise, X. Thomas Jefferson had "President of the United States" left off of his tombstone, because he didn't consider it an accomplishment. Being entrusted by others may be an honor, but it isn't an accomplishment. What you do with what you've been entrusted with, that is your chance at accomplishment. So, by my reading of Jefferson's definition of accomplishment, you are absolutely right that Sarah Palin did not accomplish much.
