Quote:
Originally Posted by larrymcg421
I'm surprised people are making such a big deal about Obama appointing people that worked for Clinton. He was in charge for 8 years and he was a Democrat. So alot of the people that have experience in different fields that will want to work for Obama had also worked in the Clinton administration. Now, I think it's pretty faulty to argue that everyone that worked for Clinton is a "Clinton" person just because they worked in his administration. Especially since many of them (Richardson, Holder) actually endorsed Obama over Hilary.
And really, some of these examples are just lame. Napolitano? Just because she was a US Attorney under Clinton? That's quite a stretch.
And Daschle is a ridiculous link. I mean, we're not even trying to have an honest debate if we're going to try to connect the dots like that. Give me a break.
I don't think anyone expected Obama to appoint Ray from the Walgreen's pharmacy to HHS. He's going to appoint people that are capable for the job (i.e. no Brown/FEMA situation), and that likely means some of them got experience working at some level in the Clinton administration.
|
He's supposed to be the candidate for change, isn't he? This isn't change. This is just going down the same road we went down 16 years ago. If they were so great, Gore would have breezed to the Presidency in 2000, but they were not, just more of the same (and same BS we got from Bush II, BTW, who brought us rehashes of Bush I).
Heck, the policies of the Clinton administration had a big hand in the loosening of lending restrictions that are basically at the core of what we're going through today in the economy, and this is the same group of people who didn't talk Clinton into taking care of OBL while they had good chances in the late 90s. These are the people we want back?
I want to see new blood in there, outside the box thinkers who really can create change. Not the SOS.