apointment and disapointments

In a recent communication to left critics of Obama's cabinet choices, Barack Obama's deputy campaign manager Steve Hildebrand spelled out some of the problems our country faces. He then said, "The problems I mentioned above and the many I didn't, suggest that our president surround himself with the most qualified people to address these challenges. After all, he was elected to be the president of all the people - not just those on the left."

I have not been nearly as outspoken about Obama's choices as I think I should be. I think it is fortunate that others are raising concerns. Mr Hildebrand's comments merit a response.

First to say that we want a cabinet that is left is not just to say we won so lets take the spoils. To argue for a more left cabinet is to argue for a cabinet that does represent the views of all the people (of the united states). Consistently The American people express opinions (in polls and such) that are to the left of Americas politicians. If President Obama's goal is to surround himself with a diversity of intelligent opinions that represent the spectrum of American political opinion, that diversity would include someone like Medea Benjamin of code pink, or even Noam Chomsky. From the standpoint of pragmatism I understand why even the left would not rush into such appointments. But the diversity of opinion argument does not hold up if it amounts only to diversity to the right. Nor does it hold water if a couple of people from the left are appointed to token offices like the department of the interior.

Second there is the question of qualifications. This concept is too often represented as intelligence and experience. The third element of what makes one most qualified for a position is perspective. One can be brilliant and wrong. Experience can bring baggage. As we face so many crisis we do need leadership of perspective. we need good ideas, and frankly I think that the left has among the best ideas to address the problems we face. On the surface they may not seem pragmatic, but pragmatism that picks convenient solutions that are easy to push through may be penny wise and pound foolish.

Now let me get to the issue of criticism. This is the rough part. I'm suspect Mr Hildebrand and his colleagues in the Obama inner circle may observe that criticisms are coming and Mr Obama is not even in office yet. They may feel unnerved for a variety of legitimate reasons. and Mr Hildebrand's article is really a request that we give Obama's centrist cabinet a chance to work to fix the problems we face. I believe they will have that chance, but perspective does mater. A fix can be progress, or it can hold thing back. Critique when fairly given, to one who can listen as I believe that Barack Obama can, has the potential to strengthen. If Obama and his transition team hear that there are voices on the left that are not represented in his cabinet that are voices of his constituency perhaps he is more likely to act to include such voices.

I hope that critiques of appointments will continue, I hope the critiques will help strengthen the new administration. For those of us who raise critiques I would suggest that we strive to give fair criticism based on perspective not personality. We should understand that mistakes will be made but we can hope that our perspectives will help correct them.