Less than 12 hours, folks.
The news that president-elect Barack Obama has offered the position of White House chief of staff to Congressman Rahm Emanuel has generally drawn praise as a canny political move.
However, former Rep. Joe Scarborough disagrees strongly, calling Emanuel “a harsh partisan” and saying on Wednesday that if he accepts the post it would be a “horrible symbol” for Republicans.
Scarborough got into a dust-up over Emanuel with the guests on his MSNBC program, beginning when Time editor Mark Haperin suggested that Obama will be “in a very strong position” when it comes to dealing with Congress because Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid are “nice people … but they’re not the strongest figures in the world.”
“Obama understands legislatures,” Halperin explainued, “and he’s not going to make the mistakes the way Bill Clinton did. … The danger you’re talking about — going too left, letting Congress run roughshod over him — I do not think’s going to happen. … He’s now … offered the chief of staff job to your friend Rahm Emanuel — I think a very shrewd move.”
According to Chris Cillizza at the Washington Post, before being elected to Congress, “Emanuel built a reputation as one of the savviest political minds in the party and also one of the most confrontational and sharp elbowed. His tactics and approach earned him the name ‘Rahmbo.’ … In pursuing Emanuel, Obama is also sending a message to Capitol Hill that he recognizes the need to work with them by selecting one of their own but that he also will not be afraid to play tough.”
Scarborough, however, apparently did not see the choice of Emanuel as a signal to Congressional Democrats that Obama intends to work with them while keeping the upper hand but rather as a slap in the face to Republicans hoping for a bipartisan approach.
“I don’t think that’s a shrewd move,” Scarborough complained. “I respect Rahm politically … [but] that is a very bad sign for a united America because Rahm Emanuel is all brass knuckles. … Barack Obama, if he selects him, has just sent a message to Republicans, ‘Drop dead.'”
“It is a horrible, horrible symbol … to people that believe that Barack Obama’s going to reach out to the center and to Republicans,” continued Scarborough. He insisted that “they needed a Tom Daschle” — referring to the mild-mannered former Senate Majority Leader who was an early Obama supporter.
Let’s get things straight, folks. Obama is not allowed to be “partisan” or “leftist” or “liberal” in any way. Therefore any cabinet or staff appointment that isn’t:
- A Republican woman or minority (or both)
- A Very Sensible Wise Old Man Of Washington that the Village pre-approves (like Tom Daschle)
- Joe F’ckin Lieberman
…will be too “partisan” or “leftist” or “liberal” and Your Liberal Media will freak out like Scarborough did and attack Obama. If Rahm Emanuel, a Hillary Clinton-style centrist “go along to get along” capitulator and the guy that helped Steny Hoyer and the Bush Dogs roll over on EVERYTHING Bush crammed down their throats, is too partisan for a White House job, then Obama will have no choice but to use actual hyper-partisan Bush staffers, otherwise he’s being hyper-partisan himself. He can’t win. The honeymoon’s already f’ckin over for this guy. Understand that anything that isn’t the status quo: Democrats rolling over to do whatever the extremist wing of the GOP wants every second of every day, is just too “partisan” or “leftist” or “liberal”. Shame on Obama playing the same old Washington insider games, the Washington insiders will say!
But then again I’ve been calling this reaction from the Village Idiots for months now.
So you can’t say you’re surprised. The Village is now enforcing the Status Quo, and even before he’s sworn in the next ten weeks will be a relentless assault on the Democratic leadership in Congress and what Obama should do to resist them at every opportunity.
Don’t be surprised if the Village starts making the “suggestion” that Nancy and Harry step down. I wouldn’t be opposed to that actually…we can do FAR better than those two for “leadership” in Congress.
But they will want Nancy and Harry replaced with Bush loyalists like Steny Hoyer and Joe F’ckin Lieberman as a “new breed of post-partisan sensible centrism”.
Hell, I’m honestly waiting for at least one Sunday talk show bobblehead to pitch having Obama having the Democrats nominate actual Republicans for leading their caucus as a bold leadership move.
After all, House Speaker Michele Bachman and Senate Majority Leader Ted Stevens is what the Village really wants ANYWAY.
