2004 Presidential Transition
Here's an article about the President and Condoleezza Rice from the New York Times via the Denver Post [November 17, 2004, "Rice is Bush's pick for Cabinet"]. From the article, "Powell's departure has been widely seen as a victory for hardliners in the administration who chafed at diplomacy in the face of what they saw as urgent threats to national security and a perhaps fleeting opportunity to promote democracy among Arab and Islamic nations. But it is not clear whether Rice, as secretary of state, will be any more prone to siding with Vice President Dick Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld than was Powell."
"An early test will be the selection of her No. 2 at the State Department. There was speculation that the White House might settle on John R. Bolton, currently undersecretary of state for arms control and international security, who has been an architect of the administration's hardline policies toward North Korea and Iran."
The Denver Post editorial staff analyzes Dr. Rice's appointment [November 17, 2004, "Rice's nomination comes at critical time"]. From the editorial, "Her nomination comes at a critical point, with the U.S. in a shooting war in Iraq, American troops in Afghanistan, and the war on terror still on the front burner. Along with all that, the State Department will have to deal with curbing the nuclear aspirations of Iran and North Korea, forging a lasting peace between Israel and the Palestinians and re-establishing strong ties with Europe."
Taegan Goddard: "Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge and Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson will step down, the AP reports. The news, first reported on CNN and MSNBC, is that Thompson 'was looking for a new position in President Bush's Cabinet.'"
Update: Daily Kos: "You thought I was gone, but one last hit before I board the plane. I really do want to let go and start my vacation, but this story demanded comment. Democratic Party leaders said Wednesday they want to know why Sen. John Kerry ended his presidential campaign with more than $15 million in the bank, money that could have helped Democratic candidates across the country. Some said he will be pressured to give the money to Democratic campaign committees rather than save it for a potential White House bid in 2008. 'Democrats are questioning why he sat on so much money that could have helped him defeat George Bush or helped down-ballot races, many of which could have gone our way with a few more million dollars," said Donna Brazile, campaign manager for Al Gore's 2000 presidential race. Brazile is a member of the 400-plus member Democratic National Committee, which meets early next year to pick a new party chairman. One high-ranking member of the DNC, speaking on condition of anonymity, said word of Kerry's nest egg has stirred anger on the committee and could hurt his chances of putting an ally in the chairmanship. That alledged ally is likely Tom Vilsack, who Kerry is depending on to grease the skids for his likely 2008 run. $15 million may have netted us a couple Senate seats, more than a few House seats. For example, $1 million would've allowed the cash-strapped Mongiardo campaign to compete against Sen. Bunning's air attack the last two weeks of the Kentucky Senate contest. Instead, Kerry hoarded the cash for his 2008 run. I am a reform Democrat."
Coyote Gulch thinks that the Kerry campaign probably needed some good accountants and software. They probably couldn't be sure of the amount of extra dough on hand. I wonder if they were spending as much money as possible with the crew they had? 
Update: The Nation: "There is no 'tyranny of the minority.' In fact, if Senate Democrats were to make real on the threat of a filibuster -- which halts Senate action as one senator or a group of senators engage in an extended discussion of a nomination or issue being considered by the chamber -- it would only be because there is no other way to get Senate Republicans and the White House to consult with the opposition party in the manner that the nation's founders intended." Thanks to TalkLeft for the link.
Update: Josh Marshall: "As we wrote earlier, the shift is not toward right, left or center, but toward more direct White House control and the silencing of dissident voices in the civil service."
6:18:35 AM 
|
|
