This weekend the WaPo reported Obama’s transition team will restore Federal safeguards the Bushies tossed overboard (or never even allowed onboard) during their misrule. Should the WaPo report prove accurate, we’ll have a lot to celebrate: the article plots a 180 degree course reversal for the White House. The good news? Obama’s reportedly planning to restore American safeguards for us all. Qui bono? All of us who eat food, drink water, breathe air, go to work (or love someone who does), or may fall ill (or love someone who may). Every living American, in other words. The bad news? When Obama takes the helm, he’ll assume power over Executive Branch bodies staffed with some of the very saboteurs who tossed Americans’ health and safety over the side. What plans does Obama and his crew have for the saboteurs?
Here’s more detail about the reported good news:
A team of four dozen advisers, working for months in virtual solitude, set out to identify regulatory and policy changes Obama could implement soon after his inauguration….
The list of executive orders targeted by Obama’s team could well get longer in the coming days, as Bush’s appointees rush to enact a number of last-minute policies in an effort to extend his legacy….
Obama himself has signaled, for example, that he intends to reverse Bush’s controversial limit on federal funding of embryonic stem cell research….
The new president is also expected to lift a so-called global gag rule barring international family planning groups that receive U.S. aid from counseling women about the availability of abortion….
The president-elect has said, for example, that he intends to quickly reverse the Bush administration’s decision last December to deny California the authority to regulate carbon dioxide emissions from automobiles. "Effectively tackling global warming demands bold and innovative solutions, and given the failure of this administration to act, California should be allowed to pioneer," Obama said in January.
So far, so good — assuming, of course, the WaPo report accurately describes what Obama will direct his crew to do once he is in the White House. Assuming President Obama really will confront corporatist power.
Reversing the corporatist course the Bushies, Rethugs, and DLC plotted for us all from below decks in the Executive Branch goes part-way towards protecting our health and safety. To finish the job, Obama’s crew will have to root out the corporatist saboteurs stowed away in the Executive Branch. Where should they start looking?
Where would corporatist saboteurs have the most power to toss out Federal safeguards that protect us? The Federal courts are one place. That’s why the Rethugs packed the Federal Bench with judicial nominees from the Federalist society: the corporatists’ wholly-owned finishing school for attorneys planning on lucrative (if recumbent) careers as capital’s prostitutes. [Future posts will have more on strategies for removing the most egregious saboteurs from the Federal Bench.]
Where else do corporatist saboteurs find the greatest power to throw away Federal safeguards that protect We The People? In the Executive Branch, they’ve wormed into the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Why? OMB is where the Executive Branch attempts to control the Legislative Branch’s work. How? OMB claims review power over all the regulations (rules) Federal agencies devise to implement the legislation (laws) Congress passes. When Big Coal or Big Poison or Big Toxic Food can’t buy off the House and Senate votes required to prevent a bill from becoming Federal law, they turn to OMB and the relevant Executive Branch entity (Energy, Agriculture, FDA, EPA, etc) and the corporatist saboteurs they’ve planted there and try to block regulations that would really implement whatever legislation Congress may have passed.
Under Reagan, Bush the Spook, and Bush the Torturer, OMB has been where regulations that safeguard all Americans (and the resources we and our children depend on for our very survival) go to die. This won’t be any surprise to Senator Obama: the Senate and OMB battle each other regularly. The corporatist servants at OMB who were Bushie political appointees will be out the door January 20: the corporatists hired on as permanent Federal employees will remain in place.
Once Obama’s at the helm, what will he and his crew do to protect all Americans from the corporatist saboteurs the Bushies hired on as permanent Federal employees at OMB? President Obama will find Bushies salted away corporatist moles as permanent Federal employees throughout the Executive Branch: Interior, Justice, Agriculture, Energy, FDA, EPA, BLM, Forest Service, CDC…every possible instrument of Federal power to preserve our health, safety, and natural wealth.
What will Obama and his crew do to wall off the corporatist moles the Bushies left behind to sabotage the regulations we Americans require to remain safe and healthy?
Related posts:
Spotlight
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search
If the political appointees enforce truly progressive policies, the corporatist moles will have limited options: they can either change their spots and do as the Obama administration directs, or they can quit and get a higher-paying corporate job, or they can go undercover and try to create damage, but very quietly. Maybe a few true believers might try sabotage, but the rewards are limited.
The caveat is that we have to be sure that the political appointees will push a progressive agenda.
I have a plan in place to insure we get some of our safeguards back if Obama doesn’t do it voluntarily
Evenin’, Dr Murphy
We’ll see.
Digg
Yes. We’ll be watching this carefully.
I’ll believe it when I see it
Obama and crew will have thier work cut out for them.
Bush and crew have made one hell of a mess!!!!
They really ruled like there was no tomorrow. And that includes being replaced by their political enemies. They seemed to really have believed the permanent R majority story. I can assure you that my wingnut son fell for it.
I won’t draw an easy breath until Jan 21st. I have a strong appreciation for the vagaries of Murphy.
A December surprise?
Hi Kirk,
Here’s a suggestion for the Obama team:
Each Federal agency will have a new director (political appointee) in charge.
Across the board, the new directors should define, in writing, the mission of that agency.
i.e. the Environmental Protection Agency must make protecting the environment it’s most important mission. (duh)
Every employee will be asked to sign on to the mission, in writing. Those that refuse will be fired. Going forward any employee who fails to support the mission, or works against it, will be fired.
Let those that get fired hire the despised trial lawyers to try and get around the mission statement.
1. Obama should establish a bureaucratic Siberia in Minot or Biloxi and transfer all Bush-loyalist career employees there. They should be put to work proofreading and remormatting documents from the Roosevelt and Truman administration administrations.
He can’t fire them without cause, but after a few months with dial phones, 8086 computers, and two timed fifteen-minute bathroom breaks a day, most of them will probably quit.
2. Besides looking at the executive orders, he should look at the signing statements. He should repeal every bill that Bush ever made a signing statement for and repass it identically with a new signing statement.
Yes I’m serious. No, I don’t think it will happen.
Smells like a loyalty oath to me.
OT, but lol funny!
Just had to bring this over for those who may not frequent TPM:
A loyalty oath? You must be kidding.
Asking someone to do the job that they are hired for is not a loyalty oath.
Folks that were hired because they were loyal to Bush and not to the agency that hired them need to be terminated. For cause. (failure to do the job.)
LOL
Thanks. I saw that earlier & loved it.
Keith O. just did a dynamite Special Comment on Prop 8
Yes. He seemed choked up too.
My God I am not gay but tears at KO comment as Human
Made me tear up.
Kindly requesting your digg help on the previous post by Ian, looks poised to take off if we get a few more:
Digg this please
Thank you Kirk for allowing this off topic…and here’s Kirk’s
Should the WaPo report prove accurate, we’ll have a lot to celebrate: the article plots a 180 degree course reversal for the White House.
But the powers-that-(used-to?)-be are fightin’ like hell to keep the status fully and completely quo.
I noted on a prior thread that CNN’s Wolfie was pushing the “Obama better be very, very careful, right panel?” line this evening. Said panel then unanimously shouted him down for his maroonishness.
Obama, I’m afraid, is in for eight years of bare-knuckle fighting.
He’ll probably look a lot like Morgan Freeman by the end of his Presidency.
Rachel points out that Obama out-alpha-dogged W bigtime today.
Mrs. Greenspan is amazed that Obama talked about the economy with W.
awfully poor taste to bring up such a trivial topic
Looks like “that one” is letting everyone know who’s in charge. Very, very nice. Gobama !
Yes. And, while watching the live coverage this morning, I saw the way Obama put his hand on Bush’s shoulder. It was a moment. It struck me. And also the press about closing quantonimo.
Better still, sounds like O told W what he wanted.
Since I heard that earlier, I’ve been wondering something. We have been told that W does what the last person he spoke to told him to do. Wonder if it will work today.
Man I butchered that spelling. But, I hope you’ll forgive me.
like Rachel, I ‘m not very fluent in body language, but I thought it was an interesting shot she showed of The First Handshake–Bush sort of leaning backward and reaching out the full length of his arm as if to keep his distance, while Obama leaned forward, appearing eager to make the connection
Rachel doing a great job of covering all that. The hand on the shoulder was part of her out-alpha-dogging story. As well as W wearing a blue tie. As well as O presenting the agenda for the meeting.
I had this whole imaginary scene running through my head today wherein Obama would inform georgie that he need not fear prosecution from him, because of an assumption that georgie is gonna pardon everybody in sight for everything they’ve ever done….
Right before Obama let georgie know that the U.S. will be, within the first 100 days, joining the International Criminal Court.
Oh, and Michelle wore a bright red dress. I’m sure that was deliberate. In your space!
Not gonna happen. New O meme, which makes sense to me, is that O isn’t gonna deliberately pick fights, as so many will present themselves. It is consistent with what I picked up from Cass Sunstein at Netroots Nation, O’s request today that Ds not punish Lieberman.
Of course, I disagree. These are fights well worth picking, as without accountability, a lot of other stuff doesn’t work, and you set the stage for much worse behavior in the future.
But O is who he is.
Did you see Laura hold up her sleeve to Michelle’s dress … as if to match color … *rolls eyes*
A mission statement is intentionally vague so as to allow for unanticipated actions that will assist in accomplishing the mission. If the employer and employee disagree as to whether the employee’s actions fall within the mission statement who’s to decide who’s interpretation of the mission statement is correct? Without a clear outline of the employee’s duties and responsibilities under the mission statement, signing on to the mission statement alone means nothing, making it in effect a loyalty statement.
These are WMNF’S mission, values and vision statements. Every paid employee and volunteer at the station may interpret these statements differently. What employer would terminate an employee using any of these as a justification without a blatant overt act by the employee that could be seen by a reasonable person as not being in the best interests of the organization?
I think BO is saying that HoJo will leave without being martyred … same plan of action for Bin Laden and Omar …
Laura looked dumpy in that awful brown dress. Why on earth did she wear that?
kinda sounding like Rachel read Jane’s thread about JoeLie from earlier today….
Laura’s dress was a particularly dowdy color. In one angle of the sun it looked like it might be a shade of red, but in most angles it looked brown.
NOoooo Rachel … do not repeat NeoCon Spin …
That’s exactly what I was thinking. One bright and upbeat, on top of the World. The Man! The other, aged before our eyes, seemingly wanting only to get out of Dodge. How many times have we seem this cycle reenacted? The stress of the Office must be unimaginable, it ages these people tremendously.
And the height differences were stunning. Michelle’s as tall as W, and O is even taller. Laura looked like midget.
“Frumpy” was my description of Laura’s dress. She said that both dresses were fall colors and Barack remarked that both of them looked autumnal.
Dubya’s eyes glazed over … obviously had never heard that word before …
I didn’t interpret O’s request that way at all. But then I’ve only heard news reports. Didn’t read the original statement.
What did you hear ? I saw an article that stated Obama’s position as I noted above.
I was just thinking – can you imagine how awful it’s going to be for the Secret Service people who have to guard W and Pickles for the rest of their lives? I think I would have to quit and go work at Burger King.
A mission statement is something that is very clearly understood by anyone who has been in the military.
The commanding officer and representatives make sure of that.
I believe from your posts, that you are former military?
The Federal government is far more like a military command structure than a community radio station.
I’m pretty sure you know this too.
I don’t understand why you wouldn’t support removing people whose conduct is counterproductive to the mission.
Maybe we could go with JohnEmerson’s suggestion about relocation to offices in Siberia?
That was most funny.
Don’t forget; this guy came from Chicago politics.
As he has often said “I may be skinny, but I’m tough!”
We could save lots of $$$ by putting Georgie in the Brink !
can you imagine what it would have done to McCain?
Do you have a link to yours? My info is all aural. As I recall, reported that O sent a note to Reid, requesting that they keep Lieberman in the caucus. Since Lieberman is saying anything less than Chair of Homeland Security is unacceptable, that implies O thinks Lieberman should retain that position.
If there’s any justice, those SS guards will be of the quality of W appointees.
Laura looked dumpy in that awful brown dress. Why on earth did she wear that?
I’m more interested in why Laura greeted the Obamas, at 2:00 in the afternoon, with a cheerful “Good Morning”?
“And Michelle, here’s the bathroom. Why yes, that *is* my medicine cabinet. Yes, it *is* a little large – I had it made specially.”
“George’s? Umm, he keeps a cabinet in his study….”
The Dog ate my Paper … *g* … off to find linky …
ROFL … Excellent !
Don’t bother if it’s trouble. More evidence will help establish a pattern, or not.
wow – we’re two threads behind here people.
Gotta be quick around here. *g*
14 years Navy. With the exception of the “mission statements” given by an officer or senior petty officer at a mission briefing before we saddled up I never saw a mission statement in the military that wasn’t a piece of junk. Not worth the paper it was printed on.
I fully support terminating people whose conduct is counterproductive to the organization’s mission. I want to avoid spending money defending a termination. A clear, concise statement of an employee’s duties and responsibilities is the best way to ensure compliance with an overall mission statement. Holds up in court pretty well too.
So Obama wants the Senate Democratic caucus to go easy on Joey Shortride? I would like to be in the room the first time President Obama meets privately to lobby Sen. Lieberman about a bill on which they disagree…
Hi folks – sorry to be late to the thread myself. THanks for the ideas and interest you all have been sharing!
Hi, Kirk
great post
I think everybody may be leaving now…
((( kirk )))
sounds like a mission statement to me, I thing we disagree on terminology.
I’ll edit my original comment to read:
“the new director should create a clear, concise statement of employee’s duties and responsibilities.”
and can them if they screwup.
(should be the stated mission of the new director…)
The Federalist Society connection
“…strategies for removing the most egregious saboteurs from the Federal Bench”
There is some reason to believe that the the US Attys who were fired, and, more importantly, those who weren’t fired because they cooperated in the politicization of their offices, were subjected to a vetting process that, at the least, included their local Senators and Congresscritters. We can only hope that their local friendly judges were incautious enough to participate as well. The purge occurred, remember, during their period of maximum confidence that they were the new permanent majority, that they would never face scrutiny, and in many other well-known instances, they behaved with incredible recklessness during this time period.
Better yet, maybe the Federalist Society participated in such vetting. Their connections to the Federalist Society were treated as a very sore and sensitive point by Alito and Roberts at their confirmation hearings. Perhaps they were on the FS committee that deals with such personnel “recommendations”, and personally participated in such vetting.
We can only hope.
I see an organization’s mission statement as a simple description of what the organization does or stands for. A specific job description for each employee would tell all concerned what that individual’s duties and responsibilities are toward fulfilling that mission.
from your 60:
If you’re going to be pedantic, be consistent.
Yeah, I should have said “mission briefing”, the mission statement being “Everybody comes back alive.” *g*
I’m with you on that.
I am starting to believe that we might survive the Bush-Cheney mission.
Barely.
best wishes.
I always thought we’d survive. It was just a matter of how shot up we’d be.
Fuckers hosed us pretty good the last 8 years.
optimist.
realist.
Simple stuff, Murph. Given what I’ve read about Obama refuting Executive Signing’s by Bushie, a lot of the embedded asshats are gonna be history and run like hell for safety as they are in the sights of reversed decisions.
Murph, yer stirring the fear bukkit where it don’t need to be stirred.
Chill the phook out, Obama will handle it. He’s got it.
“Why don’t you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don’t you dig how beautiful it is out here? Why don’t you say something righteous and hopeful for a change?”
Oddball, he gets his 60 ft. of bridge, EVERY time. With patience, and negotiation.
Hey mods, can you fix the link? Thanks . . . thought I had this a href thing down . . . my bad . . . it’s a great clip! *G*
fixed
Thanks!!!! What did I do wrong if ya have time to ’splain?
There were extra characters after the address. The clue is if you see a space (gap) in the url, delete the extras and the space. That solved it.
Hmmm . . . wonder if MAC created them extra characters? But I’ll check gaps in the url next time I try this . . . . thanks for your help!
As I recall, the extras were like this: ” =rel”
That is a space after the open-quote.
I can not say whether your machine generated them or not.