Cross-posted at the Francis L. Holland Blog.

If you look at all of the Clinton appointees who are now assisting President-elect Obama (including Rep. Rahm Emmanuel as chief of staff) it's pretty obvious that President-elect Obama doesn't want to reinvent the wheel of national governance.  He wants experienced hands from when the economy was good and the US was at peace with the world, i.e. from the Clinton Administration.

When you look at it this way, appointing Sen. Hillary Clinton as secretary of state makes perfect sense:  The world was at peace when her husband was president, and it will probably soon be at peace again with Hillary as secretary of state, to the extent that it's at all possible.

Yes, she voted for IWR, because she is a political pragmatist and thought tacking to the right would help her at the polls, and maybe even with the Jewish vote.  She might also be more pro-Isreal as secretary of state than some others whom Obama might appoint, like Gov. Bill Richardson.  Or her positioning during the primaries might have been part of a misguided belief that hawkishness would be more successful in the American context, a belief for which she cannot be blamed after George W. Bush twice found his way to the Oval Office.

To understand what's going on right now in the transition and the formation of the Obama Administration, we all have to realize that Obama's "change" message was both:

An anonymous reader of my blog was good enough to provide a link to the remarks about women's intelligence by Harvard University presidentn Lawrence A. Summers that led to his resignation from the presidency of Harvard University.  It is my contention that if a man is too sexist to be president of Harvard University, then he is also too sexist to to be Secretary of the Treasury of the United States.  If really believes that women are inherently less intelligent than men, then that belief will play out in his hiring, promotion and contracting decisions, as well as setting an awful example for the private and non-profit sectors.

I don't expect anyone to believe this simply because I say so. I suggest that readers personally read and consider Lawrence Summers' public comments for themselves and decide if he, as a member of the Obama cabinet, could treat women equally and promote their careers and opportunities in the same way that he would do for men.  

Lawrence A. Summmers' comments are below the fold with emphasis added to the particularly reprehensible parts.  I've also divided the text into paragraphs to make it easier to read, although it should be remembered that the original "stream of consciousness" nature of the comments makes it more likely that Summers was telling his audience what he really believed, and what motivates his decisions as a manager.  He basically reasserts every stereotype and bias about women in the workplace that women have heard when they are being denied jobs, promotions, internships and pay increases.

If I had suspected that Lawrence A. Summers held these attitudes when he was in the Clinton Administration, I would have written against him back then. But perhaps he only showed his true colors when he believed, incorrectly, at Harvard, that "academic freedom" protected his biased opinions about hiring and promoting women.

Cross-posted at the Francis L. Holland Blog.

In response to my discussion of how Senator John Kerry would inevitably embarrass and demoralize an Obama Administration if Kerry were nominated for secretary of state, one commenter defended Kerry and said, "what's your beef?"

(The reader ignored my reminder to readers that Larry Summers, being considered for Treasury Secretary, was driven out of the presidency of Harvard University in 2005 after he said that women are inherently less intelligent and capable than men in math and science. Won't they ask him if he still believes that during his confirmation hearings? If he's too much of a sexist to be presidency of Harvard University, then why would we want to make him Secretary of the Treasury.)

As for my beef with any John Kerry's nomination for state, it's that Senator Kerry (1) chose John Edwards as his vice presidential running mate and then Edwards rolled over in his debate with Cheney, and Edwards later turned out to be a lying, narcissistic stuffed shirt; (2) Kerry's 2004 campaign was disorganized and aimless, and he was personally listless as a candidate, unable to explain his vote for the IWR in the context of his opposition to the war; but, above all, his inept joke about the troops in Iraq convinced him and everyone else that he should not be the Democratic standard bearer in 2008.

That argument is over, but the question now is whether having Kerry on television every night, perhaps more than Obama himself, is the best public relations move for this new administration.  It's NOT.

If nominated for such a high-profile position, Kerry will bumble in terms of developing plans to end the war in Iraq and fight or end the war in Afghanistan;  Kerry will have to be entrusted with covert operations that will embarrass Obama when their ineptitude becomes apparent, and Kerry will constantly say inept or incomprehensible things that Obama and his spokespeople will then have to explain to the public in English.

Obama would be better off appointing himself secretary of state than appointing Kerry.

Cross-posted at the Francis L. Holland Blog.

What does the election of President Barack Obama mean to Black bloggers? Rickyrah of Jack and Jill Politics expressed it today through "The Imagery of Tuesday", because sometimes words are not enough to capture what we feel and what we feel has happened.

Would White people ACTUALLY vote for a Black man for President?
I said I didn't know the answer to the question, but I just wanted to know the answer. That this country was facing a moment of truth about itself. It was fast approaching the instance where the mythology of America was going to meet reality, and it was going to have to decide.
And, it did. Jack and Jill Politics

African American Political Pundit surveyed over half a dozen afrosphere bloggers, quoting their most salient points.

Cross-posted at the Francis L. Holland Blog.

There has been some terribly unfortunate talk lately of President-elect Obama nominating Senator John Kerry for Secretary of State. To see why this would be so inappropriate, we have to consider what the Secretary of State will actually be required to do, in the context of two ongoing wars as well as ongoing covert interventions in Iran and Pakistan.

As Obama seeks to end the Iraq War and get Afghanistan under control, he needs a very effective and credible communicator who can explain his policies to the American public and convince us - across the political spectrum - to support his policies. He needs a change agent in Iraq.

Kerry's doesn't represent change; instead, like John McCain, Kerry is a reminder of the generational political battles about Vietnam that Obama promised to leave in the past. Unlike the wisdom shown by Obama in the leadup to the Iraq War, Kerry supported the war before he opposed the it, showing that he really hadn't learned the lessons of Vietnam, even though he fought there. Kerry made some fatal mistakes in his approach to issues of war and peace that even he acknowledges. And those mistakes preclude him from being an effective spokesman for President-elect Obama. I have disccussed this with blogger African American Political Pundit and he agrees with my assessment. (See comments.)

The campaign of Barack Obama has certainly brought a lot of Black charlatans out of he woodwork, first to denounce Obama on behalf of Hillary Clinton and now Jackson to torpedo Obama's campaign in the last stretch, as if paid to do so by Republican campaign operatives.  The Francis L. Holland Blog and African American Political Pundit, in turn, have urged the Rev. Jackson to "just shut his f**&king mouth" and AAPP has simply asked, "What's wrong with Jesse Jackson?"

Right wing blogs are overjoyed with Jackson most recent subversive comments.

Race-Hustling Poverty Pimp Jessie Jackson says Barack Obama will end "decades of putting Israel's interests first" if he becomes President.  The Right Perspective

After Julian Bond and Jesse Jackson personally discovered in past generations of Black politics that these views are antithetical to obtaining and keeping public confidence and office in America, now Jesse purports to channel Obama's inner futilist, predicting that Obama holds the same views as those that defeated Jesse Jackson and Julian Bond.

One only has to look at the groups who are rejoicing over Jesse comments to see how destructive they are, and one only has to remember Jackson's own political history to see that he should know and does know better.

Jackson referred to Jews as "Hymies" and to New York City as "Hymietown" in January 1984 during a conversation with Washington Post reporter Milton Coleman.

As much as Jesse Jackson had other ideas and political gifts that allowed him to obtain a measure of political success, his obsession with whacking the Jewish beehive at the worst possible of times destroyed his potential for political success and made him seem pathologically self-destructive, not only to himself but to Black and polychromatic political aspirations in general.  He seemed to want to be hung on the cross of Jewish fears of Black antisemitism, and he stoked those fires instead of endeavoring, as Barack Obama's policies and person successfully have, to allay and alleviate fears.

Jesse Jackson seems to have a deep and abiding self-destructive resentment both against Jews and against those who make common cause with Jews in their efforts to improve the United States and secure its place in the world.  Maybe that's why he wants to cut Barack Obama's nuts off.

The following petition awaits your endorsement at PetitionOnline.Com:

The Afrosphere Action Coalition (AAC) calls upon the Government of the United States to take such steps as are necessary to guarantee that all those in the United States who are in need of medical treatment shall promptly receive such treatment and care as is medically necessary, without being required to pay for it beforehand, at the time of service, or individually thereafter.

Please sign the petition now.

The Afrosphere Action Coalition calls upon the US Government to institute a national system of medical care that guarantees that medically necessary treatment, pharmaceuticals and other related medical goods and services are readily available, accessible and provided through a Government-operated system of doctors, hospitals, pharmacies, clinics and private providers, paid for from the US Treasury, and redirecting as necessary such funding as is now spent on medical care in order to achieve this purpose, and provide subsidies as necessary for such care in the private system.

Please sign the petition now!

The AAC further calls upon the US Government to cease and desist obstructing medical patients from seeking and receiving quality medical care, pharmaceuticals and treatments wherever they may be most economical, refraining in particular from prohibitions on the importation of identical or essentially similar pharmaceuticals from foreign low-cost pharmacies and manufacturers overseas.

Please add your voice now!

The Afrosphere Action Coalition urges that NO PERSON OR PERSONS BE COMPELLED TO RECEIVE SERVICES UNDER THE ABOVE PROVISIONS, but that such services be available as of right to those who request them, in every region and portion of the United States and its territories and dependencies, without intentional, accidental, or incidental discrimination on the basis of skin color, ethnicity, age, gender, sexual orientation, religion, reproductive treatment necessities, psychiatric requirements, or on any other basis or pretext.

Please click here to sign now!

Cross-posted at the Afrosphere Action Alerts blog.

Signed,
Atty. Francis L. Holland
Coordinator, Afrosphere Action Coalition

When Bill Clinton left office eight years ago, he made a handful of executive pardons during his last days in office that the Republicans called shady.  Now, George W. Bush is leaving office and is requesting unfettered and unreviewable power for his Secretary of the Treasury and other officials to reconstruct the American economy, likely effectively granting criminal immunity to those who caused the current meltdown of our economy by fraud, insider trading and other illegal behavior.

Under the plan being considered in Congress, the purpose of granting a trillion dollars to the malefactors is to wipe away all that was done and start anew.  And undoubtedly that will involve undercutting the legal cases of anyone who would like to go to court, just as the Administration has opposed legal relief to those who were tortured in Iraq.  

Bush gave immunity under Iraqi law to the US armed forces and US contractors, and now he wants to give immunity under American law to Wall Street criminals - a blanket pardon of a sort that Bill Clinton never would have imagined in his wildest dreams.