****WHY**** Did Obama Nominate an Anti-Union Secretary of Commerce?

[LaydeeBug]

It's not for the vote in the US Senate. So...why? :shrug:

I have the same hesitation about Daschle, and what his nomination signals about REAL health care reform.

[TwilightGardener]

1. Maybe Gregg is the only one in Washington who paid his taxes?

[Clio the Leo]

6. I think you're on to something. NT

[TechBear_Seattle]

2. Gotta reach out and embrace the anti-union Rethugs, after all

Don't worry: he'll give a two minute speech and that will be the end of it.

[supernova]

3. Because he hired a Pro-Union Sec of Labor?

[Bolo Boffin]

30. :D n/t

[Raineyb]

31. Aren't the Repukes still holding up her nomination? n/t

Regards

[NightWatcher]

4. Obama is FAR BETTER than McCain, but he is still a politician

I think that he feels he has to make concessions in order to get things done in DC.

It's just part of the game.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

5. Because Commerce has little, if anything, to do with unions?

[Thrill]

7. Can't understand the nomination. But after Daschle, Geitner and now Killefer

my guess is he just wanted someone safe

[LaydeeBug]

19. Daschle is the other upsetting one...

he's been in bed with the health care industry for years.

But I am just venting. :hi:

[Seen the light]

8. He has utterly failed with his Cabinet

Look at the jokes in there. Sure, there are a few good picks in there, but the majority scream politics as usual.

[Jennicut]

9. He picked a Rethug to get Rethugs to go along with him

and Gregg seems to be a bridge to some Rethugs. Not entirely a terrible idea as Commerce is not a majorly important job. Obama is trying to be sneaky about getting to some Rethugs. I think some of them eventually will break down. Also, he is from NH and that seat may be up for grabs now in 2010.

[endarkenment]

12. That worked out so well for Clinton.

They never learn.

[snooper2]

14. President Obama is not Clinton

:eyes:

[endarkenment]

17. Obviously.

But my point was not "Obama is Clinton". My point was that the Clinton administration started out reaching out to the fascist asshats, and bringing the fascist asshats into the Clinton administration, and got blind-sided, sandbagged, fucked over, impeached and almost tossed out of office.

[lib_wit_it]

21. Right. I don't trust the Effin Rs to respond like humans and "come around" to reason,

whether bipartisanship or better. They're soulless, mean-spirited, and worse things only they can imagine.

[QC]

10. Don't worry: it's part of some ingenious plot far too brilliant for mere mortals

even to begin to comprehend.

[Teaser]

16. Obama is Satan and has murdered millions

He clearly means to kill us all.

[RDANGELO]

11. Here is the way I see it.

First, the Secretary of Commerce position is not a substantial position as far as setting policy within the administration. It's a notch higher than Secretary of Transportation.
Gregg probably is willing to take this because he doesn't have to take the risk of being replaced in the next election in a state that is trending Democratic, and he is likely to be in the minority anyways, which means he won't have a great deal to say in crafting legislation. So he takes a cushy low stress job.
Obama gets a moderate Republican in place of a conservative in the Senate which could make a difference on some votes. He is taking some risk with a loyal Republican in the administration.
To use a baseball analogy, this is like trading a utility infielder for a left handed relief pitcher that you are only going to use against lefties. It improves his hand marginally in the Senate.

[Political Tiger]

13. Secretary of Commerce has nothing to do with unions.

...and President Obama has already taken steps that show he is on the side of labor:

WASHINGTON — On yet another morning of grim economic news, President Obama sought on Friday to distance himself further from his predecessor, announcing steps that he said would strengthen organized labor and thereby improve the lot of middle-class Americans.

At a White House ceremony, the president signed three executive orders that he said would “reverse many of the policies towards organized labor that we’ve seen these last eight years, policies with which I’ve sharply disagreed.”

Appearing with Mr. Obama, Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. drew applause when he flung another dart at former President George W. Bush, telling labor officials among those in the audience, “Welcome back to the White House.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/31/us/politics/31obama.html

[Teaser]

15. Daschle has long been advocate for a powerful program of healthcare reform

Now, whether or not his other deficiencies derail him is left as an exercise for the reader.

[Occam Bandage]

18. What does Commerce have to do with unions? nt

[Better Believe It]

22. Why do you think Obama should appoint an anti-worker union buster to his Cabinet?

That doesn't bother you in the least?

If you're a union basher your position in support of Gregg makes absolute sense.

[Occam Bandage]

23. I didn't say that. I asked what the Secretary of Commerce has to do with labor. Is there any link?

[LaydeeBug]

27. Yes. They are both Cabinet Level Positions. nt

[Occam Bandage]

34. So there's no particular link between Sec'y of Commerce and labor policy?

Why does it matter, then?

[Elwood P Dowd]

35. Oh yes there is a link.

Commerce negotiates trade deals that ship jobs, many of them union jobs, out of the country.

[Occam Bandage]

36. What if he secretly signs and enacts an unfavorable trade deal with China?

History is rife with rogue Commerce Secretaries throwing unilateral trade deals around like so much confetti. I don't know what Congress was thinking when they passed that Constitutional amendment giving the Department of Commerce the sole power to commission and sign international trade pacts.

[backscatter712]

20. Kicking him upstairs.

As mentioned, Department of Commerce doesn't have much to do with unions, and isn't a particularly powerful department anyways. And he gets Gregg out of the Senate and replaces him with a person who will probably be the most moderate RINO Lynch can find, and who can be easily bumped out of his seat by a Democrat in 2010.

I'd say this will actually be a net gain for labor.

[Freddie Stubbs]

24. Perhaps because the Commerce Department does not regulate labor

:shrug:

[democracy1st]

25. why reward the guy ?

[Freddie Stubbs]

26. Perhaps the President believes in hiring people for their skills, rather than to reward people

[Better Believe It]

28. I don't want Obama appointing the most right-wing Senate Republican to any leadership position.

You don't have a problem with that?

Well, how about appointing Senator Hatch to head up HHS or to some other top government position?

Sorry, I thought Obama and the Democrats won the election.

[demo dutch]

29. "because he's an excellent negotiator and can "work" the GOP" (from NPR)

[Raineyb]

32. There is no working with the GOP

Didn't the massive middle finger of last week already make that perfectly clear?

Regards

[demo dutch]

33. he was supporting Obama during the election

[mmonk]

37. Bipartisanship

or some nonsense.