Why does passion trump clear-eyed stewardship?

[Perky]

There have been countless post advocating certain people for Cabinet Positions:

Notably

Howard Dean for HHS

Joe Kennedy Jr. for Energy

Jonathan Turley for AG

And many others.

There is a tendency to be believe that the more passionate about key issues a person is the greater the effectivenses they will have once inbued with statutory power,

But nothing could be further from the truth in Washington. The inside game is complex and does not suffer the throwing of molotovs particularly well. Holding a key administration means staying on the president's message and the president's timing. There are far too many moving parts, fluidity and cross-issue horse trading that goes on to let myopic passion overtake clear-eyed stewardship and the responsibities that come with not just policy but the practice of government,

There is a difference between continual protest and governing. That seems to be something that some on DU do not seem to get I am afraid.

Folks we do not need 20-plus protesters-in-chief. We won! We have to govern if we want to win again.

Do you really think these folks could subjugate their passions for the fullthroated advocacy of the President's agenda? Do you really, honestly think they would want to?

That does not mean an uber-progressive agenda gets sidetracked or mothballed, but it does mean that change comes incrementally. We may not like it, but the reality we have to deal with is that it is far easier to protest than it is to lead.

[Still Sensible]

1. Excellent point, well said. n/t

[Skidmore]

2. Why do you assume that passion and good stewardship are

mutually exclusive. That one person cannot do both. I think that is a really cynical view.

[Perky]

3. I don't think they are mutually exclusive and I never said they were

[Skidmore]

4. Flat out, I believe that

Dr. Dean is the only good choice for HHS. He has done the work in health care reform in his home state. He is at once passionate about his issues and a good steward. All the more reason to support the man.

[lib_wit_it]

10. I'm not sure who those people are, but I think they exist and that they are exactly who we need.

[ellacott]

5. A very reasoned argument

Thanks.

I remember when people were willing to support Chuck Hagel just because he came out against the handling of Iraq war.

[Gregorian]

6. Post Traumatic Bush Syndrome.

8 years of fascism. I think people are still traumatized. I am. I feel that Bush is still in office. And then this intelligent man shows up, and I realize he's our new Chief.

I suppose your post is geared toward another aspect. But I think people are actually freaked out. And not just about Bush, about how conservative and stupid America really is. We disparately need a hard left rudder.

[Occam Bandage]

7. I agree, and would add RFK Jr for EPA to that list, but would strike Dr. Howard Dean,

since he was actually quite effective at working as a clear-eyed pragmatist during his tenure as Governor. Never really understood why so many liberals act like he's the second coming of Kucinich; no doubt had he been elected in 2004, many of the people who idolize him now would be cursing him in the same breath they curse Clintons.

[Perky]

11. You may yet get your wish on Dean

[Political Tiger]

8. Perfectly said!

K & R!

[ananda]

9. The real question is:

Why does excellence and dedication to making
the world better get short shrift, while
typical Reepdom gets the job?

Hmmmm????????????

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

12. Calvin Coolidge is not generally considered a greater president than Lincoln.

[Perky]

13. No doubt but there is a Grand Canyon's worth of difference between

the presidency (and the mandate it can carry) and appointed officials who are primarily charged (if not solely charged) with doing the President's bidding