Could the impact of a Democratic White House be lessened

[burythehatchet]

because of the republick operatives who have been planted in all agencies?

It's important to remember that the power of the theocrats emerged from the bottom up. They took control of school boards, then municipalities, then government. When they took control of government they purged many of the career professionals who had been un-political workers and replaced them with the brownshirt brigades that are coming out of Pat Robertson U, Regent and Jesus Camp. I have personally met several former employees of various govet. agencies and they have lamented about the loss of good, solid leaders.

So that's what prompts me to ask the question - if the operational government has been replaced by a sycophantic colony of pods, how can Democrats undo this damage?

It won't be easy to identify the pods, they will likely go underground if they are not detected and fired. I don't see how this problem can be easily fixedd.

[saltpoint]

1. There'd likely be a thorough spring cleaning when a Democrat moves in

to the White House in 2008.

There are always partisan holdovers, but they usually don't wreak much havoc on in-coming administrations.

A strong president can really put a hard brand into his or her administration.

[burythehatchet]

2. That's a good point

I hadn't considered this as a factor in deciding upon a candidate, but it seems that our president would serve us better if he had the leadership qualities to be able to fix this.

[saltpoint]

3. If presidents select strong Cabinet members, things run better.

If the Cabinet member is herself or himself a strong administrator, I mean.

I'd appoint Max Cleland to be the Veterans Administration post, for example. I don't think we'd have Building 18 scenarios under Secretary Cleland.

And so on.

Linda Tripp did her dirty work under Clinton, so there's always that chance. But maybe a strong Cabinet can greatly reduce the odds of foul play.

[burythehatchet]

6. Whenever you hear the mouthpieces of the right rant about

something, it's always a good idea to look deeper into it. One will usually find the exact opposite of what they rant. Currently they are going after college professors and administrators. What that tells me is that the droves of goose-stepping soldiers coming out of the terror training camps at Pat Robertson University is a far worse problem than we suspect.

[saltpoint]

11. Good point. And wasn't Goodling (in the DoJ scandal) from Regent

University?

Packing the Department of Justice with right-wing kooks really sits bad with me.

[Robbien]

4. Depends on the Democrat

If a pro-business Democratic candidate is elected, many of these GOPer department heads are just what business interests want.

[burythehatchet]

5. Precisely. Another reason Hillary makes me uncomfortable

[saltpoint]

7. I'm thinking of Cabinet people like Bruce Babbitt and Vance Hartke.

Just to take two examples from different Democratic administrations.

I thought they were excellent models for the right balance of ideology and administration.

[salin]

9. Too young to remember Hartke as a cabinet member

guessing under Carter? To which post?

I only remember being *told* that we had two democratic senators from Indiana serving at the same time - though I was alive, and I know Hartke's name, too young to remember it as a fact (didn't pay attention to politics - except my father yelling at the TV during the Watergate hearings, and presidential campaigns). I do remember the first Senator Bayh, sadly the only time I got to vote for him, was the year of the Quayle takeover.

[saltpoint]

10. Hartke was the Chairman of Veterans Affairs, and not the Cabinet

Secretary for same. My mistake.

I was thinking how things were different in other periods, under different adminiatrations. Walter Reed used to be a top-drawer place. Standards have surely fallen lately.

I share your sadness over the Birch Bayh loss to Dan Quayle. That was a very dark moment in Indiana politics. I was so ashamed to see a good man like Birch Bayh go down to such a little twit as Dan Quayle. To this day I feel that Quayle is one of the worst things that can happen in American public life.

[salin]

12. it killed me that some of the same folks who said that they begrudgingly

voted for Reagan/Bush in 04 because they were concerned that Ferraro only had several terms in Congress under her belt and wasn't ready to be president if something happened to Mondale ... turned around and voted for Bush/Quayle - as if he was ready. :eyes:

Not that its much consolation - I still get a kick that the lightweight rightwing replacement for Quayle, Dan Coats - decided not to run for reelection when the son of the originally ousted democratic senator declared his intention to run for the Senate. I have mixed feelings about the son - and am glad he got out of the Presidential race - he votes more moderately dem when he isn't angling for higher office - once he got the bug to run for pres - suddenly his voting got more conservative than he had been and more than he needed to in order to be reelected in Indiana.

[saltpoint]

13. Yes. Coats is loathsome. The guy just gives ya the creeps.

Evan Bayh is not the most liberal Democrat out there, but he's popular in Indiana, and I'm guessing Hoosiers will keep him in office as long as he wants to run. To be painfully truthful, I'm not really missing him in the presidential line-up. He strikes me as awfully conservative, especially compared with Harkin and the late Paul Wellstone, for example.

I like Evan. But I deeply miss his dad.

[Old and In the Way]

8. I'd hope that each candidate gives us details of what plans they have for the federal government.

The one who understands the problem and has the most aggressive plan to drive sweeping change in the ideological make-up of the bureaucracy should be of extreme importance to Democrats. I hope this question gets asked to all the candidates and we see what their blueprints for change are.