Photo: Watson/AFP/Getty
The choice of Hillary Clinton as Barack Obama's Secretary of State is one of those mighty wind-generating news items that will keep pundits busy for days or even weeks; like a lot of campaign reporters, however, I'm suffering from Hillary fatigue after last year and find myself with absolutely no opinion at all about that head-scratching nomination.
The Barack-watching business has begun to take steps in a nervous direction for other reasons, however. Obviously the big question about Obama, after his election, was just exactly how much "change" he was going to bring about — would he bring in people who actually can do the job to work in his government, or would he hire the same old whores to man the ship? I know several reporters who are either officially or unofficially on "Whore Factor" duty, watching the rapidly kaleidoscoping transition picture and keeping track of the number of known whores and ghouls who for some reason have been invited to befoul the atmosphere of the next administration.
Obviously there has been some dire news on that front already. When Obama picked Tom Daschle to be the HHS Secretary, I nearly shit my pants. In Washington there are whores and there are whores, and then there is Tom Daschle. Tom Daschle would suck off a corpse for a cheeseburger. True, he is probably only the second-biggest whore for the health care industry in American politics — the biggest being doctor/cat-torturer Bill Frist, whose visit to South Dakota on behalf of John Thune in 2004 was one of the factors in ending Daschle's tenure in the Senate.
But in picking Daschle — who as an adviser to the K Street law firm Alston and Bird has spent the last four years burning up the sheets with the nation's fattest insurance and pharmaceutical interests — Obama is essentially announcing that he has no intention of seriously reforming the health care industry. And I know that lots of public policy people are hailing this pick, saying Daschle is perfect for the job ("His new leadership position confirms that the incoming Obama administration has made health care reform a top and early priority for action in 2009," Ron Pollack, the director of Families USA, told reporters), but when they say that I think they mean the following: "Out of all the bought-off Washington whores who could have been given this job, Daschle is the best one. His fake reform will go the farthest in its approximation of actual action than the fake reform of any other possible whore-candidate." Actually that probably sums up the ideological profile of Obama quite well generally — but that's another story.
Regarding Daschle, remember, we're talking about a guy who not only was a consultant for one of the top health-care law firms in the country, but a board member of the Mayo Clinic (a major recipient of NIH grants) and the husband of one of America's biggest defense lobbyists — wife Linda Hall lobbies for Lockheed-Martin and Boeing. Does anyone really think that this person is going to come up with a health care proposal that in any way cuts into the profits of the major health care companies?
As for the other choices: I think we can take it as good news that progressives came down from their post-electoral high fast enough to scuttle the appointment of John J. Brennan for CIA director. The choice of Brennan, a former director of the National Counterterrorism Center and aide to George Tenet, was opposed by numerous groups, including a number of psychologists who signed a letter to Obama criticizing Brennan for what they believed was his role in endorsing President Bush‚s pro-torture policies. Brennan was involved with Bush's secret interrogation programs and once told a reporter that the abhorrent rendition practice was a "vital tool," and the fact that Obama made such a person a key advisor to his campaign is strange and unsettling enough.
Even stranger, however, is the fact that Brennan used to head the Intelligence and National Security Alliance, or INSA, in independent nonprofit "research center" which is sort of like a chamber of commerce for intelligence contractors, although it claims it does not lobby. Tim Shorrock, a terrific reporter who has written a lot about the intelligence community, described the position of INSA chief as being like a "shadow intelligence director" and noted that prior to Brennan, current DNI Mike McConnell was chairman of INSA. What's strange about this is that Obama would even think about picking a guy so close to the contracting community to run his intelligence operations. "Obama had been pretty critical of the whole contracting regime," Shorrock told me. "So that was pretty odd."
Anyway Brennan's candidacy was essentially shot down by the criticism, as the poor guy eventually wrote a humorously bitter letter to Obama taking himself out of the running, blaming his critics for being a bunch of full-of-shit assholes who don't know what they're talking about. "It has been immaterial to the critics that I have been a strong opponent of many of the policies of the Bush administration, such as the preemptive war in Iraq and coercive interrogation tactics, to include waterboarding," he whined.
This is the same guy who went on TV to defend the rendition program in a story about the case of Maher Arar, the Canadian telecommunications engineer who was abducted at JFK airport by the Brennan's then-buddies at the Bush administration and sent to Syria for 10 months to live in a windowless three-by-six hole filled with rats and be beaten regularly with cables. When asked about this story, then-CBS analyst Brennan said that "I think [rendition] allows us to have the option to move a person who is involved with terrorism or terrorism-related activities to a country where they can be effectively questioned."
The balls of this guy to be involved with that horrible shit and then turn around and whine about how "immaterial" the criticisms of him are — like we should feel sorry for him! I find people like this amazing.
I've been getting lots of calls about Obama's other appointments; if you work in DC and know something about any of the new members of the government that hasn't been reported to the press, please write to me, as I'm researching the appointment process for my next book. In the meantime I'm also dragging ass on about three different magazine assignments right now (I spent the Thanksgiving holiday flying back from Los Angeles, where I had been interviewing sports agent Scott Boras for an upcoming sports piece in Men's Journal), so please forgive the scarcity of my posts.
Share
Email
Stumble
AIM
Del.icio.us
DiggThis
Fark It!
- Portions of Album Content Provided by All Music Guide © 2009 All Media Guide, LLC.
Get RS Mobile
RSS
tramadol hydrochoride | November 22, 2009 3:46 AM
It is the coolest site, keep so!
what is phentermine 37.5mg | November 22, 2009 1:57 AM
Beautiful site!
buy adipex online ships to ky | November 21, 2009 10:19 PM
Great site. Keep doing.
tramadol is it a narcotic | November 21, 2009 8:30 PM
I want to say - thank you for this!
buy adipex online usa | November 21, 2009 6:40 PM
Very interesting site. Hope it will always be alive!
truthynesslover | February 3, 2009 7:15 PM
who is the corpse?
Who would he be getting the hamberger from anyway?
Or are both
our healthcare industy?
me | February 3, 2009 3:04 PM
nice work.
Saw The Times began to report some of Daschle's Lobbying/Consulting practices. I'd like to think that Daschle w/d his nomination in part to developing scrutiny into his and his wife's business practices.
Unfortunately, they all suck.
ddbb | February 3, 2009 11:47 AM
Very good post and great job bringing this issue to light.
However, I wish people would take notice of the fact that the more the government taxes and distributes, the more opportunity there is for the Daschles and Clintons (both) of the world to enrich themselves at taxpayer expense. As long as the government has your money to pass around, people will have their hands out to get their "fair share". This should not be surprising.
The incentives to behave as a Daschle, Clinton, Rangel or whoever will never be overcome by lip service to "character." Rather, it is these incentives that attract people who love to have the power to tell people what to do and to confiscate their money and which gives them opportunity to become very rich from their exercise of that power.
Limiting the size and scope of government is the only cure. If the incentives are in place, people will act accordingly no matter how much vetting takes place, assuming there is any.
JohnnyD | February 3, 2009 1:18 AM
I haven't got to read all the other comments, but isn't Obama still supporting the "rendition practice"? Isn't that torture? Wasn't it a torture practice that he denounced? He closed GITMO and he is still allowing RENDITION! What is this?
katiedee | February 3, 2009 12:01 AM
So the few days of Obama being in office and I thought he was doing a great job, until I read this article. How in the hell do you hire someone who says, ""It has been immaterial to the critics that I have been a strong opponent of many of the policies of the Bush administration..." when they clearly agreed and took part in the process? That is like directly lying not only to a friend, but to the president. How dumb is that and how unintelligent of Obama who wants "change" to put him in office.
When it comes to Daschle who is apparently deeply involved with some of the major health care corporations and has been concerned with helping them out over the past few years, does Obama really expect there to be much change? This kind of reminds me of the saying the more things change the more they stay the same. Yay for the new head of the country claiming change when really the only thing that is changing are not the ideas, but the mouths they are coming out of.
SocraticGadfly | February 2, 2009 1:42 PM
Muddy Mo, you need to read Peter Baker's NYT story from yesterday. Obama's WH, in what surely violates the spirit of constitutional checks, looks like it's going to have a "czar" paralleling just about every Cabinet office.
Tommy D will be the healthcare czar if his HHS nomination tanks.
Muddy Mo | February 1, 2009 3:45 PM
Matt,
Had you been a regular reader of Open Left, your jockeys would not have been in jeopardy. On June 28, 2008, Matt Stoller crytal-balled it while marking Obama's about face on the FISA compromise bill when he wrote,
"Tom Daschle is going to end up in a powerful position within the Obama administration, either head of HHS or Chief of Staff."
You see, Daschle had just done some critical yeoman's work shoring up the candidates flank by providing this quote for Johnathan Weisman's Washington Post piece about the consequences of Obama's dramatic move to the middle.
"Those who accomplish the most are those who don't make the perfect the enemy of the good. Barack is a pragmatist. In that sense, he has a larger vision but oftentimes knows that we can't get there with one legislative effort. When these occasions arise, he is willing to accept progress, even marginal gain, as a step toward that vision."
BTW, I'm bumping my feed ranking for Open Left. You should too.
Katy | January 25, 2009 7:34 AM
re: post by Anonymous on 12/05
"A Fed-like health board would offer a public framework within which a private health-care system can operate more effectively and efficiently--" To screw the public, you mean. Would it be as deregulated as the banking industry? Would Daschle be the Greenspan of the health-care system? You're probably in favor of privatization of SS, too.
The "health-care" industry is exactly that--an industry that really only gives a damn about money. They don't want people to be truly healthy or they wouldn't push all these synthetic chemicals manufactured by the pharmaceutical industry to the extent they do. To make their big bucks, they have to keep you coming back, again and again--one pill doesn't work, go back and get a different one, plus one for the side effects of the first one, then you're hospitalized when you have a heart attack from a drug they rushed to market without proper testing, etc. Mo' money, mo' money, mo' money!
That whole corrupt system certainly won't change much anytime soon, but a universal single-payer system would be a start with at least some coverage for alternative treatments prescribed by certified providers. Yes, taxes would be a bit higher to cover it, but we wouldn't have premiums and co-pays and the actual costs of care should go down as there will be less administrative overhead. (that last per the New England Journal of Medicine.)
Anyway, back to the general topic, I do hope that Obama will initiate as much of the promised change as possible and that this bunch of appointees can and will indeed carry out his orders. But, Rome wasn't built in a day...
Maria | January 24, 2009 6:22 PM
matt why can't you write more? this was hilarious!! you rule!!
bennie new york | January 9, 2009 8:59 PM
in all honesty i think barack's full of shit. if he's bringing change then how come we arent hearing any new ideas from him? barack obama is simply a symbol of the complacency and lack of progress in america to me, though everyone else will say otherwise because he's our first black president. i do hope things go smoothly for him just so we dont end up with another republican president in 4 or 8 years.
by the way, matt- you are absolutely amazing and it's a pity that nothing you fight for will be acheived by the govt in the next 4 years at the least.
mary beaulieu | January 7, 2009 11:47 AM
I, too, find some of Obama's choices kind of disturbing. But look at the campaign he ran. Lots of disipline, no bullsh*t. His people did what they were told to do or got the boot. So, we may want to cut him some slack, wait and see how this all starts out, and turns out. I don't think he'll turn into a Bush,(either kiss ass or get out for family reasons!). I do think he wants differing opinions on what matters. He is definitly an amazing person. I think he knows exactly what he is doing.
At least he gives us a website to air our grievences. If you publicly disagreed with Bush, God only knows how they would tarnish, blackball, or silence you. We probably don't even know the full extent of it yet.
dont give a shit! | January 6, 2009 1:05 PM
dont give a shit.
AK | January 6, 2009 11:00 AM
Holy shit,did you die or what?
Tony Gray | December 30, 2008 6:08 PM
Will people still call Taibbi too partisan now?
Mac | December 28, 2008 8:38 PM
Hey Matt,
Where have you been? I miss your posts.
Jack Rothstein | December 23, 2008 11:40 PM
I have been distracted by the Madoff fiasco but have been following the choices made by Obama and it is certainly clear that a deal must have been made with the Clintons.... to back off.....in exchange for placing key or people important to the Clinton's in key positions....Just look at the choices....familiar names....the change Obama was alluding to in reality is simply democrats taking the baton and running the show....there will be no substantial change other than Americans feeling the grief of the loss of the middle class which from my subjective view isn't that bad a thing after all.....As far as Daschle is concerned he is a walking dead man....a corpse....it takes one to suck one off I guess...Obama did not choose the best this nation has to offer....he paid back favors....it is politics as usual.....and he will be a one termer....of that there are no doubts....the world will worsen....scandels will come to light similar to the Madoff disgrace....and Mitt Romney the turn around specialist will take on the job of transforming the system in a way that will shock the world.....so....for me...alas... a poor retired Jew living on a small pension....hahahahaha...I might as well move to Israel because.....
micah | December 23, 2008 2:19 PM
There is a typo in this paragraph:
"Even stranger, however, is the fact that Brennan used to head the Intelligence and National Security Alliance, or INSA, in independent nonprofit "research center" which is sort of like a chamber of commerce for intelligence contractors, although it claims it does not lobby."
It should be "INSA, an independent nonprofit"
Great stuff as always though Mr. Taibbi.
T Byrd | December 19, 2008 9:14 PM
I don't remember who is credited with this saying, but it may apply. "Keep your friends close and your enemies even closer."
Perhaps, this is Obama's way of figuring out how things were done in the past and how to rectify any problems associated with them.
Obama can not solve everything by himself, obviously, so we'll have to wait and see. I would much rather have him in the driver's seat than anyone else. Let us hope that all sides can come together and pursue real answers to the many difficulties facing US and the world.
Peace...
Anonymous | December 19, 2008 7:02 AM
>> ... taking the best you are offered.
Well you stupid fucks, once again you have shit in your own water bowl. The best was not Obama. THE BEST WAS RON PAUL! FUCKING DUH! Eat shit and live sheeple losers.
(Oh, I am not immune either. I too will be eating shit and living to savor the memory of the texture, the odor, and the flavor. Four years from now when we are all in breadlines and nothing important has changed, remember these words: Thanks for the memories... tra-la tra-la)
Anandaprana | December 16, 2008 4:41 PM
A celebrity has a certain mystique....a charisma that trancends the normal 'Joe'(Pun intended). Obama's celebrity was akin to this reality. When I discuss him, I look through this particular prism. Good or bad it is ocularly scewd. I FEEL a connection to my future President. And I reacted to Matts words with a mixture of "5th grade class president" deffensiveness, and a "just been fucked by Bush" refrain.
I FEEL the outcome of Bush & Co. so much that my objective self goes out the window! Instead of trying to THINK my feelings, as some may have here, I express the FEELINGS outright. Ego has been offered, ala: Reasoning and Reasonning rebuttal, and Ha Ha Ha Reasonning rebuttal, etc. and heated political diatribe from both sides. Necrophylia notwithstanding.
Paychecks matter! Is Mr. Matt Tiabbi profitting from these blogs? Maybe! But here we are reading them! And replying too! Bravo Matt!!$
I am concerned about a lot of the Future Presidents choices, and as Mr. Taibbi pointed out.... The Honeymoon is over! Barack said "Now we have the CHANCE for change..."
Everyone I've known is looking for someone ELSE to fix their problems! What Barack Obama seems to be saying is that WE are involved in our own rescue.
"But special terests....Global Warming..The economy...Paris Hilton...etc" All real problems! If, however, we could unite again we might really change things! Again!
Flowery rhetoric? YUP. But some have said the same about Barack Obamas' run for Presidency. Are we being hasty? Cynical? Over- cerebral? Yes! Fun huh?!
At least we're not hearing things like
"September the 4th, I stood on the ruins of the twim towers, it's a day I will never forget!" G.W.
Rob | December 15, 2008 8:11 AM
Hey, Matt 0 is your magazine going to do a story on the Illinois governor and the fact that he's a Democrat and that he was selling Jesus' Senate seat and that Jesus' Chief of Staff was in on it? I bet you a million bucks you won't.
Mlle. Retarde | December 14, 2008 3:35 AM
Hi Matt, can you tell me what's going on with regard to the frenzy of people buying gold and making fortresses and listening to Alex Jones' radio show like the end is near. I admire A. Jones. People say Aaron Russo was murdered, I just thought he died of cancer.
Just wondering what your thoughts are.
Ganja khan | December 13, 2008 2:33 PM
I'd love to smoke a joint in the Lincoln bedroom with the ghost of Mary Todd.
AK | December 13, 2008 3:38 AM
I wonder if Obonga smokes in the white house.HA!
Boston | December 12, 2008 11:39 PM
Matt,
All kidding aside, Robert Kenndy Jr. NEEDS a position of power in this administration.
For the country and the planet.
Matt | December 12, 2008 1:28 PM
Boston, Bob the Builder would be great! (However, like you--i would also like to hear the "real" Matt's picks:)
Ha ha ha ha - a reasoned rebuttal | December 11, 2008 11:25 PM
I would just like to say that the comment titled "a reasoned rebuttal" makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Just words put together for the purpose of seeming intelligent. It made me laugh and you should too.
Boston | December 11, 2008 9:43 PM
I generally approve of your picks however for S. of Housing I'd go with Bob the Builder. He is so sexy!
Jack Northrop | December 11, 2008 1:54 PM
Hillary is a good choice for secretary of state. She has to meet enemies and keep her cool. She rocks at that. Obama was her enemy for a year, then in a month or two she gave a speech for him at the DNC convention that had Democrats moist in the loins. She is the perfect states person.
She can argue and disagree with you for hours on end, but never leave the table or make the other leave, and that is what it is all about.
Steve | December 11, 2008 1:44 PM
Just because Daschle is a slut doesn't mean he wouldn't be a good HHS secretary. His whoreishness can be an asset. It gives Obama access to the industries and people.
Daschle isn't the one who sets the healthcare policy. It's his job to get Obama's healthcare policy enacted. You're looking at it from the perspective that Daschle is going to be writing the health policy, and Obama's job to execute it, but it's the other way around.
Daschle will become Obama's slut and will do what ever Obama tells him. He will go to the healthcare people who he has been good to to follow Lord Obama's bidding.
Matt | December 11, 2008 11:50 AM
Dear Boston (if that's even your real name!),
Here would be my picks:
S. of State- P.J O'Rourke
S. of Treasury- Arthur Andersen
S. of defense-Kimbo Slice
Attorney general- Judge Judy
S. of Interior-Martha Stewart
S. of Agriculture- Pablo Escobar
S.of Commerce- Sam walton
S. of Labor- kathie Lee Gifford
S. of Health- Bill Clinton
S. of Housing- Fannie Mae
S. of Transportation- jason Statham
S. of Energy- John wilder
S. of Education- Roger Waters
S. of Vet affairs- CHUCK NORRIS!
S. of Homeland security-Vito Corleone
Plus, I don't know where she would fit BUT i would like to see Courtny Love have some type of assignment!
Roll those around and tell me what you think! love, matthew
Boston | December 10, 2008 8:57 PM
Matt, who would be your ideal picks for cabinet secretaries, and why?
We know that just about anyone who would accept the post is a whore - So who's left with the right mix of policy knowledge/priorities, political savvy to actually corral votes in support of those policies, and leadership skills to direct a huge, multi-staff, multi-mission, multi-budget federal department?
Jay | December 10, 2008 6:30 PM
Aaron F is a genius. Mr Taibbi and Maureen Dowd are the journalistic version of Statler and Waldorf. I'd be interested in any sort of facts rather than your self-satisfied profanity.
Anonymous | December 9, 2008 11:05 PM
To Adam@December 3:
Rolling Stone didn't call out a Democrat. Matt Taibbi called out a Democrat. He calls out whomever deserves it regardless of their party affiliation.
Rob | December 9, 2008 10:13 AM
So it's only necrophilia when one man puts another man's penis in his mouth? It no longer is a homosexual act? I'm slightly offended that you are so pro-necrophilia and anti-homosexual. And Matt, the reason he chose Hillary is because he can take her out of the 2012 race.
Tim | December 8, 2008 4:11 PM
Or:
partake in the sweet poon of the post mortem.
Once again, thanks
Tim | December 8, 2008 11:22 AM
Yes, please correct that to :
Licking the labia of the once living.
Your promptness will be much obliged.
sarah | December 8, 2008 1:19 AM
I love you.
Will you be doing any in-person appearances any time soon? I missed that last one at the library.
On a more related note, however, I think you need to open your heart to Hillary.
Scott Tennenbaum | December 7, 2008 6:58 PM
@"Rob,"
I'm not gay myself, but I'm slightly offended that you seem to be equating Necrophelia with homosexuality in your comment.
Craig | December 7, 2008 11:56 AM
I think a healthy inspection, suspicion and skepticism of our government now and going forward is essential. We msut remain vigilant of what our elected officials are doing. Obama and congress must pass scrutiny even more so because of the outrageous antics of the last 8 years. If Democrats don't deliver on fixing the health system so regular people aren't driven broke or large numbers are still excluded it will be an obvious failure which they can't gloss over for the cameras. I'm taking a wait and see approach until after inauguration. So far it seems Obama wants capable practitioners to implement HIS policies, if that's not the case we'll know soon enough.
Rob | December 7, 2008 11:13 AM
Every single article you write has some sort of homosexual reference in it (suck off a corpse, Karl Rove's cock in McCain's mouth) and it usually has a negative connotation. I am not gay myself, but I think the publisher of the magazine you work for should be at least slightly offended that you find homosexuality to be such a horrible thing.
rick rach | December 7, 2008 4:40 AM
The more I read about American politics the more interested I become.Since 1776 they have truly come full circle.George #1 would be really uncomfortable in his grave if he knew what has happened here recently.The country was built on a British base.Where in hell has THAT gone?
H | December 6, 2008 3:31 AM
—whores can go fuck themselves—
What's the difference between "cronyism" and modern politics?
...And the shit is hitting the fan.
—Billary's a safe bet for the camp.
—What's it got to do with the price of beans?
—Where does the so-called constitution come into all this?
Christina | December 6, 2008 3:26 AM
Matt Taibbi, you are so sexy. The things I would do to you if I could get you alone. Keep writing and fuck anyone who doesn't like you. You;re the best.
Obameter | December 5, 2008 8:11 PM
Q. So, ya' think all these high paid whores go into the back room at the county morgue after work and suck down a few cold ones?
A. Yes. If you pay a whore enough they'll do damn near anything. Might as well make sure the right people are paying for their services. A whore in your bush is worth two out of hand.
a reasoned rebuttal | December 5, 2008 4:21 PM
"If it's cronyism, then how is Daschle unqualified for the job?"
Didn't say what you are implying I did. You're getting confused with a common logical fallacy of applying the negation into the the statement in question. Here's what I mean:
Cronyism is YOUR reason for QUALIFICATION, by your own words previously.
I reject that, claiming that cronyism should not be sufficient for qualification. That is not the same as claiming that cronyism should be sufficient for DISqualification.
It may seem just arguing over words, but the two statements have very different meanings.
To answer the rest of your question, namely facts that do disqualify him, I would say read the article again. It facts against him may not be stated with certainty, but when are they ever? It's suspicious enough and that is sufficient.
Anonymous | December 5, 2008 2:08 PM
Daschle actually wrote a book on healthcare that Taibbi might have glanced at before passing judgement. The publisher's note on the book puts a much different spin on Daschle's views that Taibbi would have us believe:
"Daschle’s solution lies in the Federal Reserve Board, which has overseen the equally complicated financial system with great success. A Fed-like health board would offer a public framework within which a private health-care system can operate more effectively and efficiently—insulated from political pressure yet accountable to elected officials and the American people. Daschle argues that this independent board would create a single standard of care and exert tremendous influence on every other provider and payer, even those in the private sector."
This sounds more like practical healthcare reform than anything I've heard Obama say.
Anonymous | December 5, 2008 9:18 AM
I did not know all this about Daschle. Obama did say that the health care industry would have a place at the table, just not the whole table. I imagine we are going to have to chip away at their grip.
Winston | December 5, 2008 7:11 AM
"Out of all the bought-off Washington whores who could have been given this job, Daschle is the best one. His fake reform will go the farthest in its approximation of actual action than the fake reform of any other possible whore-candidate." Actually that probably sums up the ideological profile of Obama quite well generally — but that's another story.'
That, my writer friend, puts your ass, dead or alive, on the line.
Alan | December 5, 2008 7:07 AM
Maybe you missed your calling. Maybe you should have done whatever Obama did to get to be elected. Or is this a more powerful position you are in?
Aaron F | December 5, 2008 1:53 AM
Always the same problem with you, Mr. Taibbi. Do you want to be taken seriously or not? If so, why not come up with any meaningful shred of evidence, like, a single vote he made in the Senate on the subject of Health Care, any kind of public policy he was involved in supporting or opposing, any specific campaign donations or legislation that favored someone in the health industry, anything better than "he works for this company that has dealings with X, is on that Board of Directors of Y, and his wife is a lobbyist for Z in a totally different industry." Fucking flimsy.
Your comments are not fueled by fact, nor do they pretend to be. They are fueled by your absurdly paranoid rhetoric. Some of these dopes may think that your "cheeseburger" statement is bloody brilliant, but I have been reading your stuff for years, and it just bores me now, because you complain and complain about people being full of shit, and lo and behold, you are yourself full of shit. You have the ability to write a statement like, "In Washington there are whores and there are whores, and then there is Tom Daschle," but then you take no time to actually support that statement with anything more than some weak-ass "connections," which make it seem like you were either too lazy to do research to come up with something solid, or you didn't think that it was important to back a statement like that up. And then from that you arrive at the conclusion that "Obama is essentially announcing that he has no intention of seriously reforming the health care industry." Is that even a rational thing to say? Or are you so absorbed by your paranoia, which may or may not be phony, and this absurd and unoriginal persona you have taken on that you just say whatever the fuck comes into your head?
The worst part is that I agree with most of your political positions, but I feel more sympathy for that bitch Coulter than I do for you, because in her case she has the excuse of being a freaking moron, which I do not believe you do. I just think you are professionally full of shit, and capable of doing much better than this. Like, I think you probably know things that would actually be interesting about Daschle, shit that would make us think maybe this wasn't a good appointment. But instead "whore" and "cheeseburger." It is so much more important to sound cool than to say something of substance, right?
So since I have learned almost nothing that has application in the real world about Tom Daschle from your cynically empty ravngs, I am going to go try and find the things elsewhere that you might have written had you been interested in creating a more meaningful piece.
Do you want to be taken seriously or not?
SouthTexan72 | December 5, 2008 1:18 AM
For all of you who are so perplexed at Clinton's SOS appointment, remember-Obama needed the woman vote, and Clintonesque supporters. Did anybody wonder why her fangs were in full gleaming view as soon as she agreed to concede the nomination to Obama? She whored her ass for a very high spot on the Obama totem pole in order to guarantee her spot in the national limelight in 2016. Not 2012 because that's part of the deal--become SOS, back off from running against a Democratic Pres. four years from now.
As for Taibbi trying to copy, or be the next Hunter S. Thompson, I have to agree with a previous commentator--those of you who believe he's Thompson incarnate, haven't been reading the gospel according to Gonzo the way you should've been reading it all this time. There's a definite sarcasm and wit that both writers share, but the presentation and style couldn't be more different than butter and gasoline.
Marty | December 4, 2008 10:09 PM
Two points:
1.) Is it possible to suck off a corpse? If so, I'm not quite as afraid of death as I once was.
2.) What kind of cheeseburger does he get for this service? I would think it would have to be a very, very, tasty burger! Like the Hawaiian burger in Pulp Fiction.
Jennifer | December 4, 2008 8:34 PM
You aren't alone in your cynicism, nor in being perplexed by the appointment of Clinton, not least of all because of the many foreign policy differences the two candidates at least feigned during the primary campaign. But Secretaries of State don't make foreign policy - they implement the foreign policy objectives of the presidents they serve - or at least that's the job description. But I'm with you that Daschle is inexplicable. Not because he's a whore, though I'll not argue that point, but because as the leader of the Senate Democrats, he was such a stupendously ineffectual whore. Why would anyone put an ineffectual milquetoast in charge of marshalling the biggest policy fight of the last 50 years if they actually wanted to succeed? The mind, as Kelly Bundy once said, wobbles.
But no one should be particularly surprised to see a bunch of Clinton-era re-treads being trundled out to center stage now - anyone who closely follows politics and campaigns already knew that Obama was a dyed-in-the-wool centrist (anyone, that is, other than the conservatard numbnuts who bought the "most liberal senator EVAR!!!" line - then again, is there any BS a conservatard numbnuts won't buy into?). It's not as if it's uncommon for members of past administrations to fill roles in new ones - even less so when the president-elect has never served in an executive role. In this case, we should perhaps be grateful that Obama isn't reaching back to administrations of 25 years ago as Bush did. Then there's the whole issue of the DLC - Obama won the nomination in spite of them, but it would be rather naive to believe that he could completely exclude them from cabinet-level appointments and still retain any semblance of the party unity that will be required to accomplish anything at all. The DLC remains a powerful force within the DNC, and one that must on some level be appeased, as much as we might all wish otherwise.
But I do think some are jumping the gun a bit. I don't think Obama is a savior or walks on water; in fact, I don't think he's anything other than what he has demonstrated thus far - that he is a very gifted politician and a more intelligent than average human being. Meaning, still a politician, but thank God, not another Bush, and quite definitely a better choice than McSame. Which is what it really all comes down to in every presidential election - taking the best you are offered. I don't doubt that we succeeded in doing that in this election just past. Will he disappoint us? Undoubtedly he will - it is a very big job, made bigger by the colossal cluster that Bush and the Republicans engineered over the past 8 years. But are our chances of not going down in flames much better with him at the helm, regardless of how many whores serve at his pleasure? I don't question that they are.
A team of whores, after all, if they industriously perform the bidding of a smart man, might get quite a lot accomplished. And that's the question that remains to be answered: can Obama effectively use the whores at his command to do things that need to be done? If so, more power to him - regardless of my distaste for various appointees.
So to some degree, yes, we do have to take a wait-and-see approach, secure (though perhaps not comfortable) in the knowledge that whatever we ultimately get, it could and would have been oh-so-much-worse if we were instead discussing the affronts to reason and decency being daily announced as appointees by president-elect McCain. I heard someone mentioning several weeks ago how an observer of FDR once noted that he didn't have a "first rate mind" but he had a "first rate temperament" which was a much more important attribute in a leader. If the Obama we witnessed during the campaign is the real Obama - and I've seen no indication otherwise, no cracks in that facade during two full years of high-profile campaigning - then he is also a man with a first-rate temperament. It's been so long since we had that in a leader that it has to be viewed as a wild card in how this will all play out. So while we can and should hang on to some skepticism - it does have its value - let's not let it overwhelm us before the game ever gets underway.
Derek Taylor | December 4, 2008 7:31 PM
Blind ideology is dangerous for the left or the right. Compromise is essential in society, especially at a time in history when we are so far from where we need to be. Compromise isn't dramatic though, no it is boring as shit. Compromise doesn't sell magazines does it Matt?
I'm sure your too busy to respond, but I'd like to know if you believe that it is possible to nominate the people you would approove of? Would it not ignite a fire on the right that would cause gridlock throughout the first term?
It seems to me Obama has a better chance of achieving progress by using experianced people to execute his agenda. Do you think this country is capable of drastic change overnight? It will take years of gradual change to unlock this unholy mess. Obama is the best place to start.
Yes, really | December 4, 2008 5:39 PM
Hey, I'm not saying he's Good at doing Mencken, I'm just going on what Matt has *actually said* on the subject of Hunter S. Thompson comparisons.
LesIsMore | December 4, 2008 5:26 PM
I can has cheezburger?
DuneBoggle | December 4, 2008 3:55 PM
JonO | December 4, 2008 2:47 PM:
H.L. Mencken...?
Now that's hilarious.
JonO | December 4, 2008 2:47 PM
THC, you're a dope. Matt is on the record as saying he isn't trying to do Dr. Thompson's schtick.
He's actually trying to cop the style of HL Mencken. That he's constantly getting compared to HST is a pretty good indicator of how that's going heh heh.
But if you've really read Thompson, you could plainly see his unique style differs significantly from Matt's.
coolgeek | December 3, 2008 10:54 PM
The idea that Obama can walk in and deliver the Holy Grail of health insurance is inexcusably naive. This is going to be a multi-step process that will span administrations. The very fact that the insurance industry is now willing to provide universal coverage (in exchange for universal subscription) is a startling turnaround from where we were 16 years ago. Start with what we can get, and work our way up. Particularly since health insurance is arguably a lower priority than the economy and alternative energy (if not energy and the environment also).
alex | December 3, 2008 9:29 PM
to reasoning:
If it's cronyism, then how is Daschle unqualified for the job? I questioned Taibbi for not mentioning Daschle's early support as a reason for his pick. The Daschle pick did not come out of thin air considering he was mentioned as a possible VP in the NYT because of the early support and advice he gave Obama. My only problem with Taibbi's criticism of Daschle is the only evidence he gives of Daschle's incompetence is the fact he works for K street and his wife is a lobbyist. OK, those are valid points, but that's the sort of job people who lose their senate seats or retire end up doing e.g. Bob Dole, Trent Lott, etc. etc.
I would like to know which positions make him a toadie of the health industry? It seems Tom has got his fingers in a number of honeypots which might make him completely neutral on the issue. Maybe now he'll just be a whore for Obama and the people. I would just like some proof before my former senator is called a whore. If I'm biased towards the whore, so be it. I don't don't mind pimping TDiddy if he gets me some free health care. Here's a cheeseburger, Tom! Now get me my medicine!
I'll even give a snippet of the type of dope I'd have liked from Taibbi. In the jacket of his recent book on healthcare, "Daschle's solution lies in the Federal Reserve Board, which has overseen the equally complicated financial system with great success." See, that might now be a pretty fucking dumb idea given the past two months. But I don't see how that's biased.
hope you guess my name... | December 3, 2008 7:49 PM
WOW, this is best read I've had from RS since P.J O'Rourke was a regular!
Obama will surley bring about change. Just probably NOT the change most people are thinking of. History always comes full circle --we know that. Just think of ANYTIME in history when a counrty has choosen, embraced, and deified a political leader like we have Obama--what follows?
Me, I'm brushing up on my pyramid building skills--i know i'll need them soon!
cgwalt | December 3, 2008 6:05 PM
More high-octane phraseology. 'sucking off a corpse for a cheeseburger' is my new favorite.
david peterson | December 3, 2008 5:59 PM
loved the cheeseburger
John | December 3, 2008 5:12 PM
Working for a magazine that has Britney Spears on the cover (talk about health care crises) is far worse a case of "guilt by association" than being on the board of the freakin' Mayo Clinic.
THC | December 3, 2008 5:04 PM
Gee....when I grow up, I wanna be Dr.Thompson too.
reasoning | December 3, 2008 2:19 PM
"I work in healthcare and have worked for large research institutions - does that make me anti-reform too?"
If you work as a lobbyist/consultant who is paid to keep insurance businesses running as is, yes.
"He hasn't even been sworn in yet! Why don't you cut the cynicism down to a minimum and bring us relevant information about the political characters you're writing about instead of choice snippets of their resumes?"
The worst argument by far, this is the worst thing you could do to yourself and this country. You know the 30% that still think bush did just fine? That's the group that is never skeptical of what they wish to be true. There is no critical thinking in that group, and those who preach "stop the cynicism, don't critique Obama yet, give him a chance, don't question his actions..." are following that very same path of irrationality.
"Can we just wait and see what will happen first before we jump on his picks?"
Do you wait and see what happens when a car comes speeding toward you? We already see actions on his part and there is no reason to ignore his initial choices. Why make some arbitrary starting point for investigating his decisions?
"If Daschle wasn't an early supporter of Obama, he probably wouldn't have been that high on the list. Daschle picked a winner early and deserves some payoff."
Mmmm, cronyism. God forbid anyone raise an issue with a cabinet pick if the person chosen was an early Obama supporter. I guess his early support makes all of the evidence Taibbi mentions about him immaterial, eh alex?
"I also believe Taibbi has turned on Obama way too fast."
Taibbi had been skeptical of Obama long before he was elected. See previous articles right on this website for proof of that.
"What exactly is wrong with being a recipient of NIH grants, Matt?"
Whose money is it that is being given out? Who has control over the decision to give it? What is the means by which recipients are given preference for that money? Answer those questions first and you then have your answer.
"It's like all this whining about Obama keeping Gates for this year; if you want to get the fuck out of Iraq as rapidly as possible, you task the guy who knows where all your forces in Iraq are right now."
Our ability and will to leave iraq has nothing to do with the secretary of defense. 50 years from now, when revisionist historians finally kill all the bullshit we have been fed about reasons to stay or leave, we will find this is more or less a political decision made by a ton of political figures exploiting this occupation to the fullest.
"Instead, you were just like the rest: willingly duped by Obama's now-hackneyed platitudes of hope and change. Dumbass."
Pro tip: Don't insult someones intelligence when you have no idea what you are talking about. Read previous Taibbi articles about Obama and you will realize(if you are willing to see reality) that you are mistaken.
Adam | December 3, 2008 2:17 PM
WHAT??? Rolling Stone just called out a Democrat! I almost can't believe it. I never thought I'd see the day when Rolling Stone actually tried to be honest about the fact that what matters most is the person, not the party.
speaking of whores | December 3, 2008 1:48 PM
I love you Taibbi. Thank you for calling bullshit where ever you see it.
Anonymous | December 3, 2008 12:51 PM
Tell me, Tom K, what does Obama stand for then? And you are absolutely right, you know, that there are no differences between the Bush and Clinton administrations. I mean, really, a $2 trillion surplus versus a $4 trillion deficit, the Patriot Act, the pre-empted war in Iraq, torturing "terror suspects". I can't even distinguish between the last 16 years. Lucky for us, you are here to shine a light on the entire situation.
In reality, can we really expect Obama to flow into his term without people who don't at least know how the process works? Obama is still making any final decisions. It is a large stretch, to say the least, that Daschle is a puppet of the anti-reformers only because he has been involved with the health care industry. It is beneficial to him, not only politically, to be the leader of a progressive health care initiative. I love almost everything you do, Matt, but this was a stretch. In a time in which international relations have become completely ignored, I figure you would jump on something to that effect.
crystal dawn | December 3, 2008 10:36 AM
I wouldn't dismiss the idea of being a cynic either. Cynics make us think logically sometimes even when we don't want to.
However, at least Obama is smart and is appointing smart people. As I always say, all politicians are corrupt, but I'll take a smart crook over a fucking imbecile. (But then there's Karl Rove... ok nevermind). ;)
Nick Robertson | December 3, 2008 10:14 AM
As much as I spew bile at times at Taibbi for his caustic rantings that seem to fear any sense of objective journalism, I must say this line:
"In Washington there are whores and there are whores, and then there is Tom Daschle. Tom Daschle would suck off a corpse for a cheeseburger."
is fantastic.
Stephen Wells | December 3, 2008 10:06 AM
Seriously, if you use "a major recipient of NIH grants" as a negative, you have fucked up badly.
Also this whole article fails to distinguish between what people do and say on their own vs. what they may be capable of doing when given a goal and proper management. It's like all this whining about Obama keeping Gates for this year; if you want to get the fuck out of Iraq as rapidly as possible, you task the guy who knows where all your forces in Iraq are right now.
Frederick | December 3, 2008 9:51 AM
Ian at 7:17...Buddy, are you joking? A democrat crying for fair political reporting?!! Barack Obama had sunshine blown up his ass by the liberal media from day one, and it never let up. This man was given a free pass into his new job. Until he stands for something, he stands for nothing. Or worse, in his case he seems to stand for everything. Oh, the brutal, brutal reality check.
Pocono Joe | December 3, 2008 9:28 AM
So what have I learned?
1. Looks like we might just have nominated a younger and blacker John McCain.
2. After reading two of Taibbi’s pieces, his writings might just be on par with other “pro-torture policies.”
Nate | December 3, 2008 6:02 AM
A friend just told me that Obama is a high ranking free-mason. Does anyone know if that is true and why wasn't it discussed in the election?
Eileen | December 3, 2008 2:40 AM
Agreed, John... I take huge issue with that statement. Now scientific research is corrupt, according to Taibbi? Good lord...
John | December 3, 2008 12:45 AM
What exactly is wrong with being a recipient of NIH grants, Matt?
JStewart | December 2, 2008 11:52 PM
I also believe Taibbi has turned on Obama way too fast. Things are in such a mess that I wonder who thinks they know the solutions. I believe Obama is working hard get us on the way to being on track. This is too great a challenge for him to hire on people cynics don't know enough about to be cynical towards because those are the only ones they won't attack!
We have dilemmas where the choice is between "the unacceptable and the disastrous". That's bad.
Tom K | December 2, 2008 11:44 PM
It's baffling that people find it inappropriate to be critical of Obama's Cabinet picks; they're probably the same folks who believe the man intends to enact "change" in this country.
Look, Obama could go on from here and name nothing but unanimously appealing visionaries and still have signaled quite clearly that, at this point, he's got the Clinton cock wedged deep in at least two holes. Whatever his actual intent, he's been forced to stock up on enough inexplicable shitheads to ensure the next four years will not provide even a remote reversal of this country's downward spiral. As it stands, I believe it's mandatory that people, insofar as they aren't paralyzed by apathy, become doubly critical of Obama than they were of Bush. After all, Obama's a much smarter guy; he hoodwinked the majority of us into thinking he's exactly the opposite of what he stands for, and to boot he has a whole first term to do jack shit and simply blame the circumstances into which he was placed. A lot of the wrong people are going to get richer over the next few years, and, in the interim, too many of us appear likely to sit back, stroke the shaft, and swallow down the gravy.
Cara | December 2, 2008 10:08 PM
poor Barack Obama.
CLG | December 2, 2008 10:06 PM
Matt, grow the fuck up.
Rob | December 2, 2008 8:51 PM
This is the time to be cynical. After years of incompetent, substandard leadership, it pays to take a look at the President-elect Cabinet appointees.
alex | December 2, 2008 8:42 PM
Did you happen to read Daschle's recent book about his ideas on reforming healthcare? Or do you base your opinions on merely guilt by association. And the best quote you can get about his supposed whoredom is one you make up out of your butt. K street is a huge law firm. It would be a mark of incompetence if you were a former senate majority leader and not work for them.
If Daschle wasn't an early supporter of Obama, he probably wouldn't have been that high on the list. Daschle picked a winner early and deserves some payoff.
I guess since you work for RS and appear on HBO you must love corporate media and hope that small independent radio stations and press go belly up. Give me a break, media whore. Just because you're a whore, it doesn't mean you're a slut. Whatever that means.
Zaid | December 2, 2008 8:32 PM
I read part of Daschle's "healthcare reform" book and it is a complete joke. He dismisses single payer out of hand in about two sentences -- that should tell you who he works for.
I'm even a grantee of the Center for American Progress (they fund a magazine I started) and I'll tell you a lot of the people in CAP are center-right clintonistas out there to make sure progressive reform happens with industry's best interests at heart.
lets wait and see | December 2, 2008 8:17 PM
The man hasn't even been sworn in yet. Can we just wait and see what will happen first before we jump on his picks? Remember folks, change doesn't mean wiping the slate clean all of the time. I welcome this change. The change from incompetence to a sane administration with actual thinkers and not ideologues. Can't wait for the piece on Scott Boras, Matt. Hopefully the Dodgers won't go brain dead and resign Manny.
T.J. | December 2, 2008 7:21 PM
So what happened to all those complainers who say the RS in general and Matt Taibbi in particular are so shamelessly biased that they cannot see straight? Seems odd that they'd all accidentally miss reading this particular post and commenting. Maybe they all followed through on their threats to stop reading.
Ian | December 2, 2008 7:17 PM
It's amazing how quickly some people switch their tune. Last week, Barack Obama was the coolest and most exciting political candidate in fifty years, a person who might actually transcend partisanship to make the choices needed to move America forward. Today he's supposedly proof that the apathy that pervades most of American culture is justified, that it's the same old game. He hasn't even been sworn in yet! Why don't you cut the cynicism down to a minimum and bring us relevant information about the political characters you're writing about instead of choice snippets of their resumes? But I understand that that would be a lot of actual reporting to do. Might as well just peer into the crystal ball and give out cynical predictions. Awesome.
Val | December 2, 2008 5:58 PM
Okay, maybe I am missing something here... but how is sitting on the board of Mayo Clinic a sign of being corrupt? Are you not allowed to associate yourself with any healthcare entities whatsoever as long as you are promoting healthcare reform? How does that work? Its not like the guy was sitting on the board of Pfizer or something... Mayo Clinic is a renowned medical institution. And why exactly are NIH grants evil? Its the primary way in which research gets funded in this country...
I am sorry, I absolutely love your work Matt, but I don't agree with that at all. I work in healthcare and have worked for large research institutions - does that make me anti-reform too?
Bobby | December 2, 2008 5:48 PM
Check out James Jones' recent employers, Chevron and Boeing. He is also the president of an energy security firm. Telling as to what might be to come.
Eric Ferguson | December 2, 2008 3:41 PM
Crud. I wish I'd known this stuff about Daschle when he was still a leak being floated instead of an appointee.