ENGLISH DEYEA NEWS

By Dr. Richard L. Benkin for Asian Tribune | The avalanche of goodwill that soon to be US President Barack Obama has generated should not eclipse the gargantuan task that faces him as he enters office, not only of the issues themselves but also of his being able to effectively tackle them. Moreover, whether it is the economy or any number of international matters, all of them will require that he support specific positions and make concrete decisions—something that he has been able to avoid doing throughout his political career.

Once he does, that good feeling will take a back seat to practical politics and the job of resolving these matters. Lawmakers’ will also feel obliged to defend what they believe to be their constituents’ interests and their own positions. Getting things done in Washington is not easy, and Obama has not been very effective in that regard as a US Senator.

Given the importance—and often divisiveness—inherent in the issues he must confront, we can expect that Obama’s "honeymoon," as it is termed in DC to last only as long as the opposition to his actions is weak. (The honeymoon is the initial time in a President’s term of office when opposition is muted to maintain good feeling.) Additionally, up until now, the implications of Obama’s positions have been marginal. Now, they will have real consequences at home and abroad, melting away the goodwill that many have for him.

But that is the job of a President and of a leader—to make the hard decisions even if they are unpopular. Up until now, Obama’s success has been based almost entirely on that good feeling; and it remains to be seen how he will react to its fading away as he gets down to work.

Obama has shown some deftness in many of the initial decisions he has made during his brief 75-day transition. His appointments and proposed “economic stimulus package” have sometimes been ideological, sometimes conciliatory. Congress tends to give presidents wide latitude in their appointments, although there was a lapse in that courtesy by the Democrats during the Bush era. Unless the appointment is shown to be guilty of corruption, some potential crime, shocking moral turpitude, or is caught in a serious lie, Congress tends to ignore political or ideological matters and votes to confirm. New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson got a jump on that by withdrawing as Obama’s nomination to become Secretary of Commerce when it became known that he was under investigation for allegedly selling state contracts for campaign contributions.

Obama has been hailed for his bi-partisan judgment by nominating two Republicans to be in his cabinet. He asked Bush Defense Secretary William Gates to remain, and because he already holds the position does not need to be confirmed. He also has nominated fellow Illinoisan and former Republican Congressman Ray LaHood to become Secretary of Transportation.

Without a doubt, however, Obama’s boldest decision was that of asking Evangelical Christian Pastor Reverend Rick Warren to give the invocation at his inauguration. Warren, whose church is in conservative Orange County, California, is a major opponent of gay marriage and credited with a significant role in passing a referendum which outlawed the practice in that state. There was a deluge of protests from liberal and gay activist groups, but Obama stuck to his guns nevertheless, telling the protestors to respect his decision to bring people of different viewpoints to the event. "We have to disagree without being disagreeable and then focus on those things that we hold in common as Americans."

On the other side, other appointments by Obama have caused an outcry not only among Republicans but among many Democrats as well. Obama’s choice to head the CIA was former President Bill Clinton’s chief of staff from 1994 to 1997. The fact that he has no significant foreign policy experience and certainly no intelligence experience has raised a lot of concerns about Panetta’s ability to grasp the complex world of intelligence and make critical snap decisions. If Panetta’s appointment turns out to be a misstep, it could have disastrous consequences for Obama and, more importantly, the American people. Panetta’s appointment seems to be a political one rather than one focused on who is the best person for the job. This one could come back to haunt Obama.

Another highly questionable appointment is Timothy Geithner as Secretary of the Treasury. MSNBC, a network that openly cheered for Obama during the campaign, indicated this nomination could be in trouble after it reported that the Democratic dominated Senate Finance Committee held an "emergency Senators only meeting" on the appointment. Their specific concern is that Geithner employed a domestic worker and failed to remit taxes and social security monies to the government. Two of Bill Clinton’s appointments had to withdraw over similar allegations. Many people are also high critical of the appointment because Geithner is a "Wall Street insider," who as many people see it was part of the problem that led to the crisis in the American economy. The most important job of the next Secretary of the Treasury will be to preside over Wall Street’s reform and regulation.

Obama’s nominations to be Attorney General, Eric Holder, and Colorado Democratic Senator Ken Salazar to be Secretary of the Interior are also drawing a lot of fire—the first from the right, the second from the left. The Holder nomination is highly controversial because of his involvement in two highly volatile Clinton pardons. Presidents have the power to pardon convicted criminals and even let them out of prison. As Assistant Attorney General in the Clinton administration, Holder reviewed clemency applications.

The one generating the most outrage was Holder’s fanatical advocacy of pardoning six Puerto Rican terrorists of the FALN and Los Macheteros, convicted of bank robbery, possession of explosives and participating in a seditious conspiracy. Their organizations, which they do not disavow, are responsible for more than 130 bombings, several armed robberies, six slayings and hundreds of injuries, according to the FBI. Holder also passed forward to Clinton the pardon Wall Street financier Mark Rich, convicted of massive fraud. The latter, like the Geithner appointment, calls into question how effectively Obama will carry out promises to reform Wall Street. The Salazar appointment has been skewered by environmental groups. According to the liberal National Public Radio, environmentalists are “fuming” over the appointment, calling it Obama’s “most controversial.” According to the Center for Biological Diversity, Salazar is closely tied “to ranching and mining and very traditional, old-time, Western, extraction industries. We were promised that an Obama presidency would bring change.”

Unless any new information surfaces, however, only the Geithner nomination is in trouble, and even the outcry over Panetta is not likely to scuttle his appointment. During this time of challenges from the left and right, Obama has stood firm on his decisions and behind the people he has appointed. His nomination of Senator Hillary Clinton to become Secretary of State might be the most revealing with regard to political changes and foreign policy in the United States. For years, Clinton had been reviled by conservatives; and going into the 2008 campaign, most saw defeating her as their number one priority. Yet, her nomination to become Secretary of State has been hailed by both sides of the political divide, and she has won praise for her competence and toughness. Her nomination sailed through the Senate committee and should be confirmed by a very wide margin.

During the committee hearings, Clinton made it clear that she and Obama both side with Israel in the current round of fighting, although both made statements of concern regarding Palestinian and Israeli civilian casualties. But their statements indicate that fears of a new US Middle East policy under Obama are unfounded.

Clinton’s appointment, however, might signal a very critical change in US policy. For some time, Obama has been talking tough about Pakistan and about how he intends to shift US focus from Iraq and the Middle East to Afghanistan and South Asia. Nor has he made any secret of his irritation over Pakistan’s role in Islamic terror there. Clinton’s nomination is significant in that regard. During her primary fight with Obama, his campaign derisively referred to her as the “Senator from Punjab” because of her close ties with Indian interests. Given Obama’s stated position on Pakistan, those ties could signal the most significant shift in US foreign policy.

It is still too early to take a real measure of the man. Whether Obama will be up to the task that awaits him is still a big question for Americans—all of whom now wish him the best as our Commander-in-Chief.