Democrats & Liberals Archives

Democratic Dream Team

While the outcome of the 2008 Presidential election is far from assured, just for a lark I took a stab at making up a Cabinet for a Democratic President.

The main criterion for the list is finding people who are qualified for the job. Diversity is a factor, too, as well as political affiliation. Finally, if the person is a US Senator they can’t come from a state with a Republican governor (who would replace them with another Republican).

Secretary of StateBill Richardson is so abundantly qualified for this job I don’t think any explanation is needed. One caveat, though: He has to promise to resign if he gives any foreign leaders a noogie.

Secretary of the Treasury Robert Rubin served here for Bill Clinton, and was widely regarded as one of the best ever in the position.

Secretary of Defense Joe Biden is a long-time Senator who chairs the Committee on Foreign Relations. He is arguably the only Presidential candidate who has presented a serious plan to resolve the ongoing nightmare in Iraq. One caveat: Stop mumbling and take a shower, dude!

Alternate: Gen. Wesley Clark. The only problem with Clark is that he may not be capable of providing independent civilian oversight. It would be good to have a veteran in this post, but not someone who was in the top leadership.

Attorney GeneralJennifer Granholm is serving her second term as the Governor of Michigan. She previously served as the state Attorney General. Due to term limits, she cannot run for another term as governor.

Secretary of the InteriorGary Locke was a two-term Governor of Washington. Traditionally, this job goes to a westerner.

Secretary of AgricultureKathleen Sebelius is the Governor of Kansas. Like Granholm, she is on her second term and can’t run again.

Alternate: Stephanie Herseth Sandlin is a congresswoman from South Dakota who serves on the Agriculture Committee.

Secretary of CommerceBobby Rush is a veteran congressman who is chair of the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection.

Secretary of Labor John Edwards always says that he wants to fight for the working men and women down at the mill. Here is his chance.

Alternate: Dennis Kucinich would be the first Hobbit-American to serve in this post.

Secretary of Health and Human ServicesJohn Kitzhaber, MD, is the best choice for this job by far. After serving two terms as Governor of Oregon, he dedicated himself to improving the healthcare system (details here).

Secretary of Housing and Urban Development – I must admit, I am sticking Loretta Sanchez here because I don’t know where else to put her. She is a veteran congresswoman from Orange County, and a member of the Blue Dog Coalition (for better or worse).

Secretary of Transportation- Federico Peña served in this post under Bill Clinton.

Secretary of Energy – The ideal person for this job is Al Gore, but I doubt that he would be willing to give up his current celebrity status for the life of a bureaucrat. A more realistic choice is Hilda Solis, a congresswoman from California who serves on the House Committee on the Energy and Commerce, the House Committee on Natural Resources, and the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming.

Alternate: Lincoln Chafee, a liberal Republican, would be an interesting choice.

Secretary of EducationRudy Crew is the Superintendent of Miami-Dade County Public Schools, and formerly was the Chancellor of the New York City Public Schools.

Secretary of Veterans AffairsCharles Rangel is a decorated Korean War Veteran and would be perfect for this job. Unfortunately, he may not be willing to give up his position as Chair of the powerful House Ways and Means Committee.

Secretary of Homeland SecurityBennie Thompson is the Chair of the House Homeland Security Committee.

For those are interested, this cabinet would include four Hispanic people, four black people, one Asian person, and four women.

Posted by Woody Mena at November 8, 2007 11:26 AM
Comment #237830

Funny, that diversity of appearances is more important than diversity of opinions.

Posted by: Lee Jamison at November 8, 2007 12:16 PM
Comment #237831

For Vice President, I suggest Governor Ted Strickland of Ohio. He is well respected (rare for a politician) and a Baptist minister to boot. The downside is that he is in his first year of his first term and he would be sorely missed by the people of Ohio who need him desperately after 16 years of Republican rule.

By the way, Kucinich is not a hobbit, he is a druid that doesn’t believe in human sacrifice.

Posted by: jlw at November 8, 2007 12:18 PM
Comment #237839


I hope that was a compliment.


There are some bona fide Blue Dogs in there.

Posted by: Woody Mena at November 8, 2007 2:00 PM
Comment #237842

Unfortunately recent news has given him undeserved bad press, but for about five years I’ve yearned to have Elliot Spitzer as our Attorney General under a Democratic President. His effectiveness as AG in NY in prosecuting illegal, but previously tolerated, behavior on Wall Street was spectacular.

Posted by: Walker Willingham at November 8, 2007 2:41 PM
Comment #237852


Surprisingly enough, I think some of these people may be good for these positions. But don’t be too disappointed if none of them are chosen. Cabinet members are usually chosen for political expediency, not for ability.
I can see Hillary putting no thought into it and using the positions as rewards for hardcore supporters/donors. She will almost certainly put less thought into it than you did.

A couple issues, though…
General Clark, a proven commander, would be a 100% better SecDef than Biden. Biden has a bad habit making of off-the-wall statements about the military (and other things) and Republican pundits usually have a field day whenever he opens his mouth. We can’t have a SecDef insulting his own troops, no matter how accidentally.

And John Edwards as Secretary of Labor??? He’s one of those rich guys who talks a big game about helping the poor while really having no clue as to how the other half (or the “other America,” as he puts it) lives. He does nothing to change that image of himself. I’ll have to go with ol’ Denny K. on that one, since he’s obviously not going to be President.

Posted by: TheTraveler at November 8, 2007 3:24 PM
Comment #237854

How about John Edwards as VP, and O’Bama as secretary of state?

Or… (just thought of this)… How about Gore as VP? That would be inspired!

Posted by: Max at November 8, 2007 4:03 PM
Comment #237855


I voted for Spitzer for AG and for Governor. Believe me, I regret that second vote. That bad press is well deserved. It’s the old story of a politician leaving the place where he can use his tallents to help the people, just so he can gain a position of power.

Spitzer was a great AG but terrible as governor. He is the kind of executive who ignores the legislative branch and thinks his policies should be followed regardless of what the law says. Remind you of anyone? His poll numbers resemble Bush’s too, and it was only a year ago he won in a landslide.

I’ll give Spitzer a pass on the Troopergate thing. That was just political feuding between him and Senator Bruno taken a bit too far.
But he crossed the line on the driver’s license issue. Instead of going about it the right way and trying to get a law passed, he is circumventing the legislature altogether, because he knows that neither party (in New York) supports giving licenses to illegal aliens. In other words, like Bush, Spitzer thinks his policies should be followed even if the law says differently.

Getting back on topic… If Spitzer was appointed the federal AG, I think he would do a good job. I might even vote for him if he ran again for state AG. But I think this will be his only term as Governor.

Posted by: TheTraveler at November 8, 2007 4:07 PM
Comment #237856

One problem is Wes Clark can’t be secretary of defense. You have to have been out of the military for 10 years to hold that post. Clark will not be able to hold the post till 2010.

The other thing is pay attention to the news Clark is going to be higher than that. VP or secretary of state.

Posted by: rick at November 8, 2007 4:17 PM
Comment #237859

Gore for VP… yeah… and me for Sec of State… David for Sec of Def… Rhinehold for Sec of Energy… and you, Max, for Att Gen?


Posted by: Doug Langworthy at November 8, 2007 4:44 PM
Comment #237862

I tend to agree with The Traveler, despite the fact that many of these individuals might indeed do very well in those positions, I just don’t see any more than say two or three being offered the job.

I think Richardson would be a good choice for Sec State given his background. But can you really see Hillary asking him?

The only way Rangel will take Veteran’s affairs is if he lost his seat—not lose the majority as in the GOP takes over, but actually is no longer in Congress. Decorated Veteran or not, it is not in Rangel’s blood to serve in the administration.

I think selecting Granholm or Sebelius is a good idea, they are term limited and Granholm can’t run for President herself (she was born in Canada) and it doesn’t look like Carl Levin or Debbie Stabenow are leaving the Senate anytime soon.

The question is not necessarily whether they are talented, and many unquestionably are talented. The issue is do they have any sniff of scandal that could get them in trouble.

Posted by: Matt Johnston at November 8, 2007 4:59 PM
Comment #237884

Woody, it would seem that your humor has been lost on here….but thanks for the chuckles.

Posted by: Jane Doe at November 8, 2007 9:09 PM
Comment #237923

If you want a 400% increase in “F” schools and rapes of students covered-up, Rudy Crew is certainly the man.

One year alone in New York, Rudy Crews and his staff covered-up 4 rapes and covered-up another 3 rapes last year in Miami-Dade at Northwestern high School.

You should check you facts before you make such inappropriate recommendations.

Posted by: LC at November 9, 2007 10:38 AM
Comment #237945

I hate to be the one to break it to you but your picks are right out of wonderland.You truly do live in liberal bubble.

Posted by: john at November 9, 2007 1:45 PM
Comment #237966

Even if thats true about “Rudy Crew,” I don’t see why it should matter to anyone anymore.
I hear there was once a President who did everything he could to cover-up rape, harassment and lies and nothing happened to him. Shoot, last I heard, he was still being idolized.

Posted by: kctim at November 9, 2007 4:11 PM
Comment #237969

kctim, you’re obviously not talking about a president from this country, at least Clinton, because rape was never an issue. And I’d say that impeachment was punishment enough for trying to keep a personal issue..personal, or at least just between him and those who NEED TO KNOW.

Posted by: Jane Doe at November 9, 2007 4:55 PM
Comment #237975

Oh, I know ladies like Flowers, Jones and Broaddrick probably had it coming to them Jane Doe. I’m sure it was NEVER and issue with them. Not with clinton being a Dem and everything. They should just except the rules are different when its a Dem involved.

Glad to see you promote the “all about protecting a personal issue” talking point.
Nice of you to ignore ALL his crimes and try to make it out to be ONLY about his “personal life.” And to try and divert away from the fact that he still lied to a grand jury and the American people.

But hey, if you are comfortable having two sets of rules, who am I to judge your hypocrisy.

Posted by: kctim at November 9, 2007 5:48 PM
Comment #237977

kctim, how many times are you going to continue bringing up an issue dealt with years ago? Every time you can’t throw something more legitimate and applicable into the fray? The country rendered a judgement and punishment against Clinton, but they obviously failed to contact you for something more to your liking.
You cited an innacuracy (rape), but guess that doesn’t matter.

Posted by: Jane Doe at November 9, 2007 6:20 PM
Comment #237982

The Traveller said: “Spitzer was a great AG but terrible as governor.”

In other words, like Bush, he rose to his level of incompetence. The Peter Principle is an omnipresent and sinister phenomenon in American politics. Brought on in part, by too many voters having risen to their level of incompetence as citizens.

Posted by: David R. Remer at November 9, 2007 8:07 PM
Comment #238137

Issues dealt with years ago should now be forgotten now eh Jane? Or only when its the side YOU agree with?

Something more to my liking? Naw. Just as with this administrations corruption, I am well aware of the past administrations corruption. The difference is that I do not ignore, defend and excuse one side and then condemn the other side for doing the same thing, like you all do.

There was no innacuracy. Broaddrick made known what happened very clear. But, you are correct, things like that do not matter because clinton was a Dem and politics for the left is more important than his victims.

It doesn’t matter if its a corrupt Republican administration or a corrupt Dem administration. As long as half the voters are willing to reward or ignore the corrpution of their “side” and vote because they fear the other side, our govt will not work for us.
Excuse and ignore your partys corruption if you wish, millions of others will do the same.
Our country is worse off because of it.

Posted by: kctim at November 12, 2007 10:26 AM
Comment #238151

kctim, our country is not worse off now because Clinton had a few minutes of pleasure sitting at his desk, but because we have an idiot in the White House who has imperiled an entire country through his personal need to leave a mark in history ! Do you suppose when the rest of the world has finally had enough of his posturing and threatening, they will retaliate against some little unprotected and unable to fight back country, or come after who has really pissed them off? You remember the saying about honey and vinegar? This fool doesn’t know sweet.
Get off the Clinton blow job deal>>>> It just doesn’t matter anymore.

Posted by: Jane Doe at November 12, 2007 2:15 PM
Comment #238174

No matter how much you wish it to be, it was never about “clinton having a few minutes of pleasure sitting at his desk.” As with Hoffa, that was just what finally stuck. Why? Because of all the administrations corruption and the partisan support from the left who no longer cared about anything else except keeping “their guy” in power.

“Get off the Clinton blow job deal>>>> It just doesn’t matter anymore”

Um, you are the only one who has tried to divert this to that. We were talking about the rape and harassment victims like Broaddrick, Flowers etc… Remember? Good ol Monica wasn’t mentioned, except by you. I wonder why you would go straight to her? Hmmmm? Could it be because you would rather have people think all he ever did wrong was a personal thing, so that they won’t think of all the corruption, taking of rights, entering a war with a country which did not threaten the US, murder of Americans by govt etc…?
Naw. Couldn’t be that huh.

“It just doesn’t matter anymore”

It must still matter to you, YOU brought it up.

Posted by: kctim at November 12, 2007 5:22 PM
Comment #238176

kctim, as it’s still Clinton for you, and not “the idiot in the White House” now. Still part of that sub-30 percentile that just don’t get it.
Oh well. Can’t waste time on a closed mind any more.

Posted by: Jane Doe at November 12, 2007 5:28 PM
Comment #238219

Thats the whole point Jane!
I see the last two administrations as having done great harm to our nation, you see only one. So which of us has the closed mind?
You cannot handle the fact that clinton, a Dem, was just as bad, so you bring up Monica in hopes of derailing. It did not work, so you take the, “you don’t think like me, so you just don’t get it,” route. Sad, but expected.

Why did I continue engaging you about clinton? Because the people elected nobody better when they put Bush in office and you will continue that trend, for partisan reasons, in 08.
The only thing that will change is the party and the cheerleaders such as yourself. The actions of our govt will not.

Fixing half a problem does nothing but satisfy a half, which leaves the whole still needing fixed.

Posted by: kctim at November 13, 2007 9:39 AM
Comment #238248

No, it is you who refuses to see that your attempt at comparing actions fails miserably. You hangers-on can’t grasp the idea of relevance. Like killing a fly with a bazooka rather than a swatter. Blue dress/Iraq. Sexual fantasy/Thousands dead. Star’s salary/Multi-billion $ debts and owing our souls to China, etc.
Balanced budget/our children & grandchildren in hock for yearrrrss. Just released, new Fed. deficit for the coming fiscal year:55.6 BILLION DOLLARS. Doing a heckuva job Bushie.

Posted by: Jane Doe at November 13, 2007 2:59 PM
Comment #238264

Comparing doesn’t fail if you compare equally Jane.
Bosnia Kosovo/Iraq. Mass graves/WMDs. Waco/Abu G. VAAPCOM/Wiretapping. FACE/Protest zones. 2nd Amendment/4th Amendment. Rendition/Gitmo. Selling secrets to communists/owing our souls to them.
And do I really need to list all the corruption, campaign finance and all that crap?

Do you see the difference in our lists, Jane?
You ignore one administrations problems and highlight the problems of the other.
My list highlights the problems of BOTH administrations.

Heckuva job Bushie. Thanks for paving the way slick willy.

Posted by: kctim at November 13, 2007 5:51 PM
Comment #238267

I give up, but by all means, continue living happily in your own little self-created world. You won’t be lonely, there are a handful left of you out there.

Posted by: Jane Doe at November 13, 2007 6:08 PM
Comment #238312

Of course you give up. Partisanship requires people be closeminded and not accept truth. So, when confronted with truth, it is easier to “give up” than it is to see truth.

Dems defend, ignore and excuse dem wrongs at all costs.
Reps defend, ignore and excuse Rep wrongs at all costs.
And it is only the other side that does wrong.

What kind of logic is that? The kind that has our country in the current situation it is in.

Posted by: kctim at November 14, 2007 9:47 AM
Post a comment