Poll: Republicans Love Rahm Emanuel

A National Journal 'Congressional Insiders' poll finds that 93% of Republicans think Rahm Emanuel will be "an effective White House chief of staff." That's only one percent less positive than the Democratic response. While some of the responses weren't exactly complimentary ("Brutal, hateful, and effective") others were downright gushing:

"Rahm was a brilliant choice. He is tough enough to deal with congressional Democrats, smart enough to reach out to Republicans, pragmatic enough to keep the administration from veering too far to the left, and controversial enough to become the lightning rod that Obama needs to keep the heat off the president and on the staff. Rahm is doing this at considerable self-sacrifice. Had he stayed in the House, he would have become speaker. He is trading future power for immediate influence. He is also putting the good of his team above his own career interests. That is a rare quality among politicians."

As Eve Fairbanks of The New Republic notes, "the quotes from GOP respondents are more adulatory than the responses from the Democrats."

Comments

[Tayo]

i bet they do!

[KQuarksSuperKollider]

Antisemitism on the left is just as dis gusting as antisemitism on the right.

[MidtownGuy]

I hope this doesn't mean Obama is poised to be complicit in allowing Isreal to continue building settlements on Palestinian territory.

[Curlew]

What on EARTH does this story have to do with Israel and Palestine?? Why not take it one further - I'm concerned that the selection of Rham Emanuel as COS means that Halley's Comet won't re-appear until 2061. OMG the sky is falling.

[CATO90025]

Here is the article that was censored--wonder why

http://www.counterpunch.org/walsh10242006.html

[CATO90025]

I love Rahm--beacuase he has 1 master:

http://www.counterpunch.org/walsh10242006.html

[sclucie]

there are four references to support the allegations in this article. one is unavailable and one is the counterpunch, is there a real piece of journalism somewhere? i don't like aipac and its influence, but this wouldn't pass a high school social studies class.

[CATO90025]

After reading this article http://www.counterpunch.org/walsh10242006.html

I bleive Rahm is a great and undying supporter of his country!

That's what I fear because it is not the US. He will have flowcharts on how dangerous Iran is--with
help from Pravda Judith Miller--let's just say hell no!

[benndissed]

clinton warmonger to the core.

[hortonhearsawho]

President Obama has no doubts...

[Cherlesq]

Thank you very much, Rahm.

[liberalrebuttal]

Good. So we all love Rahm Emanuel. That's good thing.

[RedDonnaAnn]

And... he's hot.

[whit4brains]

Second that :-)

[pupbayer]

And I was just thinking how funny looking he is.

[leftbehind2000]

So was Dorian Gray, evidently.

[Pdubya]

Neocons are the ones that love Emanuel.

Think on that trons.

[UncommonSenz]

According to the article, 94% of Dems like him too.

Does math confound you?

[elimenez]

The evangelicals love him because he's Jewish, the moderate Republicans like him because he's "Rahmbo", and the all those on the left love him for his liberal record. Obama is ahead of the curve friends.

[ElBruce]

Hey, they respect strength.

And "effective" is simply an accurate adjective. It doesn't mean they have to like him.

But what R's are most worried about right now is that a runaway one-party government is going to push through far more lefty issues than they'd ever like to see - you know, crazy hippie/commie stuff from their darkest imaginings. In this regard, Obama is the best brake there is since his agenda is fairly moderate, and since he won't want congressional Dems wasting "his" economic or political capital on issues that aren't his priorities. So paradoxically, having a leg-breaker in that position is actually in the R's best interest right now. Even if they have to take some of the beatings themselves.

Also, this is awesome:

http://www.hulu.com/watch/45817/saturday-night-live-rahm-emanuel

[canucklivinginUSA]

I don't understand the fuss about Repubs liking this pick. GOOD, because we can hoodwinked them when we start unfolding our agenda. They won't know what hit them.

[11907281]

"GOOD, because we can hoodwinked them when we start unfolding our agenda. They won't know what hit them." - I really hope you're right but I fear the appointments so far seem indicate the liberals (are we allowed to start using that word again?) are the ones who have been "hoodwinked".
But given O's early work with those in need, he's one of the few politicians I'll give the benefit of the doubt to.

[BillMelater]

I think they just liked that SNL internet skit. LOL

http://billmel8er.wordpress.com

[Livvy]

Mr. Obama hasn't betrayed anything or anybody and anyone who thinks that better head to the nearest bookstore and find a copy of the Audacity of Hope. Had you read that before the election maybe you would not have voted for him because everything he thinks about or believes in seems to be playing out in how he is assembling teams.

I have been on many hiring committees over the years for my company. We looked for passionate, bright, experienced people with a broad range of skills. Once they came to work for us they were expected to adapt to our management's vision and priorities. I see no reason why this should not be true when choosing a cabinet. These people have credentials. They know the system and how to work it. Smart hiring as far as I can see.

[ckfan]

FINALLY. Someone who gets it. Thank you Livvy. Thank you. I am now a fan.

[canucklivinginUSA]

Co-sign

[Klimb]

GOP do not really like Rahm...read about their outrage after Obama appointed Rahm! Something smells fishy...

[ObjectiveRealist]

The criticism I've seen of Obama's appointment has been *attributed* to "the left," "progressives," "liberals," the "FAR left" and "radical anti-war activists" [my least favorite of the previous smears; being anti-war is NOT "radical"]. But, it's all been stated by employees of corporate entertainment "news" organizations, and as is common, they don't name a source.

No tin foil here. The customers are on average not detail-oriented enough. The market demand for "news" is being met by suppliers. They just don't start to care until it's too late.

[daria60]

Repubs love Emanual as they have come to realize that Rahm will continue the neocon policies of Aipac - somehow, behind curtains. Oy,veh.

[gbrooks]

I hope you're wrong daria, but my sinking suspicion is that you're right.

[McChimp]

First off, Obama set a no- lobbyists rule for his administration, you won't be able to use the administration to lobby. Period.

Secondly, Rahm and Obama are very close friends, you can be assured that Rahm will have Obama's back, and he won't be lobbying on behalf of AIPAC.

[sonoffestus]

Well said !

[UncommonSenz]

Ok, when confronted with dogma, follow the logic... so here it goes.

The country is in severe crisis. There are so many fires to be put out we will have to hit the ground running to have any shot at even keeping things from completely falling apart.

Given that time is a luxury we simply don't have, and the sheer scope of the fiasco that faces us, which option makes more LOGICAL sense:

A) Hire folks that already know their way around, will be able to move forward right out of the gate, and will be able to execute Obama's marching orders WHILE SIMULTANEOUSLY growing the next generation of Obama-schooled leaders (who, as underlings now, will gain the experience they need to fly)

or

B) Only hire "new faces", who will need months to gain their footing and will inevitably make honest but painful mistakes which will be used by every detractor to say "See, they don't know what they are doing. Ignore anything they propose or it will make things worse!".

Those are your choices (as I see them at least). Which one makes more sense?

[cobobs]

I say you got it right. We are dealing with very smart and thoughtful people. I sleep better at night. Internationally, I think it will be relatively easy. The world has seen hard ball US and she scares everyone. Nations would bend over back wards to embrace nice and reasonable US.

[canucklivinginUSA]

You might have to uses some drawings to explain to the petulant children that populate liberal blogs

[SBlackmun]

LOL!

[reliant1]

;)

[lachgirl]

Spot on.

Not only that, there has been ONE democratic white house in the past 25 years. Where else would you find people to staff new democratic leadership?

Beyond that, its not as if Obama is picking staunch Hillbots left and right--he is picking pragmatic people who worked in the Clinton administration (which of course incorporates LOTS of people) that also backed him for the past 2 years. That's right, Holder et. al. have been behind Obama and advising him throughout the campaign. That turned out all right for him.

Plus, a new guy is in charge. He hasn't changed message, just taken a new approach to doing things, and is taking the bull by the horns NOW to help us out, rather than waiting. That's a leader. Can't wait to see how it all plays out come Jan. 20.

[reliant1]

Exactly - and these folks are Dems. Where were they supposed to be working while Clinton was President? They have had no choice but to work for Clinton - who else has there been since Carter and those guys are too old now.

[strifeknot]

C) Hire new faces who actually have integrity, vision, ability, and trustworthiness.

Your A is the wishful thinking of blind sheep.