"I Couldn't be Judd Gregg"

"I couldn't be Judd Gregg."

That's what Senator Judd Gregg said in explaining his withdrawal as Commerce Secretary nominee.

My question to the Obama team is this: why nominate a Republican if you don't want to hear different viewpoints? How do you have a "Team of Rivals" if you can't tolerate the rivals?

Senator Gregg is a fiscal conservative -- has been for thirty years in public service. Did the White House not know that? There are a lot of ways to vet a nominee (see; Geithner, Daschle, et al.), but anyone remotely interested could have figured out where Gregg would be not only on the Economic Stimulus Package but on the Census.

The Census is done every ten years, as outlined in the Constitution. The census falls under the purview of the Commerce Department. The census is how districts are determined in Congress. This is a surprise to anyone in the administration? Surely this came up when choosing Gregg. Didn't it?

President Obama has a lot of goodwill, from Democrats and Republicans alike. Senator Gregg trusted him, and seemed eager to serve. He made no secret of his principles though, working to get Bonnie Newman appointed to fill his seat with the help of Democratic New Hampshire Governor John Lynch.

The basic idea is this: President Obama won a mandate for change. Voters did not want anything like the Bush administration. They didn't want Senator John McCain and Sarah Palin.

Right now, the administration is operating as if it had a mandate to govern anyway it likes. Hard to see a mandate for that. A mandate for change, yes. But perhaps a mandate for inclusiveness too. Looking at the world through one set of lenses did in the Bush administration and any Republican in their wake (see: John Sununu).

The bigger question for the Obama administration is this: is looking at the world through a different but equally myopic set of lenses akin to change?

Comments

[sawbuck]

just as well. every time i see his name i think of 'judge dredd', the bomb with stallone.

[Simone]

Ms Donahue - I suggest you ready Joan Walsh's article about Gregg on Salon. She's a pretty good political analyst and someone you could learn from if you are open to ideas that are not part of the GOP spin.

[MmeFlutterbye]

Ms Donohue, What you say about the "team of rivals " is true for both sides. Consider the fact that Judd Gregg only accepted the nomination because he would control the census. When that fell through, he waited for a critical time in the voting of the stimulus package to put his hand over his heart and solemnly announce that he was his own man. In other words he wanted to have full control of the commerce dept with no one else's input. What's good for the goose etc..... The guy just couldn't compromise. I think he, with the encouragement of the Republicans, organized this set up. Somebody got to him. Suddenly he's not going to run for office in 2010. It's a routine deceitful GOP operation.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

You should paraphrase your question and direct it to Senator Gregg:

"Senator, if you don't want to hear different viewpoints, why would you have ever considered being part of the Obama Administration?"

The answer, of course, is obvious. He is a Republican. He wanted to participate to simply sabotage.

[egal]

Are you honestly asking these questions?

This man didn't like the amount of spending necessary to revive the economy, believed that the businesses, banks, and housing industry deserved the money before the rest of us who need jobs and such, and was bright enough to recognize that his perspective was worthless or even counterproductive in this economic state. He can't cut it, and he either failed to see this but got out of the way to let what needs to happen happen, or he had the integrity to recognize as much.

We could wish for as much from our reporters and the rest of our politicians.

[BuckarooBanzai]

Dear Ms. Donahue:
Your post makes the assumption that Senator Gregg was forced out of the Obama administration because Obama and his insiders couldn't tolerate different points of view. However the facts clearly show that the resignation was Senator Gregg's idea and that the Obama team was caught by surprise.

There are a lot of things that are not right about this resignation. a) The change of heart came suddenly after Gregg was severely criticized by his constituents after his non vote on the stimulus bill , b) if this really were an act of conscience, Gregg would have resigned privately on Friday, Instead he called a press conference and publicaly embarrassed Obama with this phony bi-partisan failure Republican talking point.

Gregg didn't discover his conscience, he was in fact muscled by his Republican masters. His resignation was part of an organized political/media event to attack Obama. The only good news is how dead the Republicans are in New England. Judd Gregg's inevitable electoral defeat will be the final nail in the coffin.

[faithfully]

and what about the Abramoff link outlined today in Daily Kos? Maybe it had nothing to do with team of rivals-but more a brewing scandal.

[cumchu]

I think you've flipped what it is Gregg said. He said he could not be a part of a "Team of Rivals".

[santamonica39]

Jennifer - With all due respect, what are you talking about? Obama has a mandate for inclusiveness? We elected him to make fundamental changes - to rebuild our middle class. If republicans want to help with that fine, if not screw them. We also elected strong majorities in the House and Senate and we didn't do that so that a couple of republicans could hold every piece of legislation hostage. Also, have you actually read Goodwin's book "A Team of Rivals?" Lincoln chose political rivals, but they were rivals from the nomination fight - from his own party. They weren't ideological rivals. Hopefully Obama is understanding why he doesn't need to compromise his agenda to make republicans happy. We voted the republicans OUT in November.

[super]

Hear, hear!

It seems Judd Gregg had too many preconditions. First, he wouldn't vote for the stimulus bill. Then he wanted the Democratic governor to appoint a Republican as his replacement. Then he wanted to manipulate the census and when Obama took it away from him, there went his spirit of bipartisanship. It seems that for Republicans, even supposedly bipartisan ones, it is still "either our way or the highway!"

[Eclectic Radical]

I continue to be disappointed by Ms. Donahue's writing. I respect that she believes the mantra of 'bipartisan compromise' she is touting, but the problem is that it is a fantasy.

Conservative bi-partisanship boils down to a simple, two-headed statement: when we win you need to do it our way because we won and when we lose you need to seek our approval and cooperation.

Moderates always seem far too willing to fall into this conservative trap. They go out of their way to please conservatives when conservatives are in power, then go out of their way to court conservative approval when conservatives are out of power.

I think that if there is a 'failure' in the stimulus bill it is in the way the administration was too eager to court conservative votes and gave up so much in return for absolutely no conservative support, at the cost of productive policy. If there is a failure in the handling of Judd Gregg, it is the fact that Gregg was an inappropriate choice.

Listening to all viewpoints and reaching across the aisle does not mean including all viewpoints equally or sacrificing policy to ideology not your own. If Senator Gregg felt unable to serve as President Obama's Secretary of Commerce, that is his right. However, it is not as if President Obama threw him out of his office. Senator Gregg chose to withdraw his name because he decided he could not finish crossing the aisle.

[teacheng]

Please. You are falling right into the Republican spin cycle. Both sides have to compromise. "I couldn't be Judd Gregg" means "I couldn't do what I wanted all the time."

[nikky]

i think you are quite wrong he was the one who dumped i think the republicans have something on him and he had a threat

[peorgietirebiter]

Ms. Donahue;

Thanks, I had no idea the Gregg's exit was a matter of conscience, He sounds like quite a guy. I regret thinking he might have caved to the GOP beat down he was getting, you know, since he sought out the job and all, but I was wrong. What could have given me such a boneheaded idea?

Bill Kristol in today's Washington Post - "...they were worried that clever “post-partisan” or bipartisan tactics by Obama could split and weaken an already uncertain and demoralized GOP."

Judd Gregg on MSNBC- after the house passed a 800+ billion bill
"We need a robust one," he added. "I think the one that's pending is in the range we need. I do believe it's a good idea to do it at two levels, which this bill basically does, which is immediate stimulus and long-term initiatives which actually improve our competitiveness and our productivi­ty."

Here’s Judd with Larry Kudlow-
"I think a major stimulus package, and I have said that all along, makes a lot of sense and the Senate is still working its will and I expect it will come up with an even stronger package than the package that left the House."

blindsided? Setting aside the bogus Census spin, how does giving Commerce to a Democrat will strengthen the GOP's input?

[Woodmist]

Obviously the whole census spin continues in your mind. I hate to tell you this but the same people that work with the census---appointed by BUSH, were still going to be working with the census. They came out and stated that they would work closely with the White House as they have done in the past. Now, far be it for you to tell the whole truth about it, eh? Pffft.

[jingles32]

From Atlantic.

Byron York confirmed that it was Republican partisan pressure that forced Gregg to pull out. The idea that a Republican could help give Obama cover on entitlement reform and that he would preside over a big increase in Hispanic representation in the Census was too much for the Rovian partisans. Sh**ill Kristol lets the cat out of the bag:

They were worried that clever “post-partisan” or bipartisan tactics by Obama could split and weaken an already uncertain and demoralized GOP.

Seems Judd Gregg couldn't be Judd Gregg, either.

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/02/the-gops-war-on.html

[LiberalDemIda]

HE WON! Okay, so now we've gotten that out of the way, let's move on from there.

How about YOUR party showing a little bipartisan love the President's way, hm? Why is it all the Democrats' fault when you know your party of NO won't win a darn thing when President Obama and the Democrats win over the public? This is the reality.

Yes, America voted for CHANGE, but it's your party that's trying to stop it from happening. Change for the GOP means the last nail in their political sarcophagus.

As for that inclusiveness, didn't you read the 'caveat'?

"If you unclench your fist, we will extend our hand". It was in his inaugurations speech, remember?

Why not tell your party to unclench their fists so President Obama can extend his hand. After all, those Repub tax cuts in the House bill is proof the President is willing to work at bipartisanship while the lock-step NO-vote by House Repubs is proof they're unwilling to.

See if this gets posted. :-)