Obama has no choice but to rely on advisors from previous administrations. The Democratic party began its primary with six candidates; five of whom were more experienced than Barack Obama and unlike Obama were proven leaders. The Democratic party elite handed the nomination to Obama whose following rivals those of Elvis Presley and the early Beatles. And you have to give BO credit.He does know how to convert a political rally instantaneously into a a rowdy religious revival meeting. Obama borrowed JFK's speech writer, Ted Sorenson, to complement his own team. Read from a teleprompter, his cliche-filled speeches are delivered in cadences borrowed from MLK,Jr. and JFK. Yes, he does know how to work a crowd. The Democrats selected,not elected, a very clever poltiician, trained in the corrupt methods of Old Chicago. He will outdo Dubya as he's more skilled in the political arts, but the euphoric masses who believe Obama is going to transform the world are headed for even further disillusionment.

Obama is a man who has already demonstrated on several occasions that he will do anything - anything - it takes to win an election.

Now his high-minded left-wing followers are already caving and making excuses for him as in - the end justifies the means.

Above you wrote that "as President (Obama) would seek the foreign policy counsel" of Bush Sr., Bush Jr., James Baker, and Bill Clinton, etc. But then just four paragraphs later, you make it seem as though Obama wants them to "serve" in his administration. He never said that. He said he would seek their counsel and advice on foreign policy. He is showing deference.

Obama knows that each president has had foreign policy successes. For instance, four years ago, President Bush signed into law a bill that would severely punish American citizens who go to foreign countries and engage in pedophilia. That represented a great foreign policy victory.

Lastly, you wrote this: "He's pandering to Republicans by naming Republican advisors." And that's bad? In the Illinois State Senate, Obama worked quite well with Republicans, and in the U.S. Senate he has worked with Republicans like Sen. Lugar, Sen. Coburn, and Sen. Brownback on groundbreaking legislation. So what's wrong with working with Republican advisors like Sen. Chuck Hagel and Susan Eisenhower, great-granddaughter of President Eisenhower? Not a damn thing. To win in November, Obama will not only need his BLUE STATE credentials, but he will also need to trumpet his long-standing RED STATE credibility.

He is running for The President of America. Not..."The President of Blue America".

And be careful about accusing someone of "pandering" because as you know, one can say you're "pandering" to progressives with this alarmist post...

Thank you for this article. It's the most sensible advice I've seen given to Senator Obama. Unfortunately, your advice will not be heeded. The powers that be in the Democratic party clearly see the world and particularly the nation the same way the Republicans do: everything for the corporate moguls, nothing for the people who pay for it all. Voting in America has been an exercise in futility and absurdity for quite some time now. Since our elected leaders no longer represent us, why keep up the charade? Why keep voting? As long as we hold our noses and vote for the "lesser of two evils" we thereby continue giving our consent to be governed. Perhaps it time to withdraw that consent, so that the essential nature of our "democracy" can be seen for what it is. A vote is a terrible thing to waste; and we waste it every time we give it away for free.

"Obama needs to listen. no Bush, no Baker, no corporate war maker. If Obama is "the change we can believe in" - he has to stand for change!!" Bang-on. I completely agree. I highly doubt thet Obama will bring them in. His reference to them is a pre-emptive strike to prevent sabotage from these men. They have considerable influence in the old American political arrangement and they can do a lot of damage to his campaign. Still, you make a great argument.