Saturday May 30, 2020
SNc Channels:



Nov-07-2008 12:22printcomments

Is Obama Screwing His Base with Rahm Emanuel Selection?

It's easy to see it as nothing less than a slap in the face of the progressive anti-war elements of the party to whom Obama owes his election

Rahm Emanuel
Rahm Emanuel
Photo courtesy:

(SAN FRANCISCO) - I had really wanted to celebrate Barack Obama's remarkable victory for a day or so before becoming cynical again. I really did.

And yet, less than 24 hours after the first polls closed, the president-elect chose as his chief of staff -- perhaps the most powerful single position in any administration -- Rahm Emanuel, one of the most conservative Democratic members of Congress.

The chief of staff essentially acts as the president's gatekeeper, determining with whom he has access for advice and analysis. Obama is known as a good listener who has been open to hearing from and considering the perspectives of those on the Left as well as those with a more centrist to conservative perspective. How much access he will actually have as president to more progressive voices, however, is now seriously in question.

Illinois Congressman Rahm Emanuel is a member of the so-called New Democrat Coalition (NDC), of group of center-right pro-business Congressional Democrats affiliated with the Democratic Leadership Conference, which is dedicated to moving the Democratic Party away from its more liberal and progressive base. Numbering only 58 members out of 236 Democrats in the current House of Representatives, the NDC has worked closely with its Republican colleagues in pushing through and passing such legislation as those providing President Bush with "fast-track" trade authority in order to bypass efforts by labor, environmentalists and other public interest groups to promote fairer trade policy.

Emanuel began his political career as a senior adviser and chief fundraiser for the successful 1989 Chicago mayoral campaign of Richard M. Daley to seize back City Hall from reformists who had challenged the corrupt political machine of this father, Richard J. Daley. Emanuel later became a senior adviser to Bill Clinton at the White House from 1993 to 1998, serving as Assistant to the President for Political Affairs and then Senior Advisor to the President for Policy and Strategy, and was credited with playing a major role in shifting the Clinton administration's foreign and domestic policy agenda to the right. Emanuel was the single most important official involved in pushing through the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), the bill ending Aid for Families with Dependent Children (AFDC), and Clinton's draconian crime bill, among other legislation.

Leaving the administration in 1998, Emanuel worked as an investment banker in Chicago, where he amassed an $18 million fortune in less than three years prior to being elected to Congress.

As head of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee since 2004, Emanuel has promoted pro-war and pro-business center-right candidates against anti-war and pro-labor candidates in the primaries, pouring millions of dollars of donations from Democrats across the country into the campaigns of his favored conservative minions to defeat more progressive challengers.

Emanuel was a major supporter of the Iraq War resolution that authorized the invasion of Iraq. Indeed, he was the only one of nine Democratic members of Congress from Illinois who backed granting Bush this unprecedented authority to invade a country on the far side of the world that was no threat to the United States at the time. Even more disturbingly, when asked by Tim Russert on "Meet the Press" whether he would have voted to authorize the invasion "knowing that there are no weapons of mass destruction," Emanuel answered that he indeed would have done so, effectively acknowledging that his support for the war was not about national security, but about oil and empire. Not surprisingly, he has also voted with the Republicans in support of unconditional funding to continue the Iraq War and has consistently opposed efforts by other Democrats to set a timetable for the withdrawal of U.S. occupation forces from that country and related Congressional efforts to end the war.

At a time of record budget deficits, Emanuel has been a passionate supporter of increased spending for the Pentagon and has resisted efforts by fellow Democrats to trim excesses in the Bush administration's bloated military budget. For example, he has repeatedly voted against amendments to cut funding for Bush's dangerously destabilizing missile defense and even voted against an amendment to identify unnecessary Pentagon spending by examining the need, relevance and cost of Cold War weapons systems designed to fight the former Soviet Union.

A major hawk regarding Iran, Emanuel has also voted against Democratic efforts to prevent the Bush administration from launching military action against that country and has joined the administration in exaggerated claims about Iran's alleged nuclear threat. He is not opposed to nuclear proliferation if it involves U.S. allies, however. Emanuel has consistently voted against a series of Democratic amendments that would have strengthened safeguards in the Bush administration's nuclear cooperation agreement with India to prevent U.S. assistance from supporting India's nuclear weapons program.

Emanuel is also a prominent hawk regarding Israel, attacking the Bush administration from the right for criticizing Israel's assassination policies and other human rights abuses. He was also a prominent supporter of Israel's 2006 attacks on Lebanon, even challenging the credibility of Amnesty International and other human rights groups that reported Israeli violations of international humanitarian law. Emanuel's father had emigrated from Israel in the 1950s, where he had been a member of the terrorist group Irgun, which had been responsible for a series of terrorist attacks against Palestinian and British civilians in mandatory Palestine during the 1940s. Emanuel himself served in a civilian capacity as a volunteer for the Israeli army in the early 1990s.

It is unclear how serious of a blow Obama's selection of Emanuel is to those who hoped that Obama might actually steer the country in a more progressive direction. It's easy to see it as nothing less than a slap in the face of the progressive anti-war elements of the party to whom Obama owes his election, particularly following his selection of Sen. Joe Biden as vice president. (See my articles "Biden's Foreign Policy 'Experience'" and "Biden, Iraq, and Obama's Betrayal.")

However, this does not necessarily mean that Obama as president will pursue nothing better than a Clintonesque center-right agenda. Someone with Obama's intelligence, knowledge and leadership qualities need not be unduly restricted by the influence of his chief of staff as less able presidents have. At the same time, this shocking appointment of Emanuel is illustrative of the need for the progressive base that brought him to power to not celebrate too long and to refocus our energies into pushing hard to ensure that the change Obama promised is something we really can believe in.

Stephen Zunes is a professor of politics and international studies at the University of San Francisco. and a contributor to Foreign Policy In Focus ( From 1996 to 1999, he served as chair of the board of Peaceworkers, a U.S.-based group supporting the nonviolent struggle of the Kosovar Albanians and other nonviolent movements and peacemakers in areas of conflict.

Special thanks to Alternet

Comments Leave a comment on this story.

All comments and messages are approved by people and self promotional links or unacceptable comments are denied.

Henry Ruark November 13, 2008 8:11 am (Pacific time)

To all: More detail keeps coming re O's real plans. Here's another "see with own eyes" from leaders at work on next-steps: Obama's Transition Leader Sketches Out Vision for Assertive Presidency By Sam Stein, Huffington Post Printed on November 13, 2008 "On Wednesday, major Democratic officials, including the co-chair of Barack Obama's transition team, released a comprehensive outline for the incoming administration that could go a long way in determining aspects of the president-elect's agenda. John Podesta, who heads Obama's transition effort, and Mark Green, a long-time New York Democrat who advised the Clinton transition in 1992, have completed a 300,000-word project titled, "Change For America: A Progressive Blueprint For the 44th President," that charts out a governing path for the next Democratic president." ----------------- Book due out in Jan.; see two Prefaces at this link NOW to evaluate with own mind.

Henry Ruark November 12, 2008 8:10 pm (Pacific time)

To all: Here's "see with own eyes" link further clarifying O's intention and beginning actions: Obama Transition Team Rejects Lobbyists: Why It Matters By Steven Rosenfeld, AlterNet Printed on November 12, 2008 "The Obama Transition Team has issued rules for lobbyists who want to advise the incoming administration. The rules seek to stop Washington's revolving-door culture where insiders gain access and information inside government, and then use that knowledge to help paying clients accomplish their goals. "A press release states these are "the strictest, and most far reaching ethics rules of any transition team in history." =============== The link gives you these rules for your own evaluation.

Henry Ruark November 9, 2008 10:18 am (Pacific time)

To all: See my original comment for some solid further reasons to grant O. a bit of working room, just as we granted him a large slice of running room. The issues are far too complex for easy-shot comment within only a day or two of this new beginning. Given this opportunity and the mandate granted by action of the people, directly negating all political pander possible, we own him and his assembling associates a decent interval to recover both power and the control we demand they now use to remedy what we know is so far wrong. Patience, colleagues, and a bit of tolerance, too. If you were faced with these piles of pilfered power to reassemble into a working pattern, would you be wise enough to refrain from immediately-demanded actions from multiple directions ? We have the pieces, now let's let him start to assemble them in some peace after battle, with the assurances we can now take from his attitudes and approaches so well tested so little time ago. Hang on, hold tight, breath slowly and calmly... It took a few weeks for both FDR and JFK to unscramble and unwind and unknot what they faced, too...with results like the world has never seen before or again...until, just possibly, now. We the people created this new-shot and we can still keep control, too: Same power, same plan, same pattern still can lead us closer to perfecting what Founders started so well.

Vic November 9, 2008 8:16 am (Pacific time)

I wouldnt give Obama four YEARS..I say in four MONTHS if there arent tangible changes, we have been tricked again. Appointment of Emmanuel as Chief of Staff tells me that we have indeed been fooled again. Americans are so passive and so afraid of their government, Im sure the elitists know they can do whatever they want and there will be no repercussions. We are a spineless people, scared of our own shadows...we probably get what we deserve. If the original colonists were as meek and apathetic as we are, this country would still be part of Britain. How many more years of lies and false promises do we tolerate before we revolt? Im talking guns and torches...Nothing will change until our so-called leaders seriously fear us and realize that their very existence depends on respecting and carrying out the will of the people. Till then, I expect more BS, more delays and more lies.

Henry Ruark November 8, 2008 3:04 pm (Pacific time)

Sallie: Good common sense, Sal...wish we had done so re Bush, esp. after stolen election handed him by Supremes. OR perhaps after 1st-Reagan, when Bush I sold out (remember "voodoo economics" ?) for his shot at same situations, doing about the same kind of damage albeit consequences arriving only later. But at least NOW we have shot at doing what we need to do, with strong mandate from "the people"and surely with very destructive impacts on those who reduced us to current damaged status.

Sallie November 8, 2008 12:53 pm (Pacific time)

In 4 years, if Obama doesn't do some of the things he has promised to do, which includes ending our occupation in Iraq, then I will not hesitate to vote against him in 2012, regardless of who is running against him.

Henry Ruark November 7, 2008 1:01 pm (Pacific time)

To all: Although I share Prof. Zunes concerns re most of his well-stated points re Emanual, I also do believe the choice was made to guarantee the help of a noted political warrior to assist what cannot be other than a street-fight. Then, too, there is the fact that Emanual serves at the President's pleasure, making his next-step progress open to Obama's good faith judgment on every move, while demanding like return from Emanuel. That's one way of operational management, full of stress but often not only wise but most helpful in some degree of control over what might well be uncontrollable otherwise. It is familiar Chicago-pattern proven in practice there over a long period characterized by similar "put 'em on the spot" action --followed by whatever is required, including rapid disposal of any remains. Its success depends on strong isolation and forceful action not only with the worker but also of previous supporters, probably demanded of O in these circumstances anyway. We can only watch, wait and see, with the Zunes last-pgh as a wise guide.

[Return to Top]
©2020 All opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of

Articles for November 6, 2008 | Articles for November 7, 2008 | Articles for November 8, 2008
Sean Flynn was a photojournalist in Vietnam, taken captive in 1970 in Cambodia and never seen again.

Your customers are looking: Advertise on!

Tribute to Palestine and to the incredible courage, determination and struggle of the Palestinian People. ~Dom Martin


Special Section: Truth telling news about marijuana related issues and events.