Why tap Gregg for Commerce Sec. when his Senate replacement is more qualified?

@ladyluna (7004)
United States
February 5, 2009 8:35am CST
Hello All, As many of you are aware, Judd Gregg was offered the Commerce Secretary post. There was a back-room deal made to make sure that his replacment would be a member of Gregg's political party -- so as to appear to maintain the current balance of power in the U.S. Senate. The NH governor who agreed to this back-room deal is a Democrat, and Gregg is a Republican. As if it isn't bad enough that these cronies are making back-room deals, in spite of the will of The People who elected Gregg, the question begs to be asked: Why offer the post to Gregg when his appointed replacement has far, far more relevant experience to serve in the post. In other words, J. Bonnie Newman appears to be more qualifed to act as Commerce Secretary than Gregg. Below are some links to review the qualifications of each. Like Gregg, Newman is a member of the Republican Party. So, if Team Obama was only interested in 'reaching across the aisle' in this pick, they could have accomplished that goal by choosing Newman right away, that is after Richardson backed out because of a 'pay to play' criminal investigation. How can it NOT be perceived that Team Obama made this move as none other than self-serving political strategy? The end result is that the DNC is overjoyed that this puts the NH Senate seat in play for 2010. My questions to you are: 1. Is this the CHANGE that America wanted? 2. Why do you think Team Obama tapped a lesser qualified, serving member of the United States Senate instead of choosing Bonnie Newman? 3. Should we be outraged at these slugs for blatantly ignoring the will of The People, and making national policy based on their own self-serving interests? 4. Who should we be most outraged with? Obama, Gregg, The NH Governor, the DNC or the RNC? Thanks, I look forward to all of your responses. ____________________________________________________________________________________ Bonnie Newman's qualifications: "She has devoted many years of her career to higher education, including service at UNH as the assistant dean of students from 1969 to 1972, dean of students from 1972-1978, and interim dean of the Whittemore School of Business and Economics from 1998-1999. She also served as the executive dean at Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government from 2000-2005. She is chairman of the United States Naval Academy Board of Visitors. Ms. Newman is most known for her involvement in national politics, having served in the Reagan and Bush administrations. From 1989 until 1991 she served as assistant to the president for management and administration, where she oversaw all administrative operations for the White House and Executive Office of the President. She also served as assistant secretary of commerce for economic development under the Reagan Administration. Earlier she served as associate director of the Office of Presidential Personnel at the White House and chief of staff for New Hampshire Congressman Judd Gregg. In the private sector, Ms. Newman has been active as an investor in the financing and development of early stage entrepreneurial opportunities. She also served as president of the New Hampshire Business and Industry Association and the New England Council. Ms. Newman is a director of Citizens Advisors, Lumina Foundation, Markem Corporation, and the New Hampshire Charitable Foundation. A resident of North Hampton, New Hampshire, she received her B.A. degree in sociology from St. Joseph’s College and her M.Ed. degree in higher education administration from Pennsylvania State University. She has honorary degrees from Rivier College, Notre Dame College, Keene State College, St. Joseph’s College, and New Hampshire College. http://www.unh.edu/news/cj_nr/2006/may/mc_060525new.cfm?type=n versus Gregg who other than a few short years as a tax lawyer, has NO PRIVATE SECTOR EXPERIENCE AT ALL! "NAME — Judd Alan Gregg AGE-BIRTHDATE-LOCATION — 61; February 14, 1947; Nashua, N.H. EXPERIENCE — New Hampshire senator, 1993-present; New Hampshire governor, 1989-1993; U.S. representative, New Hampshire's Second District, 1981-1989; executive councilor, New Hampshire's District 5, 1979-1981; partner, Sullivan, Gregg and Horton." http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/president/38857502.html?elr=KArks:DCiUMEaPc:UiD3aPc:_Yyc:aULPQL7PQLanchO7DiU http://bioguide.congress.gov/scripts/biodisplay.pl?index=G000445 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judd_Gregg
2 responses
@Taskr36 (13925)
• United States
5 Feb 09
I'm not going to criticize Gregg for the backroom deal because he saw this as a power play to force a supermajority in the senate. If you are concerned about the will of the people, and you should be, then write your senators, congressman, and your state senators and state congressman telling them that you think replacements should be elected and not appointed. I personally am against appointing senators when everyone knows they should be elected. A senator's job is to represent the people who elected them. By that definition you could say that Roland Burris' job is now to represent Blagojevich.
1 person likes this
@ladyluna (7004)
• United States
5 Feb 09
Hello Taskr, I understand that Gregg was probably aware of Team Obama's skullduggery. Though, I cannot overlook the fact that Gregg could have, and I believe should have declined. Had he done so, he would have been the poster child for commitment to constituency. As it is, he will finish out his career in a cushy cabinet post, instead of duking it out on the Senate Floor, which is what his constituents hired him to do. Add to that his commitment to the environmental extreme, and the necessity of a pro carbon cap & trade guy (or gal) occupying the commerce seat if the Obama 800 billion Global Warming Initiatives are to be enacted, and I'm left scratching my head. I'm feeling the same way I did after the "Gang of 14" had their way with us -- like I need a long, hot shower, with lye soap.
@ladyluna (7004)
• United States
5 Feb 09
Oh, I nearly forgot to add: Thank you for making the very valid point that we should be jamming the phone lines of The Capitol telling our elected representatives that it's long passed the time that Gubanatorial 'appointments' went the way of the dinosaur. I'm confident that our citizens would much prefer to spend money on special elections than on the nonsense that's been included in this heroic Stimulus Bill. Excellent point!
@Taskr36 (13925)
• United States
5 Feb 09
"Thank you for making the very valid point that we should be jamming the phone lines of The Capitol telling our elected representatives that it's long passed the time that Gubanatorial 'appointments' went the way of the dinosaur." This is the most critical part of a democratic republic. Too many people seem to think that democracy begins and ends at the voting booth. Many only care about the voting booth when there's a Presidential election. We elect these people to represent us. Well how in God's name can they represent us if we don't tell them what we want?
1 person likes this
@Destiny007 (5820)
• United States
5 Feb 09
Ah yes, the smoke filled back room deals... except now the back rooms are no longer smoke filled. Isn't change grand? 1... Yes, it ain't Bush and that is all that matters, because he was the only reason our country is in it's present condition. 2... Because it frees up a spot that would otherwise be occupied in 2010... and makes it easier to change the landscape in that election. 3... Yes. 4... All of the above with the addition of our corrupt Congress and our incompetent usurper in chief. A purge is in order and it cannot begin soon enough. Now they want us to be subservient to the UN, even down to the extent of dictating how we raise, discipline, and educate our children. The time has come to jerk our government back into compliance with the limits restrictions as set forth in the Constitution, with those limits and restrictions strictly enforced. It is also way past time to tell the UN to take a hike.
1 person likes this