Gates

Regarding Gates, I know I have said this before, and I am sorry to keep repeating myself, but please, everyone of leftward persuasion, remember that the "change" we all really care about in the end is POLICY change. Chill out about Gates. I know, I know, he's a Bush appointee. However, before you recoil at the association with anything GWB has touched, remember that Gates was a member of the Iraq Study Group that strongly criticized the Iraq War, and Bush appointed him from a very defensive posture after the PR disaster of Don Rumsfeld.

Also, I would urge you to remember the following:

1. He agrees with Obama on the most important priorities where his views matter, such as closing Gitmo, withdrawing from Iraq, and going after al Qaeda in the Afghanistan-Pakistan border area. If he agrees with Obama's policies and will faithfully implement them, what is the problem?

2. He had to assume his job after the category 5 tenure of Don Rumsfeld, and by all accounts has restored competence and professionalism to the defense department--no small accomplishment, indeed. As a result, he has the respect of the military brass, which is something Barack has yet to earn.

3. He is very close to Brent Scowcroft, whom Obama deeply respects. Also, if second hand sources are to be believed, he has a long standing relationship with Jim Jones, Obama's likely national security adviser.

4. It fulfills a major campaign promise, and shows Obama once again to be far more thoughtful than the reflexive political culture he operates in. He is anti-Bush where Bush is wrong. He isn't anti-Bush just because of the name. Wonder why Obama is so hard to target for righty partisans? That's why. The strongest advantage the Democratic Party has, BY FAR, is the Obama brand. Obama's approval rating is north of 70%. Congress is fortunate if they poll at Bush levels. That brand is what we will be cashing in for universal healthcare, energy independence, tax reform, aid to the states, re-regulation of the financial system, etc.

5. It is pretty hard for a defense secretary to be malignant all by himself. It is important to remember that Rumsfeld was enabled by an incredibly weak and unintelligent president, a Vice President at least as radical as Rumsfeld himself, a diffident national security adviser, and a marginalized Secretary of State. Those positions will now be held by Barack Obama, Joe Biden, Jim Jones, and Hillary Clinton. Even if Obama spends no time at all on defense/forpol, does anyone really believe that Gates will run roughshod over that bunch?

6. Which brings us to the 800-pound gorilla in the room--the economy. One of the most important decisions a president ever makes is how he will manage his time. What will he focus on? I actually read quite a bit during the primary season and into the fall about how Obama actually saw himself as more of a foreign policy president than a domestic one. Obviously, he has adapted his vision of the office based on where the economy has gone. Isn't that the right decision? Don't we want him dedicating his time there? Doesn't that make the continuity argument of Gates at defense all the more compelling? If that doesn't work out, he can always move Gates at a later time. For now, Gates is competent, widely respected, is likely to work well with the rest of Obama's national security team, and agrees with Obama's basic priorities. It makes a good deal of sense, and as usual, Obama has been thoughtful, pragmatic, and yet strong-minded at the same time.

He doesn't make decisions the way we are used to seeing politicians make decisions.

Remember, everyone. Keep your eye on the ball here. It is the POLICY that matters. Let's get the policy right, and leave the personality driven crap to the screaming heads on TV, ok?