When does “They won’t work in my White House!” mean they will? With a politician of course. One of Obama’s major campaign promises was to not allow lobbyists on his staff. The elections just happened and he’s already tossing this promise out the window:

A day after being elected president and acknowledging “the worst financial crisis in a century,” Barack Obama asked one of the biggest recipients of Wall Street campaign contributions to be his chief of staff. Rep. Rahm Emanuel, the Illinois congressman who was an aide in the Clinton White House, was the top House recipient in the 2008 election cycle of contributions from hedge funds, private equity firms and the larger securities/investment industry… Emanuel was an investment banker between the Clinton administration and his election to Congress and reported a net worth in 2007 of between $5 million and $13.2 million (lawmakers report their assets and liabilities in ranges). That would make him the 34th wealthiest member of the House. [Center For Responsive Politics]

Gov. Jon Corzine, a multimillionaire and former Wall Street chief executive [Goldman Sachs], is being actively vetted by the Obama transition team as a possible candidate for Treasury secretary in the new administration, two New Jersey Democrats familiar with the process said early this morning. [The Star-Ledger]

Goldman Sachs is a huge beneficiary of the most recent corporate bailout and the same former employer of current Treasurer Secretary Henry Paulson.

Can anyone say they were really surprised that Barack wouldn’t be different than the rest? I think in some ways Democrats in power can actually be more dangerous, because they employ rhetoric that they are different and they will make positive change. Rather than just garnering votes through scare tactics, they play on hopes for a better world.

Many traditionally liberal publications like huffingtonpost.com and the Nation, who ran some good criticisms of the US government under Bush, have curtailed their criticisms for Obama or even are outright hostile to those who seek to apply the same standards to all politicians no matter what party. I think it’s important to keep one’s skepticism healthy, regardless of rhetoric or affiliation.

Change is always going to be problematic when it’s something we merely “believe in” and leave to wealthy elites or their servants. The only viable option I see is enacting it ourselves in our everyday lives.