The media are making a big deal of Obama’s interviews with prominent Democrats who ran against him in the primaries, comparing his cabinet-building to Lincoln’s at the beginning of his first term in 1860.
\nWell, if attaining harmony and political advantage by including rivals in the running of the government is one of Obama’s goals, let’s hope he has better luck than Lincoln did.<\/p>
The media are making a big deal of Obama’s interviews with prominent Democrats who ran against him in the primaries, comparing his cabinet-building to Lincoln’s at the beginning of his first term in 1860. Well, if attaining harmony and political … Continue reading
\nAccording to the website Mr. Lincoln’s White House<\/a>, Lincoln had cut a deal with at least some of his four “major” rivals for the Republican nomination, and as a result, William H. Seward (State), Salmon P. Chase (Treasury), Simon Cameron (War) and Edward Bates (Attorney General) ended up on the cabinet.
\nWilliam Seward may be the best known to us as the member who negotiated the purchase of Alaska, aka “Seward’s Folly”.
\nOf these four, only Seward remained on the cabinet until Lincoln’s death: Chase and Cameron were eventually eased out and Bates resigned in 1864.
\nThe cabinet suffered from endless rivalries and bickering, and attempts to undermine the President’s authority. Whether built out of pragmatism or idealism, Lincoln’s cabinet was hardly a model of effective governance. While it makes one admire Lincoln’s accomplishments even more, it’s hardly the legacy to be bestowed on the guy who will be inaugurated next January.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"