The self-absorption administration

From Ron's Suskind's apparent stream of conscious observations on the transition.

Not every president gets an era. Bush 41 didn’t. Reagan did, F.D.R. certainly did and L.B.J. did, too, by virtue of having presided during havoc. Clinton yearns for his eight years to be called an era but knows he fell short, and often says that a president needs to have governed during crisis to be considered great. Or at least consequential. Much like Lyndon Johnson’s, George W. Bush’s tenure was the drama of a president devoured by titanic events — forces that overwhelmed best-laid plans and even the soundest of intentions, and magnified errors.

"The best-laid plans?" And what, pray tell, were those?

And is he implying Democrats are still the party of acid?

Of course, the roots took hold in Iowa and spread state to state. And now, the day before Election Day, Team Obama was running though fields of tall grass, city to city, in the final day of a kind of electoral mystery tour.

But Suskind's overall conclusion on the failed presidency of George W. Bush is a sound one: for Bush it was always just about him.

The transition

Froomkin writes that one thing the Bush administration does seem to be approaching one thing with a mix of competence and integrity: the transition.

Demetri Sevastopulo writes in the Financial Times: "While Barack Obama and John McCain have been trading blows over who would be the best commander-in-chief, the White House has been working with both campaigns to ensure that the winner of Tuesday's election will be prepared for the first change in presidential power since the 2001 terror attacks on the US. . . .

"Experts on presidential transitions and participants in the process say the Bush administration effort has been unprecedented in modern American history.

"'I don't recall any other transition as detailed or as conscientious as this,' said one outside transition adviser.

"'Partly it is a damage limitation thing, but partly it is a noble thing. . . . They see it as part of their obligation to facilitate as smooth a transfer as possible.'"

[...]

"The President has directed his Cabinet and staff to be forward-leaning in all of their efforts to ensure a smooth and effective transition. It has never been more critical that a transition from one Administration to the next be as seamless as possible. This Administration has gone to great lengths to prepare the Federal government for the transition to a new Administration and to help the major-party candidates prepare for a Presidential transition. For example:

"* Federal agencies and White House offices are preparing briefings for the President-elect's team on significant pending policy issues as well as the structure of those agencies and offices.

"* Career executives within each agency who may assume added responsibilities before the arrival of new political appointees have been identified, briefed, and included in a wide range of preparatory activities. . . .[sic]

But about that damage limitation thing...

Nevertheless, a recent Congressional Research Service report outlines some of the problems that may be ahead: "Interparty transitions in particular might be contentious. Using the various powers available, a sitting President might use the transition period to attempt to secure his legacy or effect policy changes. Some observers have suggested that, if the incumbent has lost the election, he might try to enact policies in the waning months of his presidency that would 'tie his successor's hands.' . . .

"The disposition of government records (including presidential records and vice presidential records) and the practice of 'burrowing in' (which involves the conversion of political appointees to career status in the civil service) are two activities associated largely with the outgoing President's Administration." (I wrote about "burrowing in" for NiemanWatchdog.org in June.)

The issue of record-keeping is particularly problematic. Warns the CRS report: "Changes of presidential administrations prompt concerns that some government records might be destroyed or removed during the transition. Responsibility for the life cycle management of government records rests with the Archivist of the United States, who is the head of the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). To address concerns about, and prevent the possible loss of, records, NARA issued a bulletin in each of the past five presidential election years, as well as in 2008, reminding agency heads of the regulations regarding proper records management. As stated in the first line of the 2008 bulletin. . . its purpose 'is to remind heads of Federal agencies that official records must remain in the custody of the agency.' . . .

"Of particular concern for the 2008 transition are electronic records."

As for the candidates themselves, I expect you're not surprised to learn that Obama's transition team has...I think the technical phrase is, has it's shit together. McCain, not so much.

Obama's transition planning is by all accounts far more advanced than McCain's.

Edward Luce writes in the Financial Times: "Washington's best-kept secret is that Barack Obama has the largest and most disciplined presidential transition team anyone can recall. Headed by John Podesta, former chief of staff in Bill Clinton's White House, it started work well before the financial meltdown hit in September but has been swamped by its implications ever since. . . .

"'President-elect Obama could be faced with a situation on New Year's Eve where US troops are not permitted to leave their barracks because there is no legal basis for their presence in Iraq,' says Bill Galston, a scholar at the Brookings Institution, who was involved in Mr Clinton's transition effort. 'To game out all these scenarios -- the financial crisis, Iraq, the fiscal stimulus, etc -- will require an unprecedented degree of planning for a transition effort.'"

Charles Babbington writes for the Associated Press: "In a 10th-floor office a few blocks from the White House is a self-described government in waiting, ready to push detailed proposals for the economy, Iraq and scores of other issues if Barack Obama becomes president.

McCain's transition team is more focused on Joe the Plumber.

Hope and calm versus fear and recriminations

While McCain vows to go after Chris Dodd and Barney Frank, two rare members of Congress who've shown real leadership, I think EJ Dionne has this exactly right.

In recent days, Obama has painted himself as calm, pragmatic, open and hopeful. He seemed to be channeling FDR when he told a crowd in Indianapolis on Wednesday: "This isn't a time for fear or for panic. This is a time for resolve and steady leadership."

As for McCain, his campaign is trying to sow fear and panic about Obama. That's exactly what Herbert Hoover tried to do with Roosevelt. Days before the 1932 election, Hoover attacked Roosevelt's "inchoate New Deal." He predicted it would "crack the timbers of the Constitution" and warned voters to beware of the "glitter of promise."

Hoover stopped short of declaring Roosevelt a celebrity. But Donald A. Ritchie reports in his excellent 2007 book, "Electing FDR," that Hoover saw Roosevelt as "his weakest and most vulnerable" foe and "did not respect him as a political rival." McCain conveys unmistakably that he feels the same way about "that one" running against him.