pitched battles with a press corps hell-bent on inflicting daily damage.

I don't see much difference today. The media has been yapping incessantly about Obama' every move. I have never seen this much attention paid to a transition, ever. They're desperate for an exclusive. One that reflects a "misstep" on the part of Obama, or "dissaray" or whatever.

So, you'd think that this:

There's a new media infrastructure to watch their backs.

would be reassuring. I don't find it so, because it seems that the new media infrastructure holds some of the loudest and harshest critics of the new Administration.

THIS IS EXCELLENT NEWS FOR SARAH PALIN '12!!!

Greg,

These people are in the "transition" team, the key word being transition. They are not in admin, not yet anyway.

BTW, not all people worked in the Clinton era become automatically "clintonites". Sorry to burst your bubble.

How could there NOT be Clintonites everywhere? (They were all over Obama's campaign, too). You need experienced people, and the experienced Democrats obviously are the ones who served in the most recent Democratic administration. Dog bites man story if ever there was one.

Assuming that the "Clintonites," such as they are, will use their experience to implement the Obama agenda, that's great. And I think this is what will happen, rather than what some people fear, which is that they would be bringing old Clinton baggage to the job.

After all, outside of the Carvilles and Stephadiculouses of the world -- who are obviously not in this mix -- most of these folks were not in Bill and Hillary's inner circle but Dems devoted to public service. Presumably, they do recognize the opportunity in the Obama administration to achieve policy changes that go far, far beyond what Clinton could have imagined.

The press -- especially including this site -- are in withdrawal after one of the most exciting campaigns in years (though they, the press, made it more exciting than it was with their "Why can't he close the deal" crap). Furthermore, the press is much larger than it has ever been in the past, with too many mouths seeking too little sustenance, in their Darwinian battles.

They have to write about anything, their jonesing is so overwhelming, that they are reporting stuff they would have tossed in the circular file years ago. Pity them. Pity us.

Does anyone realize that without people who served under Clinton, Obama's transition would be populated with inexperienced Dems or fossils who served under Carter?

this is the biggest load of nothing, this whole controversy, I have ever seen.

What is all the hoopla about using people from the Clinton administration? Obama ran against the policies of the BUSH administration, not Clintons. I don't remember him making a pledge that he wouldn't use Clintonites. Why is there analysis of this issue? I would think this was common sense.

I think it is reasonable for Greg to use the phrase: Clintonites. Whether anyone agrees with this or not misses the larger point, which is the vital experience that these people bring to Obama's Transition Team, and hopefully (IMO) his administration as well.

Clinton's administration was probably the most embattled administration in modern history. Let's remember that many of these people have acquired political combat skills as well as administrative skills. Obama's going to need them - badly, I think.

George W. has left a smoking hole in the ground, where once boundless enthusiasm was the perceived problem. My dear god, what a tragic mess.

Equally tragic is that the mere destruction of the US Constitution, and most of its foundational ideals, wasn't enough to get the American citizenry's political attention. No, what we needed was full-on global economic collapse to finally wake up, I guess.

Henceforth, let all who aspire to the throne take care. You can take away our civil liberties, imprison our fellows and spit on our friends, but stay the fuck away from our Costco memberships.

Any guesses as to how many voting Americans now care about the carnal possibilities of cigars, or blue dresses, or what the meaning of is, um, is?

Good. Some of these folks may not strongly support the same policies we do, but they have the experience and deep roots Obama will need not having those roots himself. Ultimately, we need Obama to surround himself with experienced Democrats and trust (and I do) that he will weight the opinions and use his own intellect and excellent decision making (as evidenced in the campaign) to do the right thing. I was never a huge Clinton supporter (Mr. or Mrs.) but I have no problem with them being in the Obama administration.