William Daley

I don't really have a problem with William Daley as White House chief of staff, though his work for JP Morgan Chase is disturbing in light of the role Wall Street is now playing in the nation's economy and politics. But he is certainly the cabinet-level stature that Chris Matthews was calling for, and as some have pointed out, he is at least a "grown-up." Perhaps, as E.J. Dionne says, his very presence will reassure the corporate world and give Obama more leeway to veer left, though I think that's optimistic.

What's noticeable is that naming the White House chief of staff is not only front-page news, but lead story news. Don't think that was the case when Nixon named Haldeman and Ehrlichman, though they may be the reason why it is so newsworthy now. But I think it also means that people no longer perceive the president as making his own decisions, and see him rather as an arbiter of advice rendered. Certainly in the first half of Obama's term, decision-making remained totally opaque and it would be disappointing to think that Obama himself made so many bad decisions.

'Wealthy'

I never did understand why Obama and the Democrats latched onto the $250,000 threshold as defining the "wealthy" in the whole tax cut debate.

Just this week, the president explained that Robert Gibbs would be leaving the White House because he's been working for "relatively modest pay." Yet, Gibbs' $172,000 salary, along with the earnings from wife, a practicing attorney, would almost certainly put them in that category of "wealthy."

There's no question Gibbs will make more money working as a "private consultant" for the Obama reelection campaign, but the president's remark exposes the hypocrisy of his rhetoric.