So President Obama promised virtue and transparency, and declared war on lobbyists. Thus far, we’ve got a tax cheat headed for Treasury, a man who lied under oath headed for Justice, and two celebrated lobbyists headed for the #2 slots at Defense and HHS.

I do not understand why the Treasury guy wasn’t thrown out in a rage of protest. We’ve got something like 350 million Americans. I refuse to believe he is so uniquely qualified that Geithner’s dramatic lack of virtue should be ignored. Nor do I understand why Holder’s denial that he knew all about Marc Rich isn’t grounds for rejection. Precisely for the reason Obama stated: at a time when confidence in government is crucial, you can’t start your administration by violating your own announced principles.

And to round off the first week’s accomplishments, what’s up with all the “special envoys”? That seems to me to guarantee endless turf battles within the administration. Who’s going to be in charge of Middle East policy? Mitchell? To whom will he report, the president or Hillary? What’s Dennis Ross going to do? What about Haass? What about the Assistant Secretary of State for the region? He/she won’t like being relegated to the minors. And what about all the ambassadors, who hate special envoys?

It’s not easy making decisions. Senators don’t make decisions, they give speeches. And personnel decisions are typically more about internal party politics than about substantive issues (take Vance to assuage the traditional Dems; appoint Brzezinski to cheer up the hawks; take Rogers to assuage the traditional Pubs; appoint Kissinger to make Rockefeller happy, etc.). Fine. Our government is always fractious, it’s the way we are. But it seems to me that Obama’s going out of his way to maximize internal conflict. Maybe he is taking that Lincoln book too seriously?