One is not supposed to associate corruption, incompetence, and embarrassment with the Obama administration.

But David Axelrod in various ways, from his son’s current employment, to contracts in which he is owed money, is still in part connected with the very Obama 2008 campaign lobbying firms that now have morphed into receiving lucrative contracts to push administration health-care reform. From a variety of news reports, the multi-million-dollar income of these firms seems to be in large part predicated on contracts in which administration recommendations are critical, and the direct subsequent beneficiaries of their profits include Axelrod’s friends, family — and himself, given that his ex-firm’s profitability is critical to paying Axelrod his final contractual cash-out sums. One cannot work for the president of the United States, and then be associated with policies and guidance that result in one’s former firm being able to pay one millions still owed. The conflict of interest is just too great.

Robert Gibbs has done the impossible and trumped Scott McClellan as the most embarrassing press secretary in recent memory. He does not come equipped with the facts and seems unserious about the need to be accurate; his answers are neither reasoned nor logical; he insults his questioners. He is tongue-tied and, in McClellan fashion, flares up at others apparently in exasperation at his own incoherence. Gibbs bears in small part responsibility for the growing belief that the Obama administration is unprepared, often confused, and petulant when called on it.

Hillary Clinton (contrast the former gravitas of Condoleezza Rice) has turned (or has had turned for her) the secretary of state’s job into a ceremonial position, and there is no wonder she is exasperated. Regional czars and special envoys have carved up and absconded with the important strategic areas of U.S. foreign policy. The Joint Chiefs and National Security Advisor and Council seem to be conducting two wars. Her own husband is entrusted to jetting to hot spots as she heads for ceremonial visits to Africa.

Obama himself overhypes his next upcoming key, important, land-breaking, transformative speeches on foreign policy that in turn fizzle. He overshadows Clinton instead in foreign policy through apologies and his grandstanding with Chavez or Ahmadinejad. I think what we are witnessing, to be frank, is a disturbing and cynical Chicago-style solution in which the hallowed secretary of state position was used to marginalize a potential political rival. The logic seems to have been that Clinton on the inside has no role to voice exasperation and triangulation as Obama’s polls dive — she will be tarred as Obama sinks in the polls and not credited if he comes back. Her husband’s lucrative if questionable overseas speaking income is now curtailed and she left a prominent senate seat with daily news exposure for photo-ops in the Congo that, rightly or wrongly, few know or care about.

At some point Team Obama will realize that Gibbs has to go, that Axelrod is a growing liability and will either have to recede from his prominence or resign, and Secretary Clinton will conclude that she was selected neither to implement foreign-policy initiatives nor because of her experience abroad, but largely for 2012 political reasons, and so will depart at the end of the first term if not much sooner.