Bush praises Obama, promises smooth handover

Thursday 06th November, 05:00 AM JST

WASHINGTON —

U.S. President George W Bush on Wednesday publicly congratulated Barack Obama on his historic victory and vowed “complete cooperation” as the first black U.S. president moves into the White House.

“Last night, I had a warm conversation with president-elect Barack Obama. I congratulated him and Senator Biden on their impressive victory,” Bush said as he broke his much-noted public silence on the election.

With 76 days left in his term, Bush said he had telephoned Obama, after voters decided the longest and costliest U.S. presidential race, to invite him and wife Michelle Obama to the White House “as soon as possible.”

“I told the president-elect he can count on complete cooperation from my administration as he makes the transition to the White House,” the outgoing president said in a three-minute statement in the Rose Garden.

Bush also said he and First Lady Laura Bush had invited Obama and wife Michelle Obama to come to the presidential mansion, “and Laura and I are looking forward to welcoming them as soon as possible.”

The U.S. president, whose vast unpopularity weighed down fellow Republican and chosen successor John McCain’s campaign, also left little doubt he would be calling the shots until midday on Jan 20.

Bush made no mention of consulting Obama but promised to keep him “fully informed on important decisions” while stressing: “There’s important work to do in the months ahead, and I will continue to conduct the people’s business as long as this office remains in my trust.”

Behind the scenes, the White House pursued efforts to help Obama’s team “hit the ground running” at a time of global economic crisis and as tens of thousands of U.S. troops fight wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, aides said.

Bush requested $8.5 million in funding from his 2009 budget for the transition, which will see the president elect’s team given office space in Washington.

He also created a special transition commission in early October. The panel groups senior national security and economic aides, who will be giving their designated successors briefings or running them through exercises to simulate responses to natural disasters or terrorist attacks.

Some of those have been planned but will wait until Obama has picked his secretaries of state and defense, say U.S. government officials.

“A long campaign has now ended, and we move forward as one nation. We’re embarking on a period of change in Washington, yet there are some things that will not change,” Bush said Wednesday.

“The United States government will stay vigilant in meeting its most important responsibility—protecting the American people. And the world can be certain this commitment will remain steadfast under our next commander-in-chief,” Bush said in his three-minute statement.

Obama and his top advisers have already received national security briefings, and his campaign has already submitted the names of potential senior aides to the Federal Bureau of Investigation to get security clearances required to see and discuss sensitive information.

“Every transition is complicated. This is not a parliamentary system. We have no shadow government in place,” said Stephen Hess, a U.S. presidential transition expert at the non-partisan Brookings Institution in Washington.

Noting the two ongoing wars and the global economic crisis, Hess said: “It’s like we’re on an escalator, we don’t stop the world for a new president to get on.”

Major U.S. government departments, including defense and state, have prepared briefing books and in-person explanations for key incoming officials on major policy challenges, upcoming international events, officials said.

At the State Department, spokesman Sean McCormack showed reporters a sample—four plastic embossed folders, entitled “Overview Papers,” which included classifed information, “Looking Ahead,” “Management Overview” and a budget book.

Wire reports

› Login to comment

Latest 15 of 29 Total Comments Show All

Nippon5 at 02:39 PM JST - 6th November

Come on USAFdude.. first of all you dont actually believe what you say do you? I served under multiple presidents, and took very indirect orders from them, just like I took very indirect orders from congress, but being a political person is not a right in the military when it comes to your orders.

Ours is not to reason why ours is to do or die..

A civilian doesnt have any obligation to serve a president, a president has the obligation to serve the people..

You have a strange sense of reality when it comes to that.

All elected people serve us we dont serve them, unless we are under a contract to work for them, like military or civil service.

As far as the rhetoric and such, if you believe you served Bush in a proper manner as a military person, then how do you explain the many comments about Bush you made.. In the military you have no rights to free speach hence why you have a UCMJ... You cant call your commander an ass without getting punished, and you called Bush a ton of improper names..

Also a hand over of a president doesnt change your job in any way, unless laws get passed that do such, and none will be past the day he takes over..

Since you state you had followed the change over from Clinton to Bush that would mean you have over 8 years in the service, which means you had to have reenlisted more then once(unless you did a 6 year for school enlistment then it would be just once), so does that mean you liked being in the military working for Bush? Why would someone who is very much against war and Bush's policies reenlist at least once if not more_?

Anyway... Bush is doing his job in making the transition as smooth as possible, and that is what he should do.

Stating the crap that you state is counter productive to the US and therefore is counter productive to Obama..

Dont show a few idiots and say see they did it, its ok for me to do it... Thats shows a lack of intelligence and reminds me of the saying.... If he jumped off a skyscaper would you do it too?... Just because someone is an as s doesnt mean you have to try with all your might to be the same...

Take the high road and dont become the child... But then again you started the childish acts on this thread so maybe you cant go the high road..
Nessie at 03:00 PM JST - 6th November

"We have to watch this guy and not give him an inch," one McCain supporter wrote. "The same way he criticized every move of President Bush. We have to make things as difficult for him as he did for Bush."

So that would mean...not very difficult. Great.

I agree with this McCain supporter in one respect: We certainly do have to watch Obama, as well as every other elected official. A healthy suspicion of government -- and I don't mean knee-jerk paranoia -- is necessary for a functioning democracy. This is a hallmark of conservative thinking that liberals don't always take to heart and that conservatives forgot over the course of Bush's imperial presidency and seizure of excessive executive power. If there's any such overstepping by Obama, let's rein it in like it wasn't reined in under Bush.
USAFdude at 03:06 PM JST - 6th November

Come on USAFdude.. first of all you dont actually believe what you say do you?

Every word; why wouldn't I?

being a political person is not a right in the military when it comes to your orders.

Total agreement. That's why I wrote: I followed bush's orders, even though I'm a Democrat. When the handover takes place, I'll follow Obama's. That's what I swore to do.

Ours is not to reason why ours is to do or die..

If that were true, military members wouldn't bother to vote. It is through reason and experience that people, civilian AND military, vote the way they do.

A civilian doesnt have any obligation to serve a president, a president has the obligation to serve the people..

You have a strange sense of reality when it comes to that.

A US military member DOES have an obligation to serve the President of the United States. Refer to the oath of enlistment.

As far as the rhetoric and such, if you believe you served Bush in a proper manner as a military person, then how do you explain the many comments about Bush you made

I DON'T believe bush served in a proper manner. That's why I exercised my right to vote against his party. My comments reflect that.

In the military you have no rights to free speach hence why you have a UCMJ... You cant call your commander an ass without getting punished, and you called Bush a ton of improper names..

Wrong. You do have rights of free speech in the military; refer to the opinions section of any Stars and Stripes newspaper where troops freely write against bush, and even sign their names and ranks to them. To my knowledge, none have ever been punished for doing so, nor should they. As for the UCMJ, I know that threatening a superior is prohibited; I've never threatened a superior, nor would I ever.

Also a hand over of a president doesnt change your job in any way, unless laws get passed that do such, and none will be past the day he takes over..

Uh, what about the other three years, 364 days? If you really think my job won't change in that time, you're the one whose sense of reality is distorted.

Since you state you had followed the change over from Clinton to Bush that would mean you have over 8 years in the service, which means you had to have reenlisted more then once(unless you did a 6 year for school enlistment then it would be just once), so does that mean you liked being in the military working for Bush? Why would someone who is very much against war and Bush's policies reenlist at least once if not more_?

Once again, having bush as a C-in-C does not mean I don't want to serve my country. I've done so with honor, decoration, and distinction before and during the bush years; I'll continue to do so afterward. As for being against war, any sane person is; but if I have to defend the US, I'll do so, as I've done before.

Anyway... Bush is doing his job in making the transition as smooth as possible, and that is what he should do.

Stating the crap that you state is counter productive to the US and therefore is counter productive to Obama..

Bush should make the transition as smooth as possible; no argument there. It's the other Republicans out there spewing hatred toward a newly-elected President who hasn't even taken office yet that concern me. Their words are the true crap that's counter productive to the US and therefore is counter productive to Obama, not mine.

Dont show a few idiots and say see they did it, its ok for me to do it... Thats shows a lack of intelligence and reminds me of the saying.... If he jumped off a skyscaper would you do it too?... Just because someone is an as s doesnt mean you have to try with all your might to be the same...

There are more than a few of these hateful idiots, tragically. As for intelligence, I'm still waiting for your intelligent answer to my question: why should I trust the Republicans, especially after the vitriol so many spew today? Calling out people for such filth as these people have thrown around is not unintelligent, not being an ass, and not becoming the child. It IS the high road, which I've inarguably taken.
Nippon5 at 03:31 PM JST - 6th November

USAF come on your doing a typical cut and paste but not use the whole sentence thing..

Ill write it more basic for you.. You dont have the right to disagree with the CinC, but a civilian does have that right and they dont serve the president (like a military person does) the president serves them.. Republican is 50% of Americans and statements like glad an American was voted in and not a Republican is a very childish statement.. You cant argue your taking the high road when your making statements like that..

You have no idea who is a Republican or who is a Democrate.. and when your in combat you dont really give a damn who is either , you know and respect them for being a human not a political member.. So I would have to say you trust a person and not a political party, but hey if you cant trust a republican then you cant trust half of the military people....

Im just glad I didnt serve with you.. But I did serve with many from both parties that I trusted with my life day in and day out... Including serving under both parties presidents..

You should read the UCMJ sometime.... You really dont have any rights that a civilian does.... They let you do somethings, but they can take those things away anytime they want.. Thats not freedoms when they can remove them at will...

Anyways thats the end of this thread talking to you because I know you wont take what you said as a childish idiotic thing said and will defend it until you turn blue in the face because to admit your wrong would kill you...
dennis0bauer at 03:33 PM JST - 6th November

I bet bush rather would have talked to Palin as they have so much in common ;)
Nessie at 04:16 PM JST - 6th November

I'm worried about the outgoing presidential pardons, which were an outrage under Clinton.
USAFdude at 04:17 PM JST - 6th November

Nippon5 - I regret that you feel that I'm doing a "typical cut and paste" considering I used probably 90% of your post.

Anyway, you are completely wrong about military personnel not having the right to disagree with the C-in-C; you still have to follow his orders provided those orders are lawful. It's mentioned in the UCMJ (which, of course, I've read) as well as in the oath of enlistment.

Your statement that military members don't have any rights that a civilian does is just plain ignorant. The right to vote, the right to legal counsel, the right to appeal court decisions, the right to be paid for service, the list goes on and on, particularly in the UCMJ that you seem to believe you're such an expert on. These are all freedoms that "they" canNOT remove at will.

I also regret that you're glad not to have served with me. I gather from that statement of yours that you don't tolerate healthy dissention of any kind. But then again, neither presumably do the Republicans who want to make the handover to Obama as rough as possible. Hence, my original statement, which as far as I'm concerned, I've successfully defended. But since you want to end the discussion, OK then; have a nice day.
1eyedjack at 05:17 PM JST - 6th November

"The U.S. president, whose vast unpopularity weighed down fellow Republican and chosen successor John McCain’s campaign"

Weighed down ? Ummm, the final popular vote was 56-53 million, hardly any sign of being weighted down. Gee, when is the media going to stop injecting their personal views and opinions in the "news" segments ? Ya got something to get off yer chest, go to the Opinion page !
USAFdude at 07:56 PM JST - 6th November

http://www.ucmj.us/uniform-code-of-military-justice/sub-chapter-10-punitive-articles.shtml#888.%20ART.%2088.%20CONTEMPT%20TOWARD%20OFFICIALS

Article 88 applies only to commissioned officers; I'm enlisted. Articles 89 and 90 apply to disresepct towards commissioned officers; bush is a civilian. Article 91 applies to disrespect toward a warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer. bush is none of the above.

Still waiting for you to find anything forbidding contemptuous speech against a President.

Saying that we "dont actually have those god given rights after all" is not only as childish as you claim my statement was; it's just downright wrong.

As for ranting, check out the site I posted way near the top of this thread. THAT'S ranting, not anything I posted.

Now let me slip into teacher mode for you:

Step 1) Look at the title of this thread: Bush praises Obama, promises smooth handover

Step 2) Look at the site I posted: http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/11/05/angry.mccain.supporters/index.html

Step 3) Consider my conclusion: These Republicans seem to consider being Republican more important than being American.

Step 4) Consider my evidence: The above site, plus the reaction of McCain supporters at his concession speech, during which McCain himself had to quiet down boos from the audience when McCain called for support of President-elect Obama. So much for a smooth handover.

Step 5) Answer my question: Why should I trust Republicans?

I can't make this any clearer than that. If you wish to blow off my logic and supported arguments as "ranting", then go ahead. But you'd look a lot more mature and rational if you'd actually read the UCMJ before posting, and then addressing my statement with at least a modicum of logic to back it up your argument.
SuperLib at 08:23 PM JST - 6th November

USAFdude...do you think Obama would agree with your messages to Republicans tonight?

I voted Democrat so I guess by your standards I'm a real American. Thanks. I needed that validation from you.

The fact is that what people are saying to you above is absolutely true. You might not like the messenger, so maybe it would be better to hear it from me, someone who voted for Obama and who has voted Democrat his entire life. If you plan on continuing partisan politics then you've learned absolutely nothing at all from Obama. I think he'd flat out reject your opinions of Republicans and the methods your using to continue to try to divide the US.

Many times over the past few months I've pointed out that some Obama supporters here sure as hell weren't following his message. In a lot of ways I think I was trying to define Obama as my candidate and not theirs. And when I listen to people like you, a fellow Obama supporter, trying to use the victory as a bat to hit Republicans over the head it just makes me sick.

Wasn't part of the victory the hope that we were going to start moving away from that stuff? And yet here you are on Day 1....literally trying to exclude half of the population. Did you support Obama because you supported his message or did you vote for Obama so you could get revenge on Republicans?

Do you want to know why you should trust Republicans? Because Obama does.

Yes, you're always going to be able to search the internet and find statements from radicals. That's not going to end. But the people here aren't the people writing those letters. And you shouldn't think you have the right to go around insulting every Republican just because of what some guy wrote on the internet. As a fellow democrat I'm sure you wouldn't want us to be defined by the radical left.
USAFdude at 08:32 PM JST - 6th November

SuperLib - thank you for your very good response to my question. In light of this, I withdraw my statement. I apologize to any and all whom I've offended.
zurcronium at 08:45 PM JST - 6th November

The democrats are the least of the worries for the failing republican party. They need to get their own house in order, which I think is not likely to happen, or they will become non-viable as a party. Bush destroyed the party and mccain by caving in and picking sarah "where is africa" palin (aka Bible Spice) put the final nail in the coffin.
Nippon5 at 09:27 PM JST - 6th November

Thank you superlib for pointing it out..

I would hate to see anyone continue the eye poking when we are already blind to what is going on in the world.

We have a ton of things to take care of and we cant do that with a one sided country or a one sided goverment.. Of the people, For the people, means all of the people. Left, Right, Lib. Con, or Independents like me.

I hope Obama does some of what he promises, but above everything else I hope they stop the wound we have in our budget system and spending system instead of poking at the wounds for 4 more years.. We need to get control of our financials..We spent the last 4 years bleeding out and now we need to fix the issues..

Just so you know USAF, I voted Barr because he actually had a plan to reduce the national debt that added up, I liked Obama's Energy and McCains ability to talk to either side.. I didnt like Obamas "our side is the only side" that was the theme of the Party , and McCains never wanting to change (since he stayed the corse on too much)Nor did I like that neither of them would actually control the spending and reduce the debt we have....

You didnt offend me but I did feel you spoke in direct contrast to the man you elected...

Now since I out rank you.... Go back to work:)
Sarge at 11:51 PM JST - 6th November

Some Japanese I know have said that Obama's saying he'll change America AND CHANGE THE WORLD is arrogant...
Molenir at 07:12 AM JST - 7th November

Wait, so you're saying that in spite of electing Obama, we're still arrogant. Wow.

Speaking for myself here, I'm a conservative, though my party affiliation happens to be Republican. I was against McCain for that simple reason. Oh, I voted for him, but I really didn't want another Bush, aka. Democrat Lite, as President.

We need to reign in spending, balance the budget, lower taxes, and reduce the dependence on the government. How much of this though, do you think Obama will agree with. Yeah, is about what I thought. So you see why I'm not supporting the man, even a little bit.