It isn’t always reliable, but the rule I follow is that if an administration has done something to bother David Broder it has probably done something right or at least something smart. Regarding the Daschle mess, Broder writes:

Even when the White House belatedly learned of Daschle’s tax troubles, it misjudged the political fallout. Despite the glaring contradiction between Obama’s proclaimed ethical standards and Daschle’s lucrative expense-account life that led to his tax underpayment, Obama said he “absolutely” stood by his choice. One day later, he accepted Daschle’s withdrawal. This is a blow to Obama’s credibility that will not be easily forgotten.

Of all the things to criticize about Obama’s mistakes in the first few weeks, this seems the strangest one to hold up as damaging. Arguably, appointing Daschle or failing to investigate Daschle’s tax problems and insurance industry connections was the major blunder; quickly climbing down from support for the nominee was not. At what point did Obama’s habit of dropping inconvenient political allies and associates start to be seen as damaging to his credibility by establishment pundits. No matter how close to Obama they have been, friends and allies are thrown overboard with the greatest of ease after having issued ringing declarations of fidelity and everlasting bonds of trust. Remember “I can no more disown him than I can disown the black community” or “I can no more disown him than I can my white grandmother”? The disowning followed a little later. Granted, it wasn’t the next day, but it is the same idea. After the Philadelphia speech where he made those remarks, in which he defended his membership at Trinity, it took all of a couple months for him to cut his ties with the church, too, after it had become just a little too embarrassing. Power says something offensive about his opponent? She is banished for the remainder of the campaign, and has returned to his camp only much later.

Now that Daschle, one of his patrons and long-time supporters, had become a millstone around his neck, he casts him away, and in this case the decision to drop him was obviously the right and smart move under the circumstances. This is how the man operates: when what is useful to his advancement at one point becomes a burden, he abandons it after a display of support to make it seem as if the abandonment is reluctant. It seems to be very politically effective, as Obama’s continued rise demonstrates. His fans will read this as a very hostile criticism, but it seems to me that it is just a description. After the last administration, when corrupt or incompetent officials had to be pried out of their positions with tremendous public pressure and criticism, and then only after some catastrophic failure on their watch, it is a welcome change to have a President who will throw his people to the wolves almost immediately.

The people who should be most upset by the Cabinet troubles are probably progressives, especially those interested in seeing some major health care legislation in the 111th Congress. Daschle was one of the few Cabinet selections whom progressives found unobjectionable, and some were even enthused by the choice, so it may be a sign of the administration’s priorities that he was made into the sacrificial offering while Geithner, whose competence and judgement in his last post are questionable at best, was kept on. Faced with comparable scandals, the relative centrist with Goldman Sachs ties stays on and the relative progressive health care advocate is dropped. Guardians of the status quo ought to be well pleased, which makes Broder’s complaints all the more strange.