Hillary's sly demurral speaks volumes
By David Neiwert Friday Nov 14, 2008 5:00pm
DOWNLOAD (44)
PLAY (55)
Hillary Clinton declined to answer any questions today about the speculation that President-elect Obama is talking to her about being Secretary of State in his Cabinet -- and the denial left little doubt that she is indeed in the running.
Meanwhile, Nico Pitney at HuffPo reports that Obama has offered her the job.
Personally, I'd always suspected he would name Clinton to the Supreme Court with the first opening there, but the fact that Obama is looking to build bridges with former enemies this early says volumes about how he's going to approach governance. Mostly that is a good thing, but there is a built-in downside here too.
Login or Register to post comments.
Isn't sly a loaded term?
Unless you're Sly Stone
But then I'm sure Stone is often loaded.
Hillary Sets Down ‘Conditions’ for Accepting Secretary of State
Screw Hilary. Bill Richardson is practicing his diplomacy with ALIENS!
besides the known(like her vote for the war)
Considering she introduced an anti-flag burning amendment and doesn't support gay marriage and has proven herself to be rabidly political, I don't know that I'd want to see her on the supreme court. I'd could live with her as Sec. of State.
How about Ambassador to Alaska?
...wouldn't you just LOVE to hear Obama nominate Palin as "Ambassador to Russia"? LMAO.
Putin would wrap her around his finger. Have her renouncing her citizenship and running for mayor of wasillaberg in 6 months.
Putin has already reared his head over Alaska, but Sarah the Maverick ain't skeered.
.
At least these people won't be in the Senate anymore.
I'm sorry, but one of the reasons I stopped supporting Hillary was she was becoming too much of a hawk on Iraq and showing strong bias towards Israel that would of been a source of trouble if she won.
Making her Sec of State... aka: "Chief Diplomat"... of the U.S. seems like a serious mistake.
My I reiterate my support for Richardson?
My thoughts exactly both on HRC's qualifications for SOS and that Richardson would be a much better pick. One other issue is I just don't see Senator Clinton as much of a team player. And for all the credit Obama would get with her fans (is that really very important right now) he would piss them off times ten if he had to fire her and she no longer had her role in the senate. I hope she turns it down.
What is the point now and when she screwed up there would be more hell to pay. Do not think he offered her the job...but had to consider her --then met with Richardson the next day...
Ditto on Richardson, he would make a great SoS. Hillary is tailor-made to be the next lion in the Senate. Harry Reid is a lightweight suffering from battered-wife syndrome. Hillary is a scrapper who drives the right wing bonkers. She needs to be Senate majority leader.
really has some diplomatic skills...not just borrows them from her husband...The World leaders would neither trust her or respect her...She met them 'without portfolio' as the 'wife of'!
This is a ploy [leak by clintonites]to derail a Richardson appointment...OLD GUARD REVENGE POLITICS...we need not go back.
Email Obama and voice your opinion at watchdog...We do not need the clintons to mess up his Admin...Bush et al has done enough!
On the one hand, Obama is clearing all the DLC dinosaur bones out of the Congress. On the other hand...
Perhaps, but I'm not sure how inserting Bill Clinton's bone into the State Department is going to be an improvement.
Well, the only problem with clearing "DLC dinosaur bones" out of Congress is that you could be cutting off your nose to spite your face, legislatively speaking. As silly as it may be, seniority is important in both the House and the Senate.
But if I were putting a Clinton in as SoS, I think Bill would be a better choice than Hillary. He's well respected, even well loved, around the world, and is a diplomat by nature. Admittedly, the rest of the world treats Hillary better than the U.S. does (they haven't been so busy hating anything with the name "Clinton" that they refuse to acknowledge her talents), but I'm not sure if her personality and skills are really diplomat material.
Health and Human Services, now, that would be a different matter.
four fingers and a thumb.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wiI62AZTQw8
and right freaking hilarious! I really enjoyed that ... thanks.
If, like me, you went to school in the fifties and early sixties you are quite familiar with that film. Frankly, funny as it is too watch today, it was terrifying back then, because the threat was very real.
"Change" means choosing the same old, same old to be a part of your organization. I get it. People that screamed for change, really meant little change. Please sir, can you give us some more of the same old Rethug and DLC lifers.
"ConcernedCanuck" means "ConcernedTroll"....interesting.
People that actually speak the truth are considered trolls now? What is this, a Rethug blog to you? Good luck with your change with people like the Clintons and the same old, same old political selections.
No whiny trolls are considered trolls. I've read all your whiny posts and good luck to you in your troll hole. May your whines keep you warm at night.
Where are the progressives? It's looking like moving into a new mansion and installing the same musty drapes full of stale cigar smoke from the old place.
One can only suspect the same bluedog voting routine as well.
On one hand I understand utilizing the energies of the opposition and not banishing them. Then again, does this not have the same potential to turn against Obama much the same as stocking your wine cellar with shit? Et tu` Brute`? More importantly, this group maintaining the status quo that has kept citizens in this country in despair and continuously overlooked and untended
as corporations continue come first nothing is left for us and the cupboard turns new shades of bare.
Tell me how humane progressive votes will mean jack-shit as these deck chairs rearrange.
I've heard others also express a desire to see Senator Clinton on the supreme court. I can't see that at all. She has never been a judge nor has she even practiced law in several decades. You don't just appoint people to the court because you have respect for them, they need to be able to understand and comment on complex legal issues. Although I have respect for Senator Clinton's intellect, knowledge, and work ethic I think she would be the most unqualified nominee for the supreme court since Clarence Thomas or Harriet Miers. I think she is more qualified for secretary of state but still not so much for that either. The biggest qualification I hear her supporters mention is that she's travelled a lot. She has no diplomacy experience and from her campaign and track record as first lady diplomacy doesn't seem to be her strong point. Richardson would is much more qualified and also seems like more of a team player.
They're now talking about Bill Clinton for the Supremes.
Rumour has it that Bill already had the Supremes. He said Diana Ross wasn't all that special.
I knew someone would take the bait.
Do you like sushi too?
the offer to clinton is pure politics to shut her and her hubby up, for at least the next 2 years
richardson should be the one
however...hillary can nag world leaders into submission...so she has that going for her
Hillary also has her husband. The joke is in Ireland even the poorest of families have three pictures: Jesus, the pope, and John F. Kennedy, and now there's a fourth, Bill Clinton.
In Israel after Shimon Peres died a line from Bill Clinton's eulogy became all the rage on billboards, t-shirts and bumperstickers throughout Israel, "I'll miss you my friend."
As president he went to Transylvania to tell the Romanians that NATO didn't feel they were ready for admission just yet, and the Romanians cheered like crazy because he chose to come to Cluj to tell him personally.
Bill Clinton and Bush Sr. are warmly welcomed in Asia for Tsunami relief as well as Africa, trying to bring in affordable AIDs treatment.
The embarrassing bit is when Bill Clinton travels to India and Asia he's showered by blossoms from women, and on at least one occassion as president, women were collected to be his "entertainment."
Russians would see the huge Bill Clinton and the even huger Boris Yeltsin embracing each other like a couple of Russian bears, eating huge plates of Fetuccino Al Fredo, washed down with bottles of vodka, followed by cigars, and thought of Bill Clinton as being a Russian himself.
Chris Rock said with Bill Clinton's love of junk food and chunky women he was the first black president.
Some South American country, I cannot remember which, voted Bill Clinton Muie Macho.
So although Hillary is somewhat bookish and waspish she inherits a lot of good will.
He's bored anyway. I think he would be easily confirmed for the job.
Fuck Bill Clinton. Why have this deteriorating jerk as anything...he is an EX-PRESIDENT.
Do you know any ex-presidents recirculating in new governmental positions? No!
What the fuck is wrong with us making these assumptions about recycling old administrations? and that includes Hillary!
He ought to take a tip from Jimmy Carter and strap on a leather carpenter's belt and do something useful.
But before you start spouting off, You might want to know what you're talking about.
Here are just a few issues BC has addressed since leaving office.
The William J. Clinton Foundation (Clinton Incorporated) is a foundation established by former President of the United States Bill Clinton with the stated mission to "strengthen the capacity of people throughout the world to meet the challenges of global interdependence." The Foundation focuses on four critical areas: health security; economic empowerment; leadership development and citizen service; and racial, ethnic and religious reconciliation. The Foundation works principally through partnerships with like-minded individuals, organizations, corporations, and governments, often serving as an incubator for new policies and programs. They have offices located in Harlem; New York City; Boston, Massachusetts; and Little Rock, Arkansas.
Clinton left office with an approval rating at 65%, the highest end of office rating of any President since World War II.[12] Since then, Clinton has been involved in public speaking and humanitarian work. To promote and address international causes, such as treatment and prevention of HIV/AIDS and global warming, he created the William J. Clinton Foundation.
You may install your BC anywhere you wish in your thought cabinet.
He has done his service as president. Funny how all those wonderful acts of kindness didn't quite reach the population of the u.s. from '96-on beginning with NAFTA.
All we can see so far is a reshuffling of power. You can trust that if you wish.
This is not personal, yet you seem to be intent on making it that way.
I've never said that I thought BC was/is/should go after the Senators seat from New York. There is no need to.
He will not go for it. He will not get it. The current Govenor will appoint the next Senator. That's his job. And this is assuming that it is HRC. Which I do not.
This is all nonsense.
I think it was Howard Taft that went from the presidency eventually to the Supreme Court as Chief Justice.
Taft was on the Court from 1921-1930, and was the 10th Chief Justice.
The job of the SoS is not to go out and make the people of the world feel good about America. Its to lead our foreign policy and diplomacy. Thanks to Bush we have some incredibly difficult problems to solve. I think its accurate to say our leverage as a world power is less than its ever been since the end of WWII. Also, thanks to Condi's abysmal leadership the morale of our diplomatic service is at an all time low. Someone like Richardson who has hands on experience with diplomacy could solve these problems, not someone who is a celebrity, no matter how well liked.
Biden and Richardson make sense and would make all former allies breathe a sigh of relief and come back on board as would some traditional enemies reconsider their entrenched positions. I just don't see how HC has any talent here and in my view a rather lame mismatch for her energies.
Actually Hillary does have diplomatic experience. She headed a UN forum on the Rights of Women that shocked observers when the Vatican and Islamic religious leaders locked forces to block out any discussion of family planning.
Seems like HC could work for women's rights HERE, instead of wasting her energy with the poops in the vatican or the islams.
They're not going to change, and besides, isn't that the business of the people of their own countries and religion? They have intelligence too, they are NOT mentally disabled. Haven't we had enough of that bullshit sticking our nose in the affairs of every country but THIS one? To what end and for what purpose.
Jee-zus when are we going to tend to human rights in the united states of which women's rights are but one part (nor do I see it as the most important, being one piece of a much bigger whole).
And when are we going to get over our one-issue mentality? When will we consider the rights of every citizen young middle and old, restore the middle class and the poor and work together with the more well off.
We're so STUCK!
Although I'd have to say I don't think I'd put HRC in the same category as Thomas or Miers - I think she has a raw talent for the job that both of them lacked. But she doesn't have the legal background or experience for it. Rather than unqualified, I'd say that HRC would be the most blatantly political appointment to the Court since Thomas or Miers.
I don't care so much whether an appointee to whatever position is a new face or someone that's been around the block a few dozen times - there's a place for both, and ways to make use of both. But it would be nice to maybe see appointees that have experience in the departments that they would be leading.
After all, GWB appointed some "new faces," but that alone doesn't mean much. Um, anyone remember his original FEMA head?
wanna make obama a laughing stock? nominate hillary for the supremes
im not sure why she would want to leave the senate, and a better than good chance at unseating reid as majority leader...but i can very well understand the offer for sec of state
except, obama will have to deal with the anger of the base, for nominating one who was a cheerleader for the iraq war
Interesting thang but the Secretary of State is fourth in line in the Presidential succession act of 1947, so I'm sure the president, vice president, speaker of the house and president pro tempore of the Senate will be checking for poisoned coffee, unground toasters and plugged in radios near bathtubs.
Clinton's response was very clever...
I like the way she thinks...
Wahoo!! Here come the Democrats!
Why there are 6 nominations for the position of Sec State?
Hmmmm?
Could it be that with 6 nominations pending for selection,
The GOP won't know which one to attack.?
It's an old trick played by Bill Clinton in 91.
Remember Mario Cuomo?
Wasn't he in a Doritos commercial?
He was the little guy with the really big hat that yelled,
YIP,YIP
Can't we have someone as Sec. of State with a little more humility? Not someone so full of him/herself?
And, as a woman, I want to say the last two women Sec. of State were/are disasters!!!!!
Would be my choice.
n/t
but Dr. Susan Rice would be much better!
Please pick Harry Reid! He must be good for something, somewhere. He is killing us softly in the Senate.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4mpqXu0z3wU
vague is a language, crapspeak.
Everybody is trying to teach Obama how to run his government. We have the right telling him that our country is center right and Bloggers criticizing his picks for his cabinet. Can anyone give him a credit that perhaps he knows how to do his jobs better than any one of you idiots? Just stand behind him with your support, damnit.
You're right. Blind loyalty is just the thing needed.
Eight years of blind loyalty isn't enough for some.
We should expect as our due explanations as to why the tired old war horses are being wheeled in on their wooden trollys.
Anybody vaguely recall voting for change? Or did he just mean adult diapers?
It's not blind loyalty, he hasn't even been sworn in. He also ran the best campaign in the history of this country. I wasn't his most vocal supporter and I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. Can you people shut up for a second?
??? Best campaign in the history of the country? Um. OK. Nobody has ever ran on a "Change" campaign before? Change means change. It doesn't mean picking ol' Madeline Albright up at the nursing home in a black limo and giving her an important job.
which began in '94 and the Contract on America it's our duty to not trust unproven skill or unearned trust. We're not in Kansas anymore and that kind of relaxation is dangerous.
After voting dem in every election since '68 chose Nader at Clinton half-time when the selling out of our country became truly obvious.
If we're not thoroughly awake and quite a bit paranoid to take note as these new precedents of recycling the same old faces when the Progressives of our dreams receive zero acknowledgement or positions of power.
Sure, I voted for Obama and still give him the benefit of a doubt about what he is doing (or thinks he's doing). No president should expect blind trust and backing in this current climate. He/she has to earn it like anyone past adolescence.
People complaining about President Obama's cabinet picks as too DLC seem to not trust his ability to control his own advisors.
Maybe......OR.......a majority of bloggers complaining about his picks are sick of the DLC and actually believed his "Change" meme that seems to be evaporating as he picks the same old gang of thieves that supported the Bush Regime through thick and thin using excuse after excuse?
Perhaps the change is avoiding overt partisanship against the republicans or the DLC to effect results, not partisan wins.
Give me one historical example of anyone's ability to control anyone who wasn't a dictator.
I agree, some people just need to bitch about something.
Hell, Obama hasn't even made his decision yet, and people are pissin and moanin already.
Maybe people should give him the benefit of the doubt for now.
Hell, He hasn't even been sworn in yet. That's over 2 months away.
unbelievable. The election was just last week.
Fri, 11/14/2008 - 17:57 — mudshark
I agree, some people just need to bitch about something.
Hell, Obama hasn't even made his decision yet, and people are pissin and moanin already.
________________________________________________________
Sounds like they have the clap.
No disrepect intended mudshark, but you and the other progressive intelligent posters on here did say that he was going to change things, including NOT having the same cabinet people that have been in DC for decades. Hell, even Obama said on more than one occasion that the problem was Washington. Now he is picking the same people that already had a kick at the can and failed? That sounds like a cop out. I know you were a Hillary supporter, but you did swing around to supporting change. Heck, C&L personified change with their support of new progressive candidates. Choosing the same old people doesn't make alot of sense.
Supporting Richardson for the position.
This is a ruse CC. Nothing more.
All that is intended is to confuse the GOP and their attack machine.
Don't read too much into this. It's not worth arguing over.
Actually, you make sense. Richardson would be an excellent choice. Think it would take much to confuse the GOP right now? LOL. They seem to be having problems trying to figure out just who they are.
Hey, I'm guilty of knee jerk reactions too.
But people really need to think this through.
All this infighting does is divide us.
That's the last thing we need right now.
I've said in the past that Obama will probably do somethings that I disagree with. But I think we should give it a little time. To see how this all plays out.
You're right. I just fear if the man's feet aren't held to the fire by the people in the blogosphere like yourself that got him elected, then he will turn out to be more of the same old, same old. With the economy crashing, the last thing America and the world needs, is the same bipartisan good ol' boys club. That's what screwed things up already.
On which good old boys club you're referring too.
Granted, there is blame to go around. But the last time the Dems were in office, The country did a helluva lot better.
You may be right on that, but, my point was if you ran your campaign on changing everything in Washington, how can selecting the same Washington people bring about any change? I know there are very important jobs involved with major implications, but why not give a fresh face a chance? Other nations don't elect people that are experienced in say foreign affairs. When they want a change, they elect new people. Hows about Darcy Burner?
Change to happen overnight?
It's going to take time. And with the condition the country is in, we have to be flexible at this point in time.
We have to be patient. If we really want change for the better. It's going to take more than blogging. People will have to contibute, and make sacrifices. I've heard President Elect Obama say " We will have to make sacrifices"
That reminds me of Bill Clinton.
I know alot of people strongly dislike BC.
Me? I like him. I think he did a great job.
No one can honestly say what they would have done in his shoes. That's Monday Morning quarterbacking. It's easy to bash someone when you don't know what it's like to be in their shoes.
But I will say this, Bill Clinton left the country in the black. Not the red.
Clinton was a natural born politician. Smooth. Even when his policies were screwing people, people still felt like they had to thank him. JFK to this day is thought of as some sort of royalty for some unknown reason. In my nation, many people think Pierre Trudeau was the 13th coming of Jeebus. Guess it's all in a person's point of view. Carefull examination of Clinton's policies showed he was more conservative than even Ronnie Raygun. Whatever that means. LOL.
Carefull examination of Clinton's policies showed he was more conservative than even Ronnie Raygun. Whatever that means. LOL.
Boy, That's a stretch. I suggest you do more research on both of them.
In particular, Financial policies.
As far as JFK goes.
He was young. He represented change.
He represented a new generation taking over Govt'.
We all know how that worked out.
Sure, that's why Fox News loves him.
You know what? Just because politicians don't vote 100% with you, that doesn't mean they are conservatives. Get off your high horse.
It ain't my knee I jerk.
Too much information.
Are we going back to the mandate thing?
BB King ain't the only one payin' the cost to be the boss. When you spend two years saying nothing but change this, and change that, people tend to expect something different that the same old DLC garbage.
Thank you. Good point. I imagine if he ran his campaign with a "elect me and you'll get the same ol' politicians again" slogan, he would have lost.
Ever since it began to look like Obama wanted Lieberman to stay on as chairman of Homeland Security it was clear that "keep your friends close but your enemies closer" was going to be his MO, so Hillary in the Cabinet makes sense.
But the interesting question to me is if she accepts, who will replace her as Senator from NY? I somewhat wistfully suggested Bill earlier today and that apparently left a number of people horrified. It was pointed out that being Senator vs. being President in DC wouldn't sit well with the former C-I-C., etc. and under most circumstances I would agree wholeheartedly.
But if you go back to the old philosophy that with the Clintons, it’s always the Clintons first and the Party second, I see the possibility for something unusual here. If the overriding bond between Hillary and Bill is sustained by making her the first woman President, wouldn’t there be some advantage to having Bill in the Senate where, if things turn sour for the Obama Administration, he would be like a heap of crap to the flies in the media.
Do you perhaps mean Yitzhak Rabin?
You're right. I get the names confused.
I hope this is truly a diversion as some here are saying. If Hillary Clinton ends up as SoS, I envision a dysfunctional relationship, somewhat similar to the relationship between Nixon and Kissinger. How long will it take for foes and friends alike to start asking "Who's in charge?"
I agree completely. That is what I meant when I said I don't see Senator Clinton as a team player.
No, she ain't a team player. Wouldn't we all want to see her put her professed compassion where it can do some fantastic good for the people of the u.s.? Like the universal healthcare elephant in the room? Why not give her a position where she can exercise her strengths for the long-ommitted u.s. population who by all appearances are still the monkey-in-the-middle as the money (OUR MONEY)gets tossed between Washington and Corporations.
Don't look now, but it looks like we'll be working for them on a number of very literal levels.
How anyone can suggest that BC would want the position as Senator for New York. First, he's not in a position to run for it.
And secondly, It's this guys decision. No one elses.
Will Bill Clinton please close your mouth and get yer ass out of the camera. He's got as much in common with New YOrk as an armadillo coming out of their toilets.
If you would have read any of my comments, you would know what I was saying.
Now, read closely. Try to comprehend what I was saying.
unbelievable .
I was agreeing with you, try to comprehend that. Pax
Then I suggest you be more specific in your comment.
Ok, moving on now.
Have a nice day Angel.
I'll tend to my own "specifications" instead of someone's projections of what they should be. Really. Chill.
I know, the air is thin up there.
SoS my hair.
{Deleted}
{roschelle, I've asked you numerous times to stop spamming this site.
There will be no more asking you to stop. SiteMonitor}
Wouldn't picking her to be Secretary of State sort of prove that she was right when she said she was more qualified than Obama on foreign policy issues?
She will be the Sec. of State--Mary Rice will be her Deputy Sec. of State and, as a result, the Obama administration will invade Darfur with U.S. troops and force regime change...just wait & see. Yes, and there will be "collateral damage."
or should've been Kerry.
I wish there were words that could convey just how tired I am of the media talking about Hillary Clinton. I can't think of any losing candidate in the history of America that the press can't stop talking about more than her..
Could they talk about getting out of Iraq or fixing our destroyed economy instead? Please?
For some reason, they think of Hillary as some kind of icon. Not sure why. I don't recall anything she really ever did that wasn't controversial and usually for the wrong reasons.
OK, I get it now. You don't do any research. You just spout off.
Don't engage me in anymore comments.
Which is why she is for the good of our domestic wellbeing, she's spent a lifetime developing an intimate understanding of what THIS culture needs. Not everyone else's culture. We need her HERE.
All this is nothing but a ruse. And people are getting all twisted out of shape over this. Here is a comment I made last night. In fact, it was my 1st comment.
Do you ever wonder,
Fri, 11/14/2008 - 17:40 — mudshark
Why there are 6 nominations for the position of Sec State?
Hmmmm?
Could it be that with 6 nominations pending for selection,
The GOP won't know which one to attack.?
It's an old trick played by Bill Clinton in 91.
Remember Mario Cuomo?
Much ado about nothing.
America that the press can't stop talking about more than her..
---
Sarah Palin?
Does anyone else see the position of SoS for Hillary as a good launching point for another run for President in 2016 (assuming Obama gets re-elected in 2012)? Biden would be 74, so it's questionable that he would run. Plus, that would give Hillary 8 years of continued high-level political exposure without 8 more years of a voting record in the Senate that she might have to defend in a campaign. Even though I don't believe there's been a SoS that went on to become President since James Buchanon, it's not unheard of. Am just putting that out there and would be curious what others might think.
Part of the reason why I'd think he'd consider her more seriously for a Supreme Court justice.
But I see no chance of her getting elected in 2016 and personally I wouldn't vote for her. I just believe that 8 years is a long time to go and by then.
On the other side, I was very reluctant to support Obama and now I'm 100% on board. This guy is extremely inteligent and will move the country in a good direction. He has a sense of what Americans expect from it's government and will play the game right, moving a very progressive agenda without much resistence. He will compromise from time to time, but he will do it on issues that will not have much impact on what's good for America. Kinda like throwing a bone to a dog so he can walk by. That's politics and it's impossible to avoid.
Let's not be the angry crowd like what we saw during the MCcain ralies.
I wish Hillary would take a more fitting position like heading up National Health Care. She's been working on that for 30 years.
Personally I'm sick of the same bush/clinton division of the same cell, the same crap, Bill Clinton's incredible de-evolving carelessness into immaturity and suck-self indulgence.
Then again, little is natural or fitting anymore. Hell, make her Queen.
Sleeping at a Holiday Inn Express does make you smarter and more in demand I guess.
It's not that I think it'd be a bad choice - just not the best one. Richardson would be ideal, or Kerry (I like him! Am I the only one??). Also, I really think Clinton would be better in something domestic, as that's where she really shines for me - maybe something to do with healthcare or education.
You need a bit of a scrapper for the job. Kerry let himself get swiftboated. Doesn't bode well.
Clinton would be OK, as America needs a popular goodwill ambassador as much as a SoS right now. I don't know what experience others have. This particular job is one for a Washington-insider-type, not someone new, or untried.
True, Kerry did not fight the swiftboat attacks in a way that makes sense to most of us. But that could also be looked at in another way. Kerry had his ideas about how a campaign should be run, and unlike some politicians we could name, he refused to let campaign advisers sway him from his ideals. What the media derided as spinelessness is equally an example of standing on principle.
There could be worse things in a SoS than sticking to your principles about right and wrong.
"The job of the SoS is not to go out and make the people of the world feel good about America. Its to lead our foreign policy and diplomacy."
MikeD
Mike, you take the Foreign Service orals too?
Yeah, people think the Secretary of State's job is to hand starving children loaves of free bread. Not friggin' hardly. More like finding the country that will take our cigarettes. I would go so far as to say it is not to "lead our foreign policy and diplomacy." It's simply to serve the "interests" of America -- and that usually translating into making a buck. Like I say, "stone cold" reality.
John McCain brough in a Washington outsider, and she was ready to kick some Washington ass!!! How about Sarah Palin. Before she arrives in foreign countries, she can get an education: hit the ground running, you know.
Palin: OK guys, is this place I'm going a country or a continent, and are there any Russians there? I'm good at kickin' Russian ass. Bin shooin' 'em off my lawn my whole damn life.
in the administration of a president who's less qualified to be CIC than John McCain? Or someone she isn't quite sure isn't a Muslim?
And I agree with a statement made earlier. Hillary is unable to work cooperatively with other people -- her work on the Clinton Health Care plan made that very clear. With her, it's "my way or the highway".
I just don't think she's qualified to "advise" Obama on foreign policy -- I don't believe she supports his foreign policy positions, given her strong support of George Bush's.
Much ado about nothing.
I'm surprised more people aren't on crutches from all this knee jerking. Sales in knee braces are going up.
Sorry. I don't trust her. She still wants the presidency. She is not someone who will take orders well and that's what is needed in a Secretary of state. I've said it before. The nation was offered and voted for CHANGE, not recycled Clinton people.
I say, give Howard Dean WHATEVER job he wants. And then decide, after he's chosen, who else gets what. I like Richardson for SOS for starters, with Caroline Kennedy as the UN ambassador, getting groomed to be SOS later.
I like Paul Krugman for Secretary of the Treasury, or Jared Bernstein, a solid economist who gets the way the economy has been screwing the middle class.
Call me totally out of my mind. I'd like to see Dennis Kucinich as Secretary of Defense. Just half kidding. He'd take no prisoners at the Pentagon and root out a lot of truths we haven't seen.
Ok, half-kidding about Kucinich. But doesn't what's happening overall seem lightyears away from the dialogue of our true sentiments?
And I do mean If, HRC does get the nomination.
Does this mean all these people who have been supporting President Elect Obama have been wrong?
Are they questioning his decision making?
Wow, Obama is already getting the Bill Clinton treatment, and he hasn't even been sworn in yet.
I hope the sound of heads exploding doesn't get to loud.
I already have a hard time sleeping.
Did you guys expect change to happen immediately?
LOL. Obama has way to much on his plate now to ignore older members in the talent pool.
He has a lot of work to do. A lot to fix.
Lets ignore some of the brightest brains in the country.
And break in a new guy/gal to make a statement.
Peoples hatred of the Clinton's is coming through,loud and clear.
What I would like to see, is the younger minds get together with the older minds and see what they can do. See what they can come up with.
OK, I'm done. See Ya'll Later.
For those of us unable to swallow things whole including fur and bones, exercise a little freedom of who you think Obama should really choose according to how you hoped (allowing room for both great faith and great doubt):
http://www.democracyforamerica.com/activities...
You might want to take some Pepto Bismal with that fur and bones.
Or maybe some exlax. Doesn't sound to appetizing. But then again, what ever floats your boat.:)
Have a Nice Day.
WTF was that? Who was addressing you? Have a "nice day" is it?
If you always get so worked up so easily you're ready for a talk show.
SoS?
Shit on Shingle?
I would hope presidents eat better n' dat.
Personally, I'd always suspected he would name Clinton to the Supreme Court with the first opening there, but the fact that Obama is looking to build bridges with former enemies this early says volumes about how he's going to approach governance.
Anyone that follows politics and would believe she would be named to the supreme court and she would accept doesn't really know politics that well. Hillary is not supreme court material. Hillary is a go getter and loves to be down in the trenches making thinks happen.
Sitting on the bench, spending all day in an office is not the Hillary we all know and love.
The reasons should be obvious.
I WANT TO FIX HILLARY CLINTON FOR STAYING WITH BILL WHEN SHE SHOULD HAVE DIVORCED HIM OVER:
1. HIS ANTIMASTURBATION
2. HIS CHEATING ADULTERY
ALSO IM AGAINST HER NOT LISTENING TO ME ABOUT VOTING AGAINST THE ANTI POKER BILL (PHONE CALLS, LETTERS) AND RECEIVING FUNDING FROM HEALTH INSURANCE COMPANIES WHEN THEY ARE ALREADY OVERCHARGING AND AGE DISCRIMINATING. I ALSO BELIEVE LIKE JOE LIEBERMAN THAT BILL CLINTON SHOULD HAVE BEEN IMPEACHED AFTER ILLEGALLY CHEATING ON HIS WIFE.
Login or Register to post comments.