BIll and Hillary -- Doing It Again
It's finally official: President-elect Obama will appear with Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) in Chicago on Monday as he names her secretary of state, a remarkable reunion of once-bitter rivals.
The news conference at a Chicago hotel is scheduled to begin at 10:40 a.m. Eastern.
Barack Obama just insulted or at the very least thumbed his nose at some of his supporters by selecting Senator Hillary Clinton as his Secretary of State and therefore bringing back the Clinton Dynasty to the front pages of our news papers, websites and blogs.
Many of us wanted to be rid of the Clinton family
and the Bush family. For different reasons of course but the last
thing I voted for was to see Hillary and Bill back in the White House
or even near by it. The same would go for any Bush family member. I voted for change. Not only change in policy but
change in appearances, vision and leaderships. For at least the next 4 years, we'll hear very little about what President Barack Obama is doing
with respects to the economy and foreign policy; instead the media
we'll be following Hillary and Bill Clinton around like little puppy
dogs. They'll be working 24/7 to get that 'breaking news' story to
tell. We'll be back to square one with Bill Clinton and his sex life and discussing when Hillary will announce her run for 2012.
Political pundits will be waiting anxiously to hear about policies made or supported by Hillary (not President Obama as they could have been) pertaining to our allies and enemies. They will talk for weeks about whether this idea/plan was her pushing Obama into a decision or not. The credits will most likely be given to Hillary and if anything wrong happens, Obama will receive the honor - they will see to that.
Just look at the way Hillary, Bill and their
political hacks 'controlled' the media during the primary. They were
able to convince the media that she still had a relatively good chance
of beating Obama even up to the very last State that voted. They did
it again during Obama's Vice President Selection period. They
manipulated the news, leaked false information and sometimes out and
out lies, to get their way. Lastly, they manipulated the media into
forcing Obama (if he had any doubts before) into selecting her as his
Secretary of State. They knew he couldn't risk alienating his base at
this time by turning her down once again.
I'm afraid that not only will Obama and his base pay for this decision; but Americans' in general, will-- as well.
Will I continue to support the man; of course. I'm willing however, to admit failure when I see it. This is a major error on Barack Obama's part.
This administration was to be about change, new faces, new ideas, new goals. Instead, it appears we're headed for 4 more years of Clinton stories.
I pray the stories won't override the Obama agenda and his plans for America.
I do not think that the Clintons have been doing it--so to speak--for at least a decade. My personal opinion. Maybe it is the pantsuit.
December 1, 2008 1:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
Let's see.
1) You got snookered.
2) How is it a "dynasty" when Hillary was never President and there was only 1 other Clinton? (worried about the Kennedy Dynasty? The Gore Dynasty?)
3) I'm really glad you're suffering.
4) Hillary's under your bed - Boo!!! Don't turn off the light.
December 1, 2008 2:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
Ditto! Thanks for the first giggle of the day Des.
December 1, 2008 9:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
I am with you on this one. I am very disappointed that he has made Hillary SOS.
I don't think he should have chosen anyone from congress who failed to read the intelligence before giving authority to go to war with Iraq. She has demonstrated nothing that qualifies her for this role...
I feel that he has made a decision based on some ideological notion of a 'team of rivals' and for this I can't admire him.
However, now that he has made this decision. I will hope that he will reign the Clintons in and help Hillary become the best SOS she can be and I hope that we all won't regret this later.
December 1, 2008 4:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
She's not a horse nor a maverick, she's a loyal hard-working member of the Democratic Party. She does not need a bit between the teeth, unlike some bloggers here.
Perhaps someone needs to take some spurs to your backside to remind you of this.
December 1, 2008 7:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
Your crude implications are not mine. Spare me your spurs and instead I suggest that we disagree in a huge way on the merits of this choice rather than attack me personally for having a different opinion.
December 1, 2008 9:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
Your repeating the "reign her in" nonsense, and the "has demonstrated nothing that qualifies her for this role" griping is just more nonsense, and you fail to point out that Uber-foreign-policy specialist Joe "MBNA" Biden was picked as VP despite voting for the Iraq AUMF.
You know you can quibble about the depth of her qualifications, but to just put it down as all nothing and then bring up unjustified smears about her being uncontrollable just paints you as an ideologue. So if you make yourself look bad personally, why can't I join in on the fun?
December 1, 2008 10:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
Look dude, I did not say half of what you imply. I am sick of people bringing up Joe Biden. It's over already. It has nothing to do with this situation. It doesn't make Hillary look better tome.
I said nothing in the neighborhood of her being uncontrollable... that was 'you'.
I have a valid opinion against Hillary being named SOS. Get over it! It's not as though I will keep her from getting the spot but I certianly have a right to express my objections.
I recommend you stop putting words in other people's mouths.
December 1, 2008 11:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
Words in people's mouths?
Even though you misspelled the word "rein"... you do know what this phrase suggests, don't you?
December 1, 2008 12:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well I stand by my statement however it was another persons implication that this meant 'uncontrollable'. There are many ways to interpret what I said. After what I have witnessed of the Clintons I am very concerned about what will happen. In fact I am pretty shocked that Hillary as SOS is actually happening. Regardless, this is a done deal.
Mispelling happens. Not because I don't know how but because of being in a hurry.
December 1, 2008 12:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
OK... I'm open minded. How exactly should I interpret the words I quoted from you?
December 1, 2008 1:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Interpret as "the Clintons are controllable, if there's a good master at the reins".
December 1, 2008 2:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
I just wanted to comment that I was wrong to ride you about suggesting that I meant the Clintons are uncontrollable. I realize that I am perfectly comfortable with making that suggestion. It is a valid concern for an ex first lady and ex president being brought into a new adminstration in such a way. I got too reactive to your attack and that's my lesson to learn.
I respect your right to have a differing opinion and I assert my right to have one as well.
Just as much as I had every confidence that Barack Obama should be our president from the first time I saw him.
I think this choice could end up being more of an challenge than he expects and I am shocked that he has made it.
December 1, 2008 2:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
You're welcome to your opinion - it's that it got expressed pretty closely to some rather unrealistic talking points that have been spewn around for years now.
When Hillary got to the Senate there was lots of speculation that she'd be an uncontrollable superstar, and of course she played a modest Junior Senator. When the 2-for-1 bit got negative reviews in 1992, she backed off and went into silent baking-cookies-mom mode and got a conservative doo to boot.
Perhaps I'm the only one to remember, but it was Jimmy Carter that loved to do grandstanding such as when Clinton sent him on Middle East missions - it was always a huge question how far off script Carter would get. Bill had some careless moments this year and some rather unfair moments, but before January he had pretty well stayed out of Hillary's business, and he kept a low profile for both Kerry & Gore, seemingly because they wanted it that way. For Obama he did finally hit the campaign trail, and it seemed effective, even if there was some evidence of a still smarting wound - I noted the likelihood that this kind of testimonial would be more effective for fence-sitters than someone who'd been completely in the tank for Obama. Anyway, that's my logic, have at your own.
December 1, 2008 4:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for persisting. I was wrong.
I was not thinking of it in those terms but uncontrollable is an appropriate conclusion and in fact a valid concern. To have an ex-senator, ex first lady with her ex president husband as your key representative in connection to all foreign leaders and be able to keep them in check as a new president is something I find questionable. Bill already has his own relationships, business dealings, etc. with foreign leaders. I think this is a mess. Seriously.
I know that there are other people who support PE Obama who share my concerns.
Regardless its a done deal. I just hope it turns out well for everyone but in my gut... the same gut that saw Senator Obama for the very first time two years ago and went immediately to the computer and emailed him to ask him to run for president, I don't have a good feeling about this.
December 1, 2008 2:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Beyond the battle over wording, S, I happen to agree with you on HRC at SoS. I didn't want anyone who had ties to the Iraq War decision (and held the same beef with Biden); yes, there are gains from her history with President Clinton, but that past also brings baggage with it; and I'm not convinced HRC has the most singularly best skill-set for the job.
That said, she's got enormous capabilities & assets, has shown an ability to learn as she goes, has a history of being able to step into and then out of the limelight, and all in all, I hope she produces a world-class performance for America, and then eventually gets to retire with a legacy including a few major peace agreements. I'd be more than happy to eat my old shoes if she does all that, and as of today, well... Go Get 'Em Hil!
December 1, 2008 3:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
My oh my you are so completely uninformed by reality I was wondering if this was meant as satire of a never say die Hillary hater or something.
Any idiot who thinks that Obama is slapping your face and insulting you with Clinton as SOS is just a complete kool-aid moron.
I am really glad you voted for Obama, but you should probably just sit down and shut up now.
December 1, 2008 4:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
A completely unintelligent response to someone with a difference of opinion. I could say the same to you. I most definitely do not 'hate' Hillary or the Clintons but I have a strong objection to this decision and I hope that it all turns out the best for everyone.
Yet another 'rude' Hillary supporter. And believe me I am quite informed.
December 1, 2008 8:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
I wish somebody (a univ maybe?) would do a survey of the media stories during the primary, during Obama's VP selection and during his SOS selection and find out who got most of the media's ATTENTION --- was it Obama or Hillary?
If this continues to happen in the next year --- Hillary will be on her way to running in 2012. Gaurantee ya!
December 1, 2008 8:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, I think you're just being conservative here. After Hillary Clinton completely takes over the White House, the Congress, the Vatican, the IOC, the NFL, and abolishes the AP, she'll be in line to rule the world in 2012!!!! Yay!!!
For someone who disapproves so strongly of Hillary Clinton, you sure think she's all powerful.
December 1, 2008 10:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
At the risk of being repetitive . . .
I think I have at least a little cred as a long-standing and vocal member of the I Really, Really Really Don't Want Hillary to be President Club, and even I have to say, "give me a break and give it a rest."
The idea that putting her in as Secretary of State puts her in prime position to run against Obama in 2012 is absurd to the point of bordering on crackpottery. This office is not a stepping stone for Hillary, it is a swan song. No one who served as Secretary of State has won the presidency since James Buchannan. (The fact that Buchannan is a strong contender, along with GWB and Warren Harding, for the title of Worst President Ever may have something to do with that). Hillary and, yes, Bill are well aware of this. They know full well that since the last of the Founders faded from the political scene, the office of SoS has generally been even more toxic to future presidential aspirations than mere scandal. Think about that. She knew that and she took the office anyway. (And, in case you think Obama is so weak minded that she'll be able to use her Sith Mind Powers on him, consider the fact that Obama knew all this too.)
The reason the office is toxic is that President gets the lion's share of the credit for foreign policy successes while the Secretary of State is forever tarnished by that President's inevitable failures. A former Secretary of State cannot run away from the policies of the President he or she served and is saddled with a perceived duty of loyalty that makes it impossible for that person to run against the president who appointed him.
Nor is there any basis to concerns that she'll run the State Department some sort of independent feudal fief. We have secretaries of state, in this country, not foreign ministers. And, unlike foreign ministers in some parlimentary democracies, a Secretary of State has exactly two options: wholeheartedly implement the President's policy or resign. Period. When presidents collide with secretaries of state, Presidents. Always. Win. So much so that, when secretaries of state find themselves in fundemental disagreement with the pPresidents they often have to wholeheartedly implement that policy and then resign later. (See Cyrus Vance and Colin Powell).
So, please, if you can't accept the possibility that she took the office because she genuinely wants to serve Obama at a moment of national and global crisis, or that she has genuinely come to respect Obama after he beat her and gave the lie to her expectation that he would suffer certain defeat, then at least take some consolation from the notion that Obama has effectively neutralized any 2012 ambitions she may have had and give it a rest.
December 1, 2008 12:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not happy either, especially after twenty months of volunteering and donating to Obama. We can just hope that Emanuel, Biden and others can keep the Clinton's under control and in their proper places...somehow. I'm interested in seeing how the Foreign Relations Committee confirmation hearing on her develops. I know Lugar said he would vote for her in the final analysis, but I would think (or hope at least) she would get some tough questions, even from Democrats such as Feingold. I hope the hearing is not just another mere formality.
December 1, 2008 9:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hey, I hear she's got something suspicious in your taxes. Oh wait, she already released those. Move on to next rumor...
December 1, 2008 9:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
Have you read the part in "Audacity" about projecting your hopes and dreams onto Barack, and likely being disappointed?
Read it again.
December 1, 2008 11:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
Oh boy, I hope this decision doesn't come back to bite everyone in the rear, but isn't it time we come together and deal with our PE's decision? The SOS thing is a done deal...like I said in the past, I am not excited, actually a little disappointed but not devasted with the pick...I hope Obama has very good reasons for this cave and I pray Clinton puts her heart and soul into making this a success..Either way, I think Obama is pretty much practicing what he preached---bringing people together and finding common grounds even if you do not agree with them on every stance.....If Obama is ok with CLinton, so will I be....I do understand your point with the "slap in the face" comment, but I I think you are going overboard...The Clintons were beyond nasty during the primaries, but they are good Democrats and I would like to believe that they are decent people who just got carried away during the primaries....Besides, do you honestly think Clinton would be that terrible at the job? Sure there are more exciting picks, but is it really so bad?
_______
Samantha Powers-now that is something I can salivate about...I hope she is here to stay....very brilliant woman and I was sad to see her go early on....Hopefully she stays on board after the transition........
December 1, 2008 9:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
Your disdain and Desidero's infatuation with Senator Clinton are a match.
December 1, 2008 9:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry, mine's reality-based. Pretty much every reason I like her is in her bio on Wikipedia, which means I also don't think she'd be good on the Supreme Court or has a strong power base going back to the Senate, and still fault her for either not tracking her campaign operations better or having a strong single-point COO/CFO back in December/January, along a few other missteps. It's doubtful that Hillary would appoint someone that would surprise me.
December 1, 2008 9:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
Wow. Somebody actually believes the Clintons "control the media" and "forced" the most powerful man in the world to name her Secretary of State! The Clintons' supposed method: spreading rumors that he was going to do it! As if it were impossible for Obama to release a statement saying the rumors were not true. As if Senator Clinton's supporters had not all ready rallied in their millions to Obama's side, without him naming her anything. As if Obama was such a weak person, that he succumbs to mere rumor mongering!
If he had not chosen her, there would have been barely a ripple of disappointment, because everybody was expecting her to become "the lioness of the Senate" over the next few years. But some people actually believe Obama was helpless in the face of rumors!
It must be awful to swallow all the myths of Clinton hatred, because part of the storyline is that Clinton called for Obama's assassination during the primaries. Remember that bit of trumped up hysteria? So in their view we now have a president who is so weak that he submits to rumors, and is forced to appoint someone who called for his own assassination.
No wonder their upset, the poor things.
December 1, 2008 10:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
Interesting, huh? To be such a strong supporter of Obama while simultaneously assuming he's incapable of stopping the supposed Clinton coup.
?
December 1, 2008 10:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
If you honestly believe that media cannot be manipulated then it's hopeless to discuss the matter with you.
This election was about CHANGE, a new vision, a new leadership, new ideas -- selecting Hillary who voted for the War in Iraq and continues to this day to say she would do it again (which Biden at least admitted he was wrong) is a slap in the face of those that voted for Obama because he was against the war and wanted to get out.
Our allies are extremely pleased with our votes for Obama --- for him to select Hillary is simply to reverse any gains with them.
December 1, 2008 10:31 AM | Reply | P