Sen.Clinton and John Kerry..Why Hire them?
MrBrian
Posts: 2,672
Does anyone really want to see any of them in the new Obama admin?
Well i'm sure some will like that, but really..Can anyone really consider them 'change'? 'New'?
More Pro Iraq war, Pro Israel, Pro Patriot Act politicians.
Does America have anyone else?....and let's say one of those two get hired for sec of state or another high position, do we give Obama another pass?
All we hear are those two names....Clinton, Kerry, Clinton, Kerry, like Obama has to put them into his admin, why!?
Well i'm sure some will like that, but really..Can anyone really consider them 'change'? 'New'?
More Pro Iraq war, Pro Israel, Pro Patriot Act politicians.
Does America have anyone else?....and let's say one of those two get hired for sec of state or another high position, do we give Obama another pass?
All we hear are those two names....Clinton, Kerry, Clinton, Kerry, like Obama has to put them into his admin, why!?
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
While it is Washington, and I'm sure that there will be some more Clinton retreads or longtime insiders hired, I am hoping to get a bit of new blood and outside ideas into this administration.
But for secretary of state, it might have to be someone like Kerry or Clinton. The person must have a decent relationship with Biden, and someone who is somewhat known on a global level and knows what's going on in the world politically.
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
WASHINGTON - Democratic officials say president-elect Barack Obama is considering former primary election rivals Hillary Rodham Clinton and Bill Richardson to be his secretary of state.
The officials say Obama met with Richardson today in Chicago, a day after meeting with Clinton. Richardson is the governor of New Mexico and has an extensive foreign policy resume.
He was former president Bill Clinton's ambassador to the United Nations and has conducted freelance diplomacy as governor in such hot spots as Sudan and North Korea.
Both meetings were held at Obama's transition office in Chicago and kept secret until after they were over.
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/081114/world/obama_69
Oh tasty...
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
impossible...there's so much of it to go around.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
they are strong personalities that will argue their point, don't believe the right wing nutjob hype about them, this whole BS liberal is bad thing, they could invaluable. They aren't yes people. I doubt Bush ever heard no, except when Cheney was putting him in his place.
Stop by:
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=14678777351&ref=mf
I also think Bill Richardson would be excellent as Secretary of State. He has great foreign relations experience. Btw, he's ex-Clinton admin. I think I see a pattern developing. America can't lose for winning if the choice rests between them. The embarrassment of riches continues for the Democrats.
Obama is showing excellence in leadership (yet again) in considering his ex-rivals as team mates. These people are too talented to dismiss. Squandering available talent is the purview of the Bush administration, not the purview of the Obama administration. That's definitely change
That was a super column! It really tickled me. Thanks for posting.
You should write political satire....lol
j/k
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
HOPE AND CHANGE!
HOPE AND CHANGE!
CHANGE YOU CANT! COUNT ON
You know the first warning sign we had that Obama was no good was when he refused to support the impeachment of Bush saying that it was 'divisive' and that Bush had not done enough wrong to deserve to be impeached.
Yet Obama himself will say that Bush screwed this country. He went on and on about how much bad Bush is/was and openly went after Bush on his policies. Yet when the time came to do something about it, he backed away.
But his supporters kept silent and gave him a pass, infact they didnt even touch that topic.
Then he picks Biden, this pro Iraq war 'Bush fooled me' kinda guy. He get's a pass, then Rahm, which I dont even have the energy to type all the problems with him....But anyway, Obama gets another pass.
Of course look who he has as advisors!..and Obama still gets another pass.
Now you have Hillary and Kerry considered for another top position.
Soon Obama supporters will have to put the 'hope' away and face the reality of the situation. The reality of what they have voted for. Who they have voted for.
http://obamaaaaaaaa.ytmnd.com/
Obama's advisers have begun looking into Bill Clinton's foundation, which distributes millions of dollars to Africa to help with development, to ensure that there is no conflict of interest. But Democrats do not believe that the vetting is likely to be a problem.
Clinton would be well placed to become the country's dominant voice in foreign affairs, replacing Condoleezza Rice. Since being elected senator for New York, she has specialised in foreign affairs and defence. Although she supported the war in Iraq, she and Obama basically agree on a withdrawal of American troops.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/nov/17/hillary-clinton-secretary-of-state
---
So far I can't find much more info on it. Let's see,
Secretary of state Hillary Clinton.
I imagine all the Obama supporters that couldn't stand Hillary like nails on a chalkboard are going to be thrilled.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
How is that a bad thing, considering what a colossal waste of time the Clinton impeachment was?
Personally, i don't think our voices should stop just because we have elected President Obama. We can't just sit back and 'hope' that things do change. We have to do our best to make sure that our voices are still heard.
I sometimes get disheartened by the constant negative threads here about Obama and how he is perceived by a lot of people to be a 'failed' president before he even takes office. Why? Because it's rare to hear what these people are actually doing to make a difference themselves other than posting other peoples blogs and news reports on this board. I'd love to hear what those that are so negative towards obama are doing to make their voices heard, or how we can all work together to make it a better place for us all. Seriously. I made my voice heard when i voted for him and i won't stop there.
I voted obama for reasons which i have already mentioned numerous times and i clearly would not have voted for him and placed my trust in him unless i believed he would make a difference. I absolutely agree with some of Howard Zinn's thoughts about why we should have voted Obama. Although Howard didn't think obama represented much change, i think there is definitely going to be difference. Zinn said. ' Even though Obama does not represent any fundamental change, he creates an opening for a possibility of change, and it's up to us to make that happen.'
That's why i don't care what these people say on a message board anymore. Unless of course they are out in the 'real world', making their voice heard, then they are as bad as the people they publically ridicule and make fun of. They are doing nothing to make change happen as far as i'm concerned.
There's plenty you can do..
Do you feel that Bush has done enough to get impeached? Because Obama does not think so. Think about it for a second.
But why even has this impeachment thing in the first place? President 2, impeachment 0
Really, is that how it works?
No matter what you do, you get away with it.
Let's also not compare the clinton reasons to the bush reasons.
Actually, our voices should be louder.
But, there has to be a selectiveness for it to have impact ... pissing and moaning about EVERY move he makes, no matter how small, doesn't work.
As for HRC, I hope she passes ... or it doesn't get offered ... some hope for that from Politico ...
~~~~~~~~~
Team Obama, after all but offering SecState to Senator Clinton, is expressing EXASPERATION with the Clinton camp for the difficulty in getting a clean vet on President Bill Clinton’s many entanglements. “The ball is very much in her court, but the president's finances have been a major point of sensitivity from day one,” a Democratic official said. (“Day One!”) “Given that everyone's mystified by how deliberately public the Clintons have made this once secret process, the assumption is either that the Clintons are trying to use the public buzz to steamroll their way in, create a sense of inevitability that overcomes those concerns, or that it's just a matter of time before they … satisfy vetting somehow, some way. Otherwise, after all this speculation, there’ll be a permanent dark cloud hanging over her finances. … But generally the sense among the no-drama Obama world is: This is well on its way to winning best Oscar for drama.”
From the other side, a Democratic source tells me that Clinton herself is conflicted about taking the job.
"I don't believe in damn curses. Wake up the damn Bambino and have me face him. Maybe I'll drill him in the ass." --- Pedro Martinez