MyDD :: AP: Obama Tapping Clinton for State

AP: Obama Tapping Clinton for State

by Jonathan Singer, Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 11:17:28 PM EST

President-elect Barack Obama is on track to nominate Hillary Rodham Clinton as secretary of state after Thanksgiving, an aide to his transition said Thursday.

One week after the former primary rivals met secretly to discuss the idea of Clinton becoming the nation's top diplomat, the two sides were moving quickly toward making it a reality, barring any unforeseen problems.

The transition aide told The Associated Press that the two camps have worked out financial disclosure issues involving Clinton's husband, former President Bill Clinton, and the complicated international funding of his foundation that operates in 27 countries. The aide said Obama and Hillary Clinton have had substantive conversations about the secretary of state job.

Clinton has been mulling the post for several days, but the transition aide's comments suggested that Obama's team does not feel she is inclined to turn it down.

I have already written out my thoughts already on Hillary Clinton at Foggy Bottom -- namely that her selection would indicate a determination by Barack Obama to place policy over process, putting together the strongest possible cabinet regardless of the prattling of the on-air punditry -- but what do you think?

Tags: Hillary Clinton, Secretary of State, Obama Administration (all tags)

Permalink :: 74 Comments :: Post a Comment

Re: AP: Obama Tapping Clinton for State (2.00 / 4)

Given the deteriorating global financial situation Obama needs the strongest possible cabinet. Hillary Clinton fits that bill for Secretary of State, as does Daschle at HHS. Treasury and DOD should be interesting.

by souvarine on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 11:22:10 PM EST

Re: AP: Obama Tapping Clinton for State (2.00 / 1)

Napolitano for DHS is also a strong choice. Holder does not have the political stature of those three, but I think he is a very solid choice and it is just as well that the AG not be too political.

by souvarine on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 11:37:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: AP: Obama Tapping Clinton for State (none / 0)

Nice to forgive and makeup, but how do our allies feel about this appointment of Hillary, who was called a "War Goddess" by one writer, and another "Iron Maggie," after Thatcher, by another during the campaign.

The key issue is who will be National Security Adviser? No clues here, but it is probably the most important appointment of all.

by MainStreet on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 07:51:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: AP: Obama Tapping Clinton for State (none / 0)

From most reports our allies would be quite happy to work with Hillary Clinton. Obama is signalling that he will not be a push-over to those who might have been under that illusion. As for the name-calling, you can't be effective without pissing some people off.

If Obama is putting these high-power people in his cabinet to neuter them then National Security Adviser is more important, but that does not appear to be his intent. We'll see, but the Obama of the campaign was a person with enough confidence to be comfortable managing powerful people.

by souvarine on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 10:23:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Jim Jones at NSC (none / 0)

Politico is now reporting that retired Marine General Jim Jones, former Supreme Commander of Natio and Middle East envoy, is likely to be appointed National Security Adviser. He seems to be a very forceful individual and independent thinker, and he has been outspoken about the need to pay more attention to Afganistan. Obama has cited him as an important influence on his thinking about national security, so Jones would probably have good access to the president. He also is knowledgeable about energy--so much so that he was considered for Secretary of Energy. I think he would be well-equipped to make sure that national security strategy is directed by the White House, even with powerful figures like Clinton and Gates in the cabinet.

by slvn on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 11:09:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jim Jones at NSC (none / 0)

A Marine General as NSC would suggest a more hawkish foreign policy. Also, if the speculation is correct, it gives Obama one member from the military leadership in State/DOD/NSC which may help him keep tabs on the military.

Appointing Jones would also be a favor to John McCain.

by souvarine on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 11:45:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: AP: Obama Tapping Clinton for State (2.00 / 1)

see, the Clintons have been vetted and are suitable. Take that Clinton-haters. KUMBAYA

by Lakrosse on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 11:24:03 PM EST

Re: AP: Obama Tapping Clinton for State (2.00 / 3)

You need to stop obsessing about the Clintons and the "Obama supporters" cause its making you look like an 8 year old..

by obama4presidente on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 12:44:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: AP: Obama Tapping Clinton for State (2.00 / 1)

And Obama has graciously offered a high-ranking cabinet position to Clinton. How does that kool aid taste, Obama haters?

Change has come to America.

by the mystical vortexes of sedona on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 12:56:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: AP: Obama Tapping Clinton for State (none / 0)

Grow up.

When you start out making the "slippery slope" argument, where do you draw the line?

by Jess81 on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 03:26:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: AP: Obama Tapping Clinton for State (2.00 / 2)

I'm really going to enjoy sitting back and watching MSNBC, Talking Points, NYT, WaPo, Kos, et al. throw their fits!

by BigBoyBlue on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 11:26:33 PM EST

Apparently this was the memo (2.00 / 2)

because even Jennifer Donahue has changed her tune completely over at HuffPo: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jennifer-d onahue/hillary-clinton-why-she-i_b_14537 4.html

by sgary on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 11:46:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: AP: Obama Tapping Clinton for State (none / 0)

Why? Remember "I'm looking forward to having you advise me, Hillary"?

Heads are currently exploding at The Confluence.

When you start out making the "slippery slope" argument, where do you draw the line?

by Jess81 on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 03:27:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: AP: Obama Tapping Clinton for State (2.00 / 3)

Good for HRC--Good for Barack !

Hil is by far the best one for that high profile, globe trotting position

my sense is that Hillary will soon become Barack's strongest -and most trusted- lieutenants.

She has already crossed the bridge re no more pres aspirations in my view-she is well aware it's not in the cards 8yrs from now.

I also think that they discussed this very role when they met months ago in Feinstein's condo in Washington.

by ionsys on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 11:31:49 PM EST

Re: AP: Obama Tapping Clinton for State (none / 0)

Do you think she is more qualified than Bill Richardson?

Give to Redistricting Project candidates for Democratic maps 2011-2021! http://www.actblue.com/page/redistrictin gproject

by Sandwich Repairman on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 03:05:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: AP: Obama Tapping Clinton for State (2.00 / 1)

in a word, absolutely.

by swissffun on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 04:34:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: AP: Obama Tapping Clinton for State (none / 0)

Why? She has no executive or foreign policy experience. He does.

Give to Redistricting Project candidates for Democratic maps 2011-2021! http://www.actblue.com/page/redistrictin gproject

by Sandwich Repairman on Sat Nov 22, 2008 at 11:58:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: AP: Obama Tapping Clinton for State (none / 0)

I think it is hard to say (I argued for Richardson as a better choice when this first started coming out), but the real question is will she be good at it. Will she do Obama's bidding, and will Obama have her back no matter what she does?

I have no idea, but I'm willing to be optimistic.

by letterc on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 07:46:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: AP: Obama Tapping Clinton for State (none / 0)

They have different qualifications. I, in general, really like the idea of Richardson doing anything Richardson feels like doing. Hillary, maybe, has "nontraditional" experience for the role, but I generally work under the assumption Obama knows what he's doing until he proves otherwise (I can disagree with Obama's positions - and Hillary's - but I think they know what they're doing.)

However, I'm enjoying this just because we all get to see whose head ESPLODES and whose doesn't. So far, DKos gets about a 3 on the ESPLODE O METER, HuffPost a 5 to 7, Atrios 0, TPM 1, and CNN 10 OF 10 ESPLODES.

by Exhausted Pennsylvanian on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 09:00:47 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: AP: Obama Tapping Clinton for State (none / 0)

ionsys stated: "She has already crossed the bridge re no more pres aspirations in my view-she is well aware it's not in the cards 8yrs from now."

My response: We'll see...

However, overall, I agree with your statement.

by Check077 on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 10:37:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: AP: Obama Tapping Clinton for State (none / 0)

"She has already crossed the bridge re no more pres aspirations in my view-she is well aware it's not in the cards 8yrs from now."

I really don't see evidence for that statement. Nobody knows how things will develop over the next 8 years, but what we do know is that the Secretary of State position is the one high-profile position that comes with an extremely high level of popularity by default. Powell, Albright, Rice were the most popular cabinet members, by far, in their respective administrations for a reason.

If Hillary Clinton's popularity soars into the mid-70s, approaching 80s, because of her international role, there is no way we can dismiss the potential 8 years from now that a 68-yr. old Clinton with the highest popularity of her lifetime can't be at least consider putting herself back into the game. Biden won't run, so Hillary would be the closest thing to a continuation of the Obama administration. This is only an issue if the Obama administration is considered to be a successful one at that point, of course.

by devilrays on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 11:04:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: AP: Obama Tapping Clinton for State (none / 0)

I guess the big question is, is Hillary willing to dance to Barack's music? I assume clarity between the two on this topic will be achieved. If so, she will be great.

by viperlmw on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 11:37:47 PM EST

Re: AP: Obama Tapping Clinton for State (2.00 / 2)

I cannot imagine Mrs. Clinton having done anything more than she did for the Obama campaign once she lost the primary. Both she and President Clinton acted supportively in a way designed for maximum tactical benefit to Obama. Mrs. Clinton is not a stranger to lost campaigns in the past, and knows how to stand up, brush it off, and move on.

Where all of the bitterness is supposed to be coming from on her part is a mystery to me. Certainly she has been disappointed, but I do not see the mean spirit that is being pushed by some in the blogs and the media.

by candideinnc on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 06:49:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: AP: Obama Tapping Clinton for State (none / 0)

Hillary was loyal throughout the general election, she's shown no inclination to be anything but loyal as a member of his administration.

But even given that I don't think Obama is looking for yes (wo)men who will dance to his tune. He appears to be looking for strong minded leaders who will challenge him but be disciplined once he has decided on a course.

by souvarine on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 10:12:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]

About time (2.00 / 3)

the palace intrigue was growing tiresome.

by JJE on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 11:44:41 PM EST

Re: About time (2.00 / 2)

Amen brother.

by obama4presidente on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 12:44:57 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: AP: Obama Tapping Clinton for State (2.00 / 6)

Why does the press constantly spew hate at Hillary? Even Wolf -dumbass- Blitzer was announcing earlier that he would "explore the issue" of whether Hillary was competent to be SoS in light of her DRAMATIC "failures" with health care reform...

What a crock of sh*t!!!

Anyway - GOOD FOR HILLARY, GOOD FOR OBAMA, GOOD FOR THE WORLD!!!

by nikkid on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 11:48:30 PM EST

Re: AP: Obama Tapping Clinton for State (none / 0)

Hillary bashing = ratings.

Give to Redistricting Project candidates for Democratic maps 2011-2021! http://www.actblue.com/page/redistrictin gproject

by Sandwich Repairman on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 03:06:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: AP: Obama Tapping Clinton for SoS (2.00 / 1)

Obama tapping Clinton? That's a visual I didn't need.

by Spiffarino on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 12:57:55 AM EST

Re: AP: Obama Tapping Clinton for SoS (2.00 / 1)

Heh. I was wondering who'd be the first to go there.

I'm as strong as a bull moose, and you can use me to the limit. - Teddy Roosevelt

by fogiv on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 01:19:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]

c'mon, its not like (2.00 / 1)

Bush tapping Angela Merkel

by Lakrosse on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 01:23:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: c'mon, its not like (none / 0)

I just hurled. Thanks.

by Spiffarino on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 09:43:55 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: AP: Obama Tapping Clinton for State (2.00 / 2)

I'm warming up to this in the context of how to solve two compelling problems at the same time. The issue then becomes how to navigate the policy. I can conceive of Hillary being a tremendous asset but it implies that there is a common purpose which engages her in an overarching cause which is clear to both of them. This is a gamble of his which I must admit I was resistant to at first but I can see where it would have significant benefits in the long run.

I'm assuming that a Palestine/Israel solution is at the heart of this, and as Hendrik Hertzberg noted there could be a powerful pressure brought to bear on Israel with Hillary's bona fides as a relatively conservative but powerful voice for American constituencies who might come to understand that a settlement there is our best chance to a successful prosecution of the 'war' on terrorism.

by Shaun Appleby on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 01:07:44 AM EST

Re: AP: Obama Tapping Clinton for State (none / 0)

I'm warming up to this...

See, Shaun--that's the advantage of a long drawn out selection process, with steadily escalating trial balloons and leaks along the way. It gives time for even the biggest skeptics to eventually warm up to the idea before it becomes official :-)

by markjay on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 01:19:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: AP: Obama Tapping Clinton for State (2.00 / 2)

The long, drawn out selection process seems to be the thing mitigating most against it at this point, it's a bad sign. The only possibility of success for the Secretary of State to fulfil the challenging role awaiting them is if foreign actors are convinced that they are speaking for the president and have their implicit trust and confidence.

The likelihood of this actually happening seems to diminish with each passing day. If we're going to do this let's get on with it and get it done. Her authority is dependent on the swift resolution of this appointment.

by Shaun Appleby on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 01:23:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]

All in all, disappointing. (none / 0)

I have tried to stay quiet about it, but, this is all just very disappointing.

We have a nascent "shadow government" of the two Clintons in the making, here. The spin on all of this, from leaks on both sides, has been to play this up like Nixon going to China, as if Obama's agreeing to meet her was some noble diplomatic gesture between heads of different states. The melodrama of it all is rather suffocating, isn't it?

I think Friedman and Broder ARE right, that this is going to be a bad mistake. The Clintons are not going to be good team players. Even ignoring all their past history, just the past couple of weeks alone suggest that they won't be able to put their egos and ambitions aside. And this is a c cabinet post that requires players to play from the same sheet of music. I think we can look forward to a lot of unpleasant drama from this.

by Dumbo on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 01:32:44 AM EST

melodrama (2.00 / 2)

The source of the melodrama is a hyper-ventilating media. Hillary and Bill Clinton are really just two smart successful people. I think this talk of egos and drama is just a media fantasy that you've bought into. It's imagined soap-opera-ism. Notice you can't say explicitly what a Sec. Clinton would do in the state department that would be so awful. What's her secret "shadow government" foreign policy agenda? Can you name at least one thing? There's just this vague cloud of "drama" that follows the poor woman wherever she goes. She's not Lady MacBeth. This isn't a play. We're governing here.

by riboflavin on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 01:45:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: melodrama (none / 0)

I think you're missing the point, perhaps. There has obviously been a fair bit of spinning and contraindications from both camps. The media are puerile and mercenary but they don't just make this stuff up out of clean air. The question is whether the intention which Obama had in offering this position can be realised and whether Hillary is willing to come on board as an uncompromisingly loyal participant, with her own opinions and unique contributions, in the common purpose to which she has been invited.

Those of us one the sidelines and even in the intimate circles of the respective camps should perhaps reflect on the mutual and collective benefits of such a collaboration rather than weigh the outcomes in terms of the mundane political opportunities and threats for the parties involved. At least for a few moments. I am beginning to think this was what Obama had in mind from the outset, but old habits are hard to break.

by Shaun Appleby on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 02:11:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]

mind reading (none / 0)

The question is will she be good at her job. Everything else is jibber-jabber.

by riboflavin on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 03:07:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: melodrama (none / 0)

Well, she did vote for the war, for starters. And the Iran resolution. She's been quite hawkish in the Senate. HHS might be better for her.

Give to Redistricting Project candidates for Democratic maps 2011-2021! http://www.actblue.com/page/redistrictin gproject

by Sandwich Repairman on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 03:12:24 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: melodrama (none / 0)

jeez, have another sandwich. . . .

by swissffun on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 04:36:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: melodrama (none / 0)

Sorry to offer hard facts that might lead people to question the proposition at hand. Are we back to the John Edwards debate? We should just excuse all those who voted for the war? What's a tattered international reputation, a few hundred billion dollars, hundreds of thousands of deaths, and 4 million people displaced among friends? Maybe the polluters shouldn't be in charge of the environment, the drug companies shouldn't be making health care laws, and hawks shouldn't be running our foreign policy.

Got a substantive response, or just personal attacks?

Give to Redistricting Project candidates for Democratic maps 2011-2021! http://www.actblue.com/page/redistrictin gproject

by Sandwich Repairman on Sun Nov 23, 2008 at 12:04:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]

The drama counts. (none / 0)

I don't agree that it is all media-created -- obviously somebody has been leaking. But let's put that aside, and assume it's all a media hallucination. Even then, the hallucination COUNTS, because we are talking about the job of the chief diplomat of the USA, and a perception on the part of other heads of state that the Sec of State may have her own separate agenda, ambitions, and political infrastructure. Just the appearance of this is bad.

by Dumbo on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 07:20:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Except when it doesn't count. (none / 0)

C'mon man, you're making stuff up.

"we are talking about the job of the chief diplomat of the USA, and a perception on the part of other heads of state that the Sec of State may have her own separate agenda, ambitions, and political infrastructure."

You are talking about that. Not "we". What evidence is there? What historical precedent can you think of that's even slightly relevant. We're talking about the fact that "somebody has been leaking". In other words, we're talking about D.C. gossip. And I contend that that gossip is totally blown out of proportion by the media in order to make a big deal out of nothing so that you're more likely to tune into Hardball now that the election's over. We're gonna be fine, Hillary's gonna be fine, Barack's gonna be fine. Until I see evidence that Barack or Hillary is incompentent or ineffective, I will not even begin to sweat this. We've got the best Democrat in the country in the White House and the second best Democrat in the country at State. How is that anything but awesome? Why in the world should I be freaked out about that? Oh yeah "perceptions" and "agendas" and "ambitions" and "hallucinations" that "COUNT". Whatever.

by riboflavin on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 10:53:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: All in all, disappointing. (2.00 / 2)

I share your concerns. On the other hand I'm beginning to see the possibility that Obama's motives were not political. There are a lot of imponderables here and frankly the Clinton's don't exactly have my 'trust,' as it were. Yet by the same token I do believe that they share a common sense of purpose, as Democrats and patriots. I'm beginning to think that Obama's intentions are to appeal to everybody's 'higher angels,' theirs, yours, mine and those of the electorate at large, to rise above our passions and prejudices, our habits and mundane ambitions, for a common good which embraces all of our best interests. He has said as much from day one.

My warning bells are all ringing but from the time when I realised that this offer was genuinely made to Hillary in preference to other applicants, which seems to be clearly the case, I have had to do a bit of soul searching about the whole thing. Maybe Hillary and Bill are doing the same. I sure hope so, for all of our sakes.

by Shaun Appleby on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 01:45:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I hope you're wrong. (none / 0)

I'm beginning to think that Obama's intentions are to appeal to everybody's 'higher angels,' theirs, yours, mine and those of the electorate at large, to rise above our passions and prejudices, our habits and mundane ambitions, for a common good which embraces all of our best interests. He has said as much from day one.

As you know, Shaun, I was a strong Obama supporter through the election, but I said on more than one occasion, that if I thought he actually believed all that kumbaya crap, I'd vote against him! Please, dear God, don't let him be that naive. Depending on people's better angels is not a sound strategy. Maybe in love, perhaps, but not in politics.

by Dumbo on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 07:10:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: All in all, disappointing. (none / 0)

I'm with ya. But if it gets that clearly bad, Obama can fire her. She serves at his pleasure, and there are other folks qualified to be Secretary of State. Jimmy Carter? ;)

Give to Redistricting Project candidates for Democratic maps 2011-2021! http://www.actblue.com/page/redistrictin gproject

by Sandwich Repairman on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 03:11:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]

That would look great. (none / 0)

Him firing Hillary Clinton? Uh uh. Not a good situation.

by Dumbo on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 07:12:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: That would look great. (none / 0)

That's a damn good argument not to hire her for the job in the first place.

Since when shouldn't a president fire a cabinet secretary gone awry? Clinton ousted Hazel O'Leary from Energy. Bush canned O'Neill and then Snow from Treasury. Hillary has some kind of magic status?

Give to Redistricting Project candidates for Democratic maps 2011-2021! http://www.actblue.com/page/redistrictin gproject

by Sandwich Repairman on Sun Nov 23, 2008 at 12:07:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]

you and Shaun are right to be wary... (none / 0)

because her Presidential ambitions will always be hanging in the air and Bill is uncontrollable. And obviously, the press will have their radar turned up high.

But she has strong incentive to follow the White House in policy, tone and style. If Obama has a successful Presidency and foreign policy, she will partially own it. That would be powerful in 2016 and/or to her personal legacy. If she crosses Obama, that would be a big black mark going into 2016. This does not mean she has to acquiesce to Obama because he wants her strong personality and opinions. Hopefully, troublemakers like Fox News commentator Howard Wolfson and comedian Lanny Davis will fall out of the HRC loop.

This has nothing to do with anything, but there was a spectacular photo of HRC in New York Magazine:

hrc

Our Moment Is Now

by mboehm on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 04:24:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I approve (1.00 / 1)

specifically because I think it's dumb to waste Hillary Clinton in the Senate. She's a carpetbagger who's been using that seat as a stepping stone for the presidency. She's an executive-brancher at heart. New York has a ton of homegrown progressives who'd be great at her job. Plus, now that she's tied to the Obama administration, if she wants another shot at the big job (she'll be 69 in 2016, same age as Reagan in '80; tough but doable) she has no incentive to undermine his agenda (or whatever Machievellian/Macbethian fantasy plans people want to project onto her and Bill).

Only problem I have with it is her management style based on her campaign. But then again, it was the second best run campaign in the country this year. I think she'll do fine. And if not, she's done in 4 and we'll all move on. I guess if she's a total disaster and starts a nuclear war with Iran or something then we'll all be dead anyway so nobody will be around to tell me they'd told me so. I'm willing to take that risk.

by riboflavin on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 02:09:38 AM EST

Re: AP: Obama Tapping Clinton for State (2.00 / 2)

I agree. Obama has completely ignored all the wailing and gnashing of teeth from both sides throughout his campaign and transition. He will do what he thinks is right for the country.

That One is the Right One for 2008.

by GFORD on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 02:28:33 AM EST

Re: AP: Obama Tapping Clinton for State (none / 0)

Went to a seminar where Sam Donaldson gave us his take on Obama picking Clinton, as far as politically speaking 'it would be very wise' he said.

Mainly because if Obama messes up [knock on wood, of course], she wouldn't be able to challenge him at a later date in his re-election bid.

Donaldson thinks its a done deal, that she will get the job.

by alyssa chaos on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 02:45:02 AM EST

Re: AP: Obama Tapping Clinton for State (none / 0)

Someone asked my opinion of this last night, and I was reminded of LBJ's old maxim: better to have 'em inside the tent pissing out than outside the tent pissing in.

Give to Redistricting Project candidates for Democratic maps 2011-2021! http://www.actblue.com/page/redistrictin gproject

by Sandwich Repairman on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 03:17:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: AP: Obama Tapping Clinton for State (none / 0)

thats exactly what Sam Donaldson said!

by alyssa chaos on Sat Nov 22, 2008 at 08:29:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: AP: Obama Tapping Clinton for State (2.00 / 1)

UNhappy, macnam, UNhappy.

I like what David Broder said. Sec of State is the wrong role for Hillary. She belongs in the Senate.

Give to Redistricting Project candidates for Democratic maps 2011-2021! http://www.actblue.com/page/redistrictin gproject

by Sandwich Repairman on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 03:03:01 AM EST

Re: AP: Obama Tapping Clinton for State (none / 0)

Sysstat: Uptime 99:9:01. I have been awake for 22 months, 9 hours, 2 minutes, 36 seconds...

by Shaun Appleby on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 04:08:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: AP: Obama Tapping Clinton for State (none / 0)

The cake is a lie.

by Shaun Appleby on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 04:10:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: AP: Obama Tapping Clinton for State (2.00 / 1)

Good almighty I thought that would never be over.

Well good luck to her.

When you start out making the "slippery slope" argument, where do you draw the line?

by Jess81 on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 03:42:15 AM EST

Re: AP: Obama Tapping Clinton for State (2.00 / 1)

My Opinion-

1)HRC has no intentions of undermining Obama

2)It is doubtful that she will run again in 2012
But even if she does, it will be because she
did a good job under Obama (as he exits)

3) All things considered, this is a Win Win for
both of them, on balance

4)I didn't think Obama had the cajonnes to do
this, as Hillary is quite strong and a leader
The fact that he is going to do just that
makes Obama even stronger imo and I salute him

5) Any other SOC selection would have been 2nd
rate-Richardson is middle drawer, Kerry is
far too bland etc. HRC stands head and shoulder
over them

6)Hillary likely bored with Senate now anyway

7)I doubt she wanted VP--too stifling---and has
wanted State all along. This has been in the
cards for months--before June imo

by ionsys on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 06:10:40 AM EST

Re: AP: Obama Tapping Clinton for State (none / 0)

"It is doubtful that she will run again in 2012"

Well, hell no. She might in 2016, though.

by devilrays on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 11:09:45 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: AP: Obama Tapping Clinton for State (2.00 / 1)

Good move. It shows he's more interested in getting the Democratic Party united more than pleasing the WaPost and NYT's editorial scrum.

by Jerome Armstrong on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 08:41:47 AM EST

Re: AP: Obama Tapping Clinton for State (none / 0)

The democratic party is largely united. Obama's job now is to unite the nation. This is a step in the wrong direction, considering that goal.

Oh well. I will have to trust Obama's judgment, as it is his administration. ;)

Howard Dean is my go-to guy

by lojasmo on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 10:19:08 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: AP: Obama Tapping Clinton for State (none / 0)

The democratic party is largely united. Obama's job now is to unite the nation. This is a step in the wrong direction, considering that goal.

How is pegging Hillary Clinton for the main diplomatic post a step in the wrong direction when it comes to uniting the nation? I don't see that at all. Hillary Clinton is extremely popular nationally, not just with Democrats. The nation wants to see either her or Powell at this position, nobody else is even close - see Rasmussen's poll in that regard.

by devilrays on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 11:08:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: AP: Obama Tapping Clinton for State (none / 0)

I am uneasy with this choice. Will she be too hardline, too hawkish towards Russia and the Middle Eastern peoples? Actually, what these countries want is someone who is confrontational with them, and Obama's successful election threw them into a loop. This somewhat does what they wanted along-after all, she (along with John McCain!) wanted to have the Presidents of the Ukraine and Georgia to get the Nobel Peace Prize. Only time will tell whether or not this was a good step for Obama.

by demjim on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 10:41:45 AM EST

I would call it a Unity Government (none / 0)

that has the chance to endure on the rocky seas of the next 4 years and beyond.

Clinton is not by nature a diplomat; let's not pretend that she was chosen for her skill set.

What it isn't is Change.

by Paul Goodman on Fri Nov 21, 2008 at 11:39:42 AM EST

You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.