Agree. Hillary would be a spectacular choice. I'm optimistic since neither she nor the Obama team are making any effort to throw cold water on the story, and greatly encouraged by the overwhelming enthusiasm the idea is being greeted with in general.
I very much identify with your story, and watched the election from afar after Hillary lost too. Then the chit hit the fan when the realities of a potential McCain administration with no new ideas in the face of a global economic meltdown snapped me out of my funk. It persuaded me to give Obama a 2nd look, and he looked darn good when starkly contrasted to McCain. McCain's choice of Palin threw me into a near panic. By the time early voting time rolled around here in Florida, I was actually starting to like Obama, and appreciate his many fine qualities. I was in line on the 2nd day at the crack of dawn to vote for him.
I like and approve of all the names you mention for whichever post Obama wants to put them - with one major exception - Edwards. I don't judge him for his personal failures, but will never be able to trust him after he ran for the nomination while conspiring to deceive the party about those failures. Had he won, the party would have lost. I consider him as sanctimoniously phony as Lieberman, and every bit as self-absorbed. Edwards is now out to pasture politically speaking, and best left there permanently, imho.
I'm with you. imho, Wes would be as perfect a choice for Secty. of State as Rahm was for Chief of Staff. That said, I rarely get my way when it comes to political preference, but the law of averages says I'm overdue for a pleasant suprise ;)
MSNBC showed the clip of Lieberman's public statement regarding his meeting with Reid today. Nora O'Donnell laughed and asked the news correspondent she was talking to about it, "What was THAT supposed to mean???"
Lieberman read from a prepared statement in a halting, almost beginner reading level way. It was really strange, didn't make much (clear) sense, and Lieberman himself looked a bit shaken and off his game.
I'm sure something more than either Lieberman or Reid are letting on occurred in that meeting, and it wasn't what Joe wanted to hear.
Agree, and agree. It takes a pound of common sense to utilize each ounce of intelligence.
Why not just look past the patriarhical reference that has a few in such a snit, with the understanding that the British think in a slightly different way than us due to their long history of having a monarchy as national familial figureheads, and leave it at that.
IMHO, there is nothing more damaging and ultimately self defeating than hypersensitive activist types who are so wrapped up in their causes, that they lose the ability to maintain a rational perspective.
If Obama had also won a filibuster proof Senate majority, he'd have been able to govern more to the left, but as it is, he'll have to adopt a somewhat more centrist stance to get anything accomplished. All you can do is play the hand you're dealt the best you can.