I tend to hate people who betrayed me, and between NAFTA, free trade with China, the DOMA and her vote authorizing the Iraq War - not to mention her despicable behavior during the primaries - there are plenty of reasons for me to feel betrayed by the Clintons.

That having been said, I think making her Secretary of State is an absolutely brilliant move. In fact, I recommended Obama name her to his cabinet in order to get her out of the Senate, where she almost certainly would act as a leader of any Democratic efforts to obstruct Obama's legislative agenda (a role which now falls to that quisling little Smurf Lieberman, who may be too in love with his precarious position as a committee chair to jeopardize it by making waves).

She's an excellent choice because she's well-known and she brings her husband along for the ride. He's even better-known and regarded overseas. Between the two of them they could do a lot to repair America's image abroad and Bill is already experienced at negotiating peace accords, something we definitely need to see more of in the Middle East. It's the kind of superstar, two-for-one deal no other candidate could possibly offer.

It'll also keep both of them out of the country a good deal of the time, where they won't be able to form a kind of shadow government waiting for opportunities to stab Obama in the back. Indeed, if there's some kind of foreign policy meltdown Obama will be able to credibly deflect the blame onto Billary. That means the Clintons will have to stay on their best behavior.

As for why Hillary would take the job, a 2012 run against Obama might split the party, and she's gonna be borderline too old to run in 2016. If she does a good job as Sec of State and does decide to run in 2016, it would certainly be a plus on her resume. More of a plus than her time in the Senate - a seat she may not keep anyhow if the Republicans run someone competent against her.

Even assuming she keeps her seat 'till 2016, because of the way seniority works in the Senate she's unlikely to become Majority Leader anytime before 2012. Indeed, I'd be surprised to see her become Majority Leader before 2016. So as a career path and a stepping stone to another run for the Oval Office accepting the Sec of State job makes more sense than not accepting it. And if this is to be the end of Hillary's career as an elected politician it's still preferable for her to leave the Senate on her own terms, as opposed to being forced-out by losing an election.

I think Obama is the shrewdest politician we've had in the White House since Roosevelt. I would hate to play poker against this guy - I think you'd be guaranteed to lose your shirt.

The more I think about this appointment, the more it makes sense for the Clintons. Bill wasn't able to achieve peace between the Palestinians and Israelis in the waning weeks of his Administration, but they did come pretty close. Unfortunately, at the moment his legacy revolves more around cum stains than diplomatic gains. But if, thru Hillary at State, Bill can get some kind of lasting solution in place for Israel, that would be quite a feather in his cap (and it wouldn't hurt Hillary's chances for 2016 either, if she decides to run).

I think part of the drive for a second Clinton White House was to repair their mixed (at best) legacy. Obama's just offered them a somewhat easier way to do that, without all the downsides that come from actually having to run the country and make unpopular choices. Or in the case of the Clintons, often disastrous choices, like the repeal of Glass Steagall, NAFTA / China "free" trade, and the strong dollar policy, all of which have now crippled our economy.

Obama seems to have found a way to harness Bill's charisma and massive ego and Hillary's cold calculation and put them to some productive use. Bravo!

The last place he'd want them is kicking around in the Senate. There's a slew of legislation he'll need to get passed in his first 90 days in office, and Hillary could do serious damage if she wanted to by organizing and leading any Democratic opposition.

Here's where we hid the whiskey. And this glass table is a great place for setting up lines of coke!

Isn't Graner being tortured?

No.

Gee, that was difficult.

Is he being treated "unfairly"?

No.

Are others more powerful than Mister Graner being allowed to escape justice?

You betcha!