Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
Let him hire all the Clinton-era staffers and officials he likes. He's hiring their expertise to enact his will. He's not hiring them to enact Bill Clinton's will.
Their job is to do what Obama tells them to do; it's not as if Obama will install them in their posts, wind them up, and then spend the rest of his term smoking pot and phoning it in from Hawaii.
Am I missing something here? Is there really cause for concern that I'm just not seeing? What *is* the concern, precisely?
"Andrea Mitchell of NBC first reported the Clinton/SoS rumor and she said she had two OBAMA advisors as sources."
Oh, yeah? What were their names? You don't think reporters lie? To protect their political sources? Have you been involved in political media long, or were you actually born yesterday?
I think it's perfectly safe to say the Hillary camp is behind the leaks. Hillary has everything to gain, Obama nothing. Hillary might, with luck, generate enough buzz that her appointment becomes a fait accompli, and everyone forgets to check on where all that beautiful grubby money came from.
Also, if she were going to turn down the appointment, we'd never have heard about it at all.
Now we get that she's "undecided". This piece of utterly avoidable drama will continue for the next couple of days, and then she'll announce on Thursday afternoon that she's decided to take it, milking every gram of media attention she can manage.
If that doesn't show Obama that he's making a big mistake bringing her on board, nothing will. Sure, she's knowledgeable enough about foreign affairs, even if she can't tell when she's being shot at, and sees political and diplomatic wisdom by lying about other countries, but what are the odds that she'll screw up badly enough in the job that he'll have a politically opportune moment to fire her? Probably not before she's started a few wars and shoveled nearly infinite money towards her husband, who seems to have developed a taste for the finer things in life, like becoming richer than God.
This is a substantial mistake. Obama's insistence that no one else in his administration provide drama just leaves the spotlight free for the Hill and Bill Show. What a colossal disappointment.
I really was not trying to be sarcastic earlier, with my statement that you liberals should have your way. I lived in Europe and saw first hand how Vater Stadt socialism (as the German speaking countries call it) works. Pretty effective, actually. So, I'm not fearful of anything the new administration might foist upon us.
Also, I appreciate your taking the time to correspond with me. It was getting lonely over there on the Sarah Palin threads; I was pounding out my odes to Sarah like the Phantom of the Opera in the 7th floor dungeon and not getting much response.
I do need to move on with life, and beyond Salon, but I can never decide whether the moment is right - especially when it seems like every week there is a new media effort to crush my favorite political gal, and I feel compelled to somehow offer a one-man noble and sane response.
Well, anyway, good evening to you. I'm sure you'll enjoy the politics of the coming era much more than me. Although, as I mentioned in another thread, sometimes being the Bourbon royalist in an age of bonapartism has its moments too. Especially when you have a heroine, and a sense of balance about it all.
"@Joan Walsh
"Andrea Mitchell of NBC first reported the Clinton/SoS rumor and she said she had two OBAMA advisors as sources."
Oh, yeah? What were their names? You don't think reporters lie? To protect their political sources? Have you been involved in political media long, or were you actually born yesterday?
I think it's perfectly safe to say the Hillary camp is behind the leaks. Hillary has everything to gain, Obama nothing. Hillary might, with luck, generate enough buzz that her appointment becomes a fait accompli, and everyone forgets to check on where all that beautiful grubby money came from.
Also, if she were going to turn down the appointment, we'd never have heard about it at all."
Thadeus Crumb, sometimes our hatred for someone leads us to some twisted logic. You will think that some level of intelligence, not blind hatred will allow you to conclude from Andrea Mitchell's report that a seasoned journalist who knows where her bread is buttered will not falsely accuse a popular president elect camp of leaking such a sensistive information about Hillary Clinton if it is not true. Any right thinking person will conclude that Andrea Mitchel will not throw away her future sources with Obama's team by falsely accusing them of leaking such a sensitive material about Hillary. If you throw away the hate blinders you will actually realize that it does not make sense for Andrea to lie about her sources.
The same lie about the Clintons leaking the information was told yesterday on Fox News by Hannity, O'Reily and by Dick "toe sucker" Morris, the usual anti-Hillary crowd and parroted across talk radio and the blogs.
Again, innuendos and false accusations are the refuge of cowards and you can go ahead and say anything about the former president and his charitable foundation without facts.
I do not blame you for bringing this up; I blame Obama and his campaign for all of this Hillary and SoS nonsense. On one hand, he told the whole world how Hillary could be on anyone's short-list for VP and then turning around and thumbing his nose at her. This after Hillary has poured her heart out and campaigned as vigorously as anyone to get him elected. Had he at least considered her for VP and done due diligence will we be in this demeaning situation again with the same self-serving questions about Hillary and Bill's business dealings and with Bill's anti-American Charity foundation? And where it looks like the former first lady who holds Kennedy's seat in the senate is begging for the position of SoS?
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Once seen as a lunatic fringe, reactionary anti-women groups are courting respectability
Salon headlines in your mailbox
