Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
Yes she is grate my dad said she should be a secratary of state because she is a woman so she can be a secratary. im voting for her for this position
I hadn't thought about Krugman's support of Hillary's health care plan as a factor, but how antithetical (trying to recall) was that to Obama's health care plan? I know they were different, I don't think drastically--or certainly not so far apart that there could be no "golden mean."
However, I would really love to see him as Treasury. I believe he is most a pragmatist and a leftist and he has excellent social skills.
Agreed. If only Obama would ask me or thee ;)
With all these bailouts, the people who are not being bailed out are poor people and lower working class people. They will really hurt. I remember that Krugman -- remember the stimulus -- wanted to see some of it to go straight to increasing food stamps. Food stamps are essential to the working poor. They help keep them working and actually aid in keeping them off welfare. Moreover, they have to spend it so that it goes straight into the economy.
I wish I could send you an article written by a friend of mine for Philadelphia Magazine a few years back. I have the mag, but couldn't find the story online. In short, it covers his family who could not have survived without "welfare cheese" (those big icky blocks) and such, and gee, despite conditions of living in the "projects" with family problems galore (diabetic abusive dad dying, mom keeping three little kids home and having to send three young sons to schools/homes for orphans or fatherless dads) and guess what? All ended up getting college degrees--sisters in the family included. All pay taxes. Are all okay, through and through, psychologically speaking? No. The youngest son ended up the worst off. They're human beings. There are scars. But if those food stamps and welfare payments hadn't been there, this family would never have gone on to better lives and contribute to society.
Paulson? Oh, yeah. He's a peach. Oversight is the Big O.
Joan, I think your reasoning on this is solid. Just to give you context, I supported Hillary and then threw my support to Obama when she bowed out. She's absolutely capable. Because the Secretary of State carries out the President's policy, if he thinks she's the one to represent him and his policy, that's what counts.
Naturally the pundits go on and on and on. I missed Hardball tonight, but since have heard charges of SSDD/SOS (or put more nicely, "business as usual") because Obama has put in or there's speculation he's going to appoint those close to the Clinton White House and keep Bush's Gates. Egads! He just needs to focus and do what he knows is right for his administration and the country.
Meanwhile, there may be problems with Daschle's potential appointment because of what he's done and with whom post-Senate. I think it would be a shame if that fell through.
And it just tickles me to death that Sen. McCain has issued a statement urging Congress to approve Gov. Janet Napolitano's appointment to the Homeland Security post when it hasn't even been announced. I guess McCain is trying to follow Obama's lead on the gracious front.
While I know Obama will have to incorporate some feelings into his personnel choices, I have faith . . . no wait, I believe . . . . Let me start over because "feel," "faith" and "believe" give me that creepy Bush feeling. I got sick of hearing Bush express his policy and strategy edicts on Iraq and everything else in terms of feelings and beliefs. Obama has demonstrated that he can make rational, fact-based decisions. Add to that a gut-check and I think he'll do fine.
"Now, if they continue to talk and he has doubts about her capacity to loyally represent him abroad; if concerns emerge about President Clinton's global dealings; if any number of genuine troubles arise that convince Obama that despite his initial enthusiasm, it's not the right choice, I'll accept that. The only bad reason not to pick Hillary Clinton as secretary of state is the predictable media mob of Clinton haters telling him not to."
You are predicating your acceptance of Obama's rejection on the conditions created by the media, and if concerns emerge about Clintons global dealings? I am disappointed that you have bought lock, stock and barrel the media insanity developed for the Clintons. Who decides genuine troubles? And if President Clinton's global dealings according to the media is so anti-American why should we end there by derailing only Hillary's elevation to SoS? Why not let investigations go on and prosecute the former president for illegalities? Is this not what we have lived through Clintion's presidency with the media hyperventilating on false accusations against the former president culminating in numerous special prosecutor investigations only to end with sexual humiliation?
The proper question to ask, Joan considering your faith in Obama's decision is knowing the media and the way they are with the Clintons, could Obama not have found a more dignified approach to this particular selection of his "friend" rather than allow the usual Clinton haters like David Broder, Tom Friedman et al to vet her in the media with this circus? These same media elites and pundits never uttered a word about Bush senior and his global dealings when his son became president. They were all part Reagan principle:"never speak ill of another republican" and helped immensely in propagating the Iraq war that benefited Cheney and his former company Haliburton. No conflict of interest there. Unbelievable.
"Hitchins needs a Wagon
And the next time Christopher Hitchins plans to appear on TV to trash someone, he should really wait for at least 48 hours to dry out from his binge. He looked disheveled, hair messed up, sloppy, words slurred, like a drunk, frankly, as he trashed a very smart, capable, courageous, accomplished, and sober woman.
Everyone has had an opportunity to see a different kind of woman aspiring for high governmental office. Have they not been able to set a standard from the comparison?
-- nana4g"
You do not have to blame a buffoon like Hitchens who was too eager to oblige in the character assasination of a woman she has come to hate; blame Joan's friend Chris Mathews who knew exactly what he wanted and could not wait to bring one of the most virulent Hillary haters to his show to thrash her.
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
