Site Presented By
Wednesday, Nov 4, 2009
I love all y'all, and I love Krugman, but it aint gonna happen. (Well-deserved) Nobel Prize or no, as Confucius pointed out, the market reaction would be severe, and whether we like it or not, the selection of Treasury Secretary is much more geared towards who the markets will be comfortable with than what the impact will be on regular folk. The leftist in me (and the Facebook Paul Krugman Fan Club member in me) would love to see PK, or Robert Reich, appointed, but it's gonna be Geithner or Summers, and the more markets keep tanking like they are, the more likely it'll probably be Summers.
Again, I say this in the spirit of love and peace. I'm a fellow fan, just keepin' it real here...
"She's smart and tough, has a lot of respect worldwide, she had an international portfolio as first lady, and she's strengthened that experience as a senator and on the Armed Services Committee. She'd also be a strong voice for women's rights globally."
OK. Here is where you lose me. The last sentence. Why does gender have to be a factor? And how can it be a positive factor when H. Clinton would be dealing with dignitaries in foreign countries that have no use or acknowledgement of women? Condi Rice did little to ease conflicts with those Middle Eastern nations. And of course H. Clinton, we can expect, would be much more aggressive enforcing her (and hopefully Obama's) platform on "diplomacy." I just don't see this as a wise choice. She'll be dealing with her husband's past reputation in dealing with them as well.
In my opinion, waving the "I am Woman" flag is...well, just wrong! We have few decent examples of successful women in politics, and many (like Pelosi) who should never have been elected to a position of such power. She is just not capable.
I agree, I trust Obama to do the right thing. But I also think he may feel an obligation to give her a post in his Cabinet. I don't think Secretary of State is the appropriate one.
(Well-deserved) Nobel Prize or no, as Confucius pointed out, the market reaction would be severe, and whether we like it or not, the selection of Treasury Secretary is much more geared towards who the markets will be comfortable with than what the impact will be on regular folk.
Oh, I realize that that's why it won't happen; I was saying that's why it should happen! It's high time that the markets' "shock therapy" or "shock doctrine" (a la Naomi Klein) is turned right back around at them. Bringing in Summers means that any sort of progressive reform of the financial markets will be DOA, and that will be a disaster. But, this country seems unwilling to abandon its economic and financial theology, even after it's been shown to be a rank failure, so I'm not expecting much from the new Treasury Dept!
BTW, yours is another one of the many nom de posts that I like. When I was a kid, I had this running joke during one summer that I spent at camp where I would spout out "Ah, Confucius say..." followed by some ridiculous foolishness...hey, I was a kid! :)
I'm not in disagreement with you at all; Capitalism as we have practiced it here in the US is dying, and we have to expect that it will be an agonizing demise. Hang in there, though. Change has a way of occurring whether we will it too or not.
I heart Naomi Klein.
Probably...
But only if they're Girl Scout cookies...
"Did you see/hear the news?
AP: Obama "Aide: Obama on Track to Nominate Clinton"
"Some Democrats and government insiders have questioned whether Clinton is too independent and politically ambitious to be an effective secretary of state. But Obama is said to admire her talents and experience, as do many other Democrats."
The link didn't work, but you can google it.
Other Obama aides have noted: "She's a great team player."
Yay!!!!!!
-- luminesce"
Huuh? Okay let me see; fifty percent (50%)of Democrats and Government insiders think she is too independent and politically ambitious to be an effective secretary of state while another 50% and Obama think otherwise. Or is it 30-70 one way or other? The absurdity of this whole thing is mind-boggling. The media is getting pathetic.
I vote for Thin Mints and those coconut-y ones...but are they Kosher?
But that doesn't mean our fan club is wrong! Heck, we have a dream. I'm sure GoodCelery! would lend us a pipe. When do we start our march on transition team HQ...?
You cannot use Condi Rice as a comparison to Hillary for SoS.
Firstly, Condi did not have a very sane foreign policy to represent, nor did she have a sane or reputable President to represent=Strike 1.
Secondly, Condi is Acadameia. She is an expert on Russian history and that was the extent of her knowledge base. A college professor of Russian history and government. She comes across a bit rigid and cool and not very personable=Strike 2.
Most importantly, she just did not have much with which to work. A disastrous Administration that made disastrous judgements. She "tutored" Bushie during the campaign on foreign policy; then was his National Security Advisor; then SoS, and, apparently, either did not have very good advise or, again, she did not have much with which to work, with Rumsfeld and Chaney calling the shots for Bushie.
Hillary has a great President, a smart one, and he will have a smart Cabinet. He will seek out disparate views and opinions and make the decisions. She and he share a mutual respect, that is obvious, in many subtle ways, and I believe he knows exactly what he is attracted to her in this position. He is under no obligation to anyone to "use" this very important position as a "pay back". He just would not do that, certainly not in these troubled times.
From Greenwald, today:
Writing about yesterday's ruling on the Guantanamo detainees, Andrew Sullivan says: "And Obama wants an apologist for this -- John Brennan -- at CIA? Has he lost his mind?"I'm both entirely unsurprised and basically undisturbed by the fact that Obama's most significant appointments thus far are composed largely of standard Washington establishment figures and pro-Iraq-War hawks, and are devoid of people "on the Left". That is who Obama is -- he's an establishment politician who, with a few exceptions, is situated smack in the mainstream middle of the national Democratic Party. The mentor he sought out when arriving in the Senate was Joe Lieberman, who he then actively supported against Ned Lamont. The notion that Obama is some sort of aggressive or radical Leftist challenger of establishment power is and always was the by-product of fear-mongering from the Right and, to a lesser extent, the projected desires of some progressives. As I've said many times, I intend to wait and judge Obama on the policies he pursues, not the administrators he appoints to carry out those policies.
But John Brennan is a different matter. To appoint someone as CIA Director or Director of National Intelligence who was one of George Tenet's closest aides when The Dark Side of the last eight years was conceived and implemented, and who, to this day, continues to defend and support policies such as "enhanced interrogation techniques" and rendition (to say nothing of telecom immunity and warrantless eavesdropping), is to cross multiple lines that no Obama supporter should sanction. Truly turning a page on the grotesque abuses of the last eight years requires both symbolism (closing Guantanamo) and substantive policy changes (compelling adherence to the Army Field Manual, ensuring due process rights for all detainees, ending rendition, restoring safeguards on surveillance powers). Appointing John Brennan to a position of high authority would be to affirm and embrace, not repudiate, the darkest aspects of the last eight years.
*
*Boldface emphasis is mine.
An Israeli columnist issues a scathing indictment of Israel and calls on the U.S. to apply pressure.
Even when government officials purposely subject an innocent person to brutal torture, they enjoy full immunity.
Hey, guys: Are adult films making you bad at sex?
What was once depicted as a grave act of lawlessness -- Bush's NSA program -- is now deemed a vital state secret.
The loony wing of the Republican Party prepares for a big day in Tuesday's elections
Salon headlines in your mailbox
