Politico: Obama Expected To Pick Clinton As SoS
Posted by Ashish on 11.21.2008
Bill delivers all asked of him...
Politico reports that Obama is expected to name Hillary Clinton Secretary of State shortly after Thanksgiving. Bill Clinton and his finances were the main hang ups the Obama team had about picking Hillary, but he has apparently given them everything they have asked for and they are satisfied.
Posted By: Blah (Guest) on November 21, 2008 at 01:09 AM
What's wrong with getting the best candidates for the job?
Posted By: Guest#2330 (Guest) on November 21, 2008 at 01:56 AM
"Is this supposed to be "Change"
1446 days and counting"
The President selecting someone who he fought in an extremely difficult and heated campaign instead of a yes man being rewarded for backing him from the start?
No...you're right...same old same old here...
Posted By: Guest#8223 (Guest) on November 21, 2008 at 05:40 AM
The change part is bringing in your opponents to help you in your administration. Bush only brought in people that would let him call them turd blossom, and would only hire US attorneys that were strict Bush followers. Depoliticizing the justice department will be one of many changes. And make that 2892 days buuuuuuuddy. Gotta love a Pauly Shore reference.
Posted By: James (Registered) (Guest) on November 21, 2008 at 05:45 AM
It's definitely a change from Bush and his idiotic ways.
Posted By: GREAT NEWS! (Guest) on November 21, 2008 at 08:02 AM
And thus the Master Plan is complete. The Democratic Party simply wanted another Clinton term and have now found their way to do so. Obama is a puppet. While he may be the supposed head honcho, he's taking all of his advice from Clinton people and people who supported Clinton. The Democratic Party really pulled it off well, since instead of Hillary, they now have a puppet that will purse Clinton-esque policies. The only "change" they wanted was someone who wasn't George W. Bush, after that, politics as usual is fine with them.
Posted By: Guest#4324 (Guest) on November 21, 2008 at 08:27 AM
This isn't change. You're missing the point. Obama campaigned on the premise he would change Washington. He hasn't. While he's a new face, his Administration is the same old characters from the Clinton Fiasco from the 90s.
If he wanted to be an agent for change, he'd invite more Republicans and more fiscal conservative Democrats into his cabinet. Instead, he's relying on career politicians.
Posted By: Michael (Guest) on November 21, 2008 at 09:08 AM
yes, this is indeed change! Why is it that if President-Elect Obama doesn't have "more Republicans" as elected officials in his administration, it's not change? How many Democrats has ANY Republican President (the last 4) had withing there administration? Have you Republicans forgotten so quickly? YOU ARE THE ONES THAT GOT US INTO THE FUCK-UP WERE ARE CURRENTLY AND HAVE BEEN IN FOR THE PAST 8 YEARS!
President-Elect Obama has always said he will be the "Agent of Change" - YES!.. Getting rid of Republican screw-ups out of the White House for the next 8 years. Now THAT'S A CHANGE YOU CAN BELIEVE IN!!
Posted By: Independent for Obama (Guest) on November 21, 2008 at 09:22 AM
And I guarantee if he brought in a slew of Washington outsiders, some of you guys would be complaining that he is bringing in inexperienced, untested and risky people.
Is this different from the previous 8 years, hell yes. Going back to the Clinton era? Too early to say yet. HE HASN'T EVEN TAKEN OFFICE YET. Sometimes players can behave completely different and the nature of the team changes with a different coach.
Posted By: Elliot (Guest) on November 21, 2008 at 09:24 AM
"And thus the Master Plan is complete. The Democratic Party simply wanted another Clinton term and have now found their way to do so."
Ummm, what? If that were the case why wouldn't we have just elected her? I guess we just like the challenge of protracted primary fights and selecting minority candidates which always go over well in America. What some people don't understand is that the Clinton name is still viewed positively internationally and carries a great deal of credibility... it's only right wing Regressive Americans who hate them so much. While I have some reservations about the selection, it is clear to me that most of the people bent about this selection or any Obama selection for that matter will complain unless a Republican is selected. Again, get over it people. The country pretty clearly repudiated the Republican way of doing business this year, why do you do you think Obama should thumb his nose at the voters by selecting people who hold ideologies that they voted out of office this year?
Posted By: Riverbottom Nightmare (Guest) on November 21, 2008 at 09:42 AM
I've said it before and I'll say it again: competence is a change.
Posted By: matt (Guest) on November 21, 2008 at 11:29 AM
i called this months ago. the moment she officially dropped out of the race, i told my wife that if obama wins, she's is sec of state.
clinton was his fiercest rival. she disagreed with barack on numerous issues. contrast that with bush who i recalled had his attorney general fire anyone who didnt agree with him.
Posted By: rey (Guest) on November 21, 2008 at 12:01 PM
I would of voted for Clinton the Democrat over Obama the socialist any day.
1445 days and counting. Yes we can.
Posted By: Blah (Guest) on November 21, 2008 at 12:03 PM
I called this months ago! Nice call dude.
The only thing this signals to me is how far the State Department has fallen from relevance. There hasn't been a Sec of State that mattered since Jame Baker.
Posted By: AdmChesterMynutz (Guest) on November 21, 2008 at 01:02 PM
"And I guarantee if he brought in a slew of Washington outsiders, some of you guys would be complaining that he is bringing in inexperienced, untested and risky people."
Precisely. How can those on the "losing side" claim Obama is inexperienced AND whine that he's bringing in experienced advisors? That's what happens when you start with a conclusion and work backwards to justify it. Hard to believe that with the nation in a GOP-made crisis some of you would rather act like petulant children over not getting your way Nov. 4th than to welcome a change in leadership and actually let him get into office before making up grievances. It's about the country, not who won or lost, so pull up your diapers and deal.
I can't stand Hillary and don't want her within a hundred miles of the White House, but if Obama picked her he has his reasons and I'll see how she does before howling.
Posted By: Shockmaster (Guest) on November 21, 2008 at 01:50 PM
So Blah... I guess that means you are joining the non-existing ranks of regressives pledging to not accept any tax break that may find its way into their pay check if taxes are increased on the wealthy. Is that correct? If so I applaud your conviction. If not that would make you a socialist based on your defintion.
Posted By: Riverbottom Nightmare (Guest) on November 21, 2008 at 02:11 PM
"I would of voted for Clinton the Democrat over Obama the socialist any day.
1445 days and counting. Yes we can.
Posted By: Blah (Guest) on November 21, 2008 at 12:03 PM"
If you don't know the difference between the words "of" and "have" you shouldn't be allowed to vote at all. It's almost as retarded as calling Obama a socialist.
Posted By: STK (Guest) on November 21, 2008 at 02:24 PM
"contrast that with bush who i recalled had his attorney general fire anyone who didnt agree with him. "
You do realize when Clinton took office in 1992 he fired every Bush appointment, right? I forgot, its ok when a Democrat does it.
Posted By: Michael (Guest) on November 21, 2008 at 03:50 PM
I'm as much of an Obama supporter as anyone, but I hate this pick. Being a former First Lady doesn't bring credentials that others have with foreign policy. This move is nothing but a way to keep the Hillary supporters from bailing on Obama.
He was smart enough not to pick her as VP. Still, she'll be a huge media distraction as Secretary of State. Just look at how this past week has gone.
I'm as liberal as they come, but this was a potential time Obama could have crossed party lines. There had to be a Republican who had foreign policy credentials, but who shared similar opinions with Obama against the Iraq war and about Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Posted By: guest (Guest) on November 21, 2008 at 06:00 PM
There are two names that command respect and influence around the World, from a North American perspective. Obama and Clinton.
Say what you want, but this is the best conceivable pick for Sec of State possible for Obama.
Let's revisit this in a year. To see what's what. After all the photos of thousands of adoring people, following Clinton on her visits overseas, to talk about and fix real problems, for real people, THEN we'll see.
Not only will she be a true ambassador for change, she'll also be in the forefront of trying to fix real issues. Aids in Africa. The Palestinian issues. NATO expansion. Relations with Russia. Iran and Pakistan. The list is endless.
She's the perfect pick.
Again. Stop all the belly rubbing. And let's revisit in a year. Hang onto this post.
The World is going to be a lot better off, I can assure you.
Posted By: willia451 (Registered) on November 21, 2008 at 08:22 PM
Yeah right OBama is the MESSIAH , in one year time the guy is gonna cure all disease in the world, making poor people becoming rich and eradicating violence and wars anywhere just by raising his eye brow.....
IF YOU SMELLELELELELEL WHAT BAROCK
IS COOOKING !
No seriously.....
Posted By: BassGroove (Guest) on November 21, 2008 at 11:49 PM
If Blah is really opposed to Barack, he should follow his own principles and refuse the tax cut that the President-elect plans to give to him.
Posted By: Finn (Guest) on November 22, 2008 at 01:43 AM
For all of you who are still whining about Obama winning go some where and hang your self! Bush had a bunch of yes men and his vice president called all the shots. And how stupid do you have to be to say that the Clinton era was a fiasco? More jobs better economy and a lower nationwide debt is fiasco? You people are a joke when was the last time a president was willing to have his former opponents in his cabinent the 1800's? But you dont see that as change . And as far as Obama being a puppet you have got to be joking he won deal with or go to another country.
Posted By: dee76 (Guest) on November 22, 2008 at 11:04 AM
As a math teacher, it makes me happy to see that some people can do math (e.g. 1446 days and counting). However, the English needs some work. I may not be a religious person whatsoever, but Obama has given me hope. I like the idea of Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State. She won't be a yes-man. THAT right there is a change.
Posted By: Sev (Guest) on November 22, 2008 at 07:15 PM
I came on here to post my thoughts but someone (Elliot) said it damn near word for word already!
"And I guarantee if he brought in a slew of Washington outsiders, some of you guys would be complaining that he is bringing in inexperienced, untested and risky people. "
couldn't have said it better
Posted By: Flint (Guest) on November 22, 2008 at 07:47 PM
STAY CURRENT