DISQUS

RitornaVincitor · 1 year ago

Good for you, John!!! I'm so proud of you. Seriously. This is the way we move forward together. Thank you for taking this stand.

John Aravosis · 1 year ago

Hey, I never wrote her off. She ticked me off during the primary, as did her husband - and Obama ticked her supporters off - but like I said, that's a far cry from someone like Lieberman. We all get pissed during the primaries, but then we get over it. Well, hopefully.

RitornaVincitor · 1 year ago

You deserve a lot of credit. I know it's not easy to "get over it".

And thanks too for your work for gay marriage. Over at the Queerty site they are saying that they expect a decision today from the Cal Supremes on whether or not they will hear the suits against Prop H8. What a trip this has been! My hubby and I married in SF 4 years ago, only to be annulled 6 months later when the courts decided that Saint Gavin acted without authority. Then our state legislature twice passed gay marriage, only to have it vetoed twice by a weight lifter from Austria. Then the courts passed gay marriage, so we got married again. Then came Prop H8. Now the Governator, who agrees with the majority who say marriage should only be between a man and a woman, says they were wrong, and tells us to fight on for our rights. And so we shall. Thank you Governor Playbothsidesenegger. Either we strike down Prop H8 in the courts, or we have yet another ballot initiative in two years.

And I see that we just picked up another Senate seat! Ted Stevens just conceded, and will not request a recount.

And I also see that the California Supreme Court has just decided to hear three of the cases against Prop 8! Three issues to be decided by the court:

(1) Is Proposition 8 invalid because it constitutes a revision of, rather than an amendment to, the California Constitution?

(2) Does Proposition 8 violate the separation-of-powers doctrine under the California Constitution?

(3) If Proposition 8 is not unconstitutional, what is its effect, if any, on the marriages of same-sex couples performed before the adoption of Proposition 8?

In its order, the court established an expedited briefing schedule, under which briefing will be completed in January 2009 and oral argument potentially could be held as early as March 2009. For a Supreme Court, this is considered "expedited".


http://www.towleroad.com/

Indigo · 1 year ago

Aïda much?

atariageguy · 1 year ago

Whoa! It's like an alternate universe today. Well, I'm glad you can turn on a dime from despising to being excited. Of course, many people took the cues form here and elsewhere on the blogosphere and believed them wholeheartedly - and continue to this day.

That's the danger of loose - and sometimes false - talk made in the blogs. And that's why it really pissed me off. People who are not as, um, resilient as you will simply accept the talk, from influential sources like here, as gospel. *Their* views have not changed. The Clintons are evil and must be purged. Really, Palin could say the same thing: "hey, it was just the campaign.... what's the big deal? They all knew he isn't *really* a terrorist, right?"

Regardless, it's nice to see rationality set in.

1970cs · 1 year ago

Thanks for taking the time to explain to us what we really meant to think. It would be difficult for you to be more of a condescending asshole.

Enjoy your afternoon.

atariageguy · 1 year ago

huh? OK, whatever. People around these parts were VERY clear about what they thought. It's all in the archives. What's the issue? I'm juts happy more people are coming back to rational discussion about Democrats.

1970cs · 1 year ago

Right, pretend your post meant something else entirely.

atariageguy · 1 year ago

What the heck are you talking about.

1) I was pissed off at the cross-Democratic trashing during the primaries (beyond the usual candidate attacks).

2) Many people read these attacks, took them as fact, and - to this day - still repeat them. For them (have you been to dKos? there's a huge number) it's all still true.

3) And that's what I didn't want to see happen. But it did.

End of story.

I don't know what's ticking you off.

duncan · 1 year ago

-Couldn't agree more re. your entire post - the archives ARE there and so much of what was said by the blog hosts, not to mention the commentors, was toxic as regards Hillary. Joan Walsh at Salon has it absolutely right today, on her post there. Most people knew there was pitifully little difference btw Hillary and Obama and how they would likely govern, but you would never have known it from reading lefty blogs.

1970cs · 1 year ago

Because after Wisconsin, it was over, she couldn't win. It wasn't politics at that point it was math.

Yet, here we have the both of you divining what is correct and incorrect thought, no thanks.

duncan · 1 year ago

BS. This blog, and others, were creepily and irrationally vitriolic about her way before Wisconsin. The extremes many went to to voice their personal dislike of her was sort of shocking, really. No one is saying what is or isn't correct thought, so get over that. The left resembles the far right at times with the poisonous rhetoric about those whom they do not, for whatever reason, support. Sorry, if you can't self -examine! Anyway, blogs are always taking it on themselves to determine correct or incorrect thought - why else would you be HERE?

1970cs · 1 year ago

"BS"

"get over that"

"you can't self-examine!"

You just can't help yourself, can you?

atariageguy · 1 year ago

Enough. Let it go.

atariageguy · 1 year ago

That's pretty much what I kept trying to say back then, but no one hears the rational voice when there's so much fun to be had. Eh... it's all old news now. But this has obviously let some people (incl. me) pick some old scabs.

Ick.

Steve_in_CNJ · 1 year ago

if Hillary hadn't made so many mistakes during the primary, she wouldn't have needed to go nuclear on Obama. there was a path to victory that didn't involve the smears and character attacks (for an example, consider obama's victory). john and a few other blogs took it personally and started going off on hillary even when she didn't deserve it. they could say it was just a political game but, as you say, readers don't necessarily get that. i couldn't stand what she was doing either (including extending the primary too long), but her words and conduct since then have more than atoned. lieberman could probably win back a lot of support too -- but guess what. he won't. to me, that's a very instructive contrast.

atariageguy · 1 year ago

pretty much agreed on all points. Every sentence, actually. Maybe I should have just written that and it would have been clearer. Thanks :)

Once Hillary gave her convention speech, I knew 90% of the healing was in full swing. But the underlying grumbling remains.

As for Lieberman... no frakking way I can see he could EVER make amends. I mean everything done during the primaries (Clinton v Obama) was insignificant. but with Lieberman, he could have been silent during the general and he STILL needed to be booted from prestige. He has been on the GOP side of every important decision for at least the past 4+ years. His campaign behavior simply cemented the deal.

Indigo · 1 year ago

Relax, handsome. This is politics, not ideology. Wasn't it Moe Udall who once said, "Those are my views and if you don't like them, I'll change them!"

atariageguy · 1 year ago

:) I know. But, you can see, just from the accumulating comments above, that many people -right this second - have not rolled with this being politics.
That's my only issue with high flying rhetoric - especially if it's based on faulty information.

Politics is fine.

But no one should act surprised if the extreme rhetoric hits in ways the political wonk blogs did not intend. Which is why I really didn't like the direction this blog and others took back March-June.

atariageguy · 1 year ago

OTOH, you're right about relaxing. I'm meaningless in the blog or political world, so trying to point out things never gets noticed. Shouldn't bother. Better for my health. :D

SpectCon · 1 year ago

Hillary for SoS is probably a deal as many have speculated. I'm sorry to say it, but the Clintons seem obsessed with wealth, and SoS seems to provide that opportunity. Yes, Clinton already has his Global Initiative (to cure poverty and AIDS...I'm sure he'll win :) and it makes him tons of money, but check out Albright and Kissinger. Few know it but, Albright's firm got a sweet piece of the James Baker re-negotiated debt/reparations deal between U.S. Iraq and Kuwait. The deal didn't get much press, and when it did it was presented as a great thing for the Iraqi people. It was stealing, let's be honest. If Hillary as SoS would guarantee a Clinton global consulting/lobbying operation like none other. I think we look too deep for altruism when we look at the Clintons. But, then again, maybe I'm just too cynical.

duncan · 1 year ago

Yeah - well Huffpost, and Arianna especially, tore into Hillary constantly and relentlessly from the first.. before Obama entered the race. She loathed Bill while he was prez and while she was still a hack for the GOP, and she also led the pack in tearing down Al Gore during his run. Arianna attempted to rake Hillary and the Clinton's "psychodrama" , as she prefers to repeat whenever possible, over the coals the other night while substituting for Rachel Maddow but her guests wouldn't take the bait, which left her sputtering. One could hardly expect Arianna or her post to accept Hillary as ANYthing but loathsome.

grandma · 1 year ago

As one who switched support from Hillary to Obama during the primaries....and spoke out against some of her actions and words during the primaries....I am happy to see her as Sec of State...

The Democratic Party is more united now than it has been for a long, long time......
She did some good compaigning for Obama...in some crucial States.....and kudos to Obama for
choosing her .

kladinvt · 1 year ago

I agree the primaries & what Hillary said during them is not even in the same ballpark as what Lieberbush did. Aside from my continued distaste & confusion regarding any lack of an apology from her about the vote to go to war in Iraq, there's still the Big Dog Bill question. Can anyone really keep him on a short leash & explain to him, that this is not another opportunity for him to be in the limelight? Hillary as Secretary of State is an interesting choice & very possibly a successful one too, but Bill playing the loose cannon on the world stage could be a big mistake too.

BrianD · 1 year ago

As an avid supporter of Hillary during the primaries, I was pleased that she and Obama were able to work together during the general election. That shows that Hillary truly is a team player and that she's thinking more of the issues, such as universal health care, than her own image. She is the type of public servant we need.

Ever since Joe Biden was named as the running mate, I have advocated that Hillary should be secretary of state. She has shown herself capable and rational, and her work over the general election campaign shows that she can work with Obama. Furthermore, how better to say that we're returning to pre-Bush relations than to put the Clintons out there? This also gets Bill Clinton back on the scene in a semi-official role, and the two Clintons can tour the world working on behalf of Obama. It's the best choice for the position, and I'm glad to see that Obama is staying true to his word and bringing people together.

HereinDC · 1 year ago

I couldn't of said it better John A.
Thanks...well said.

katjam · 1 year ago

I was ready to strangle Hillary in the primaries and I hated the fuel she appeared to be giving to the Republicans but in the end she not only made Obama a stronger, more concise and passionate candidate she, in a sense, allowed him to neutralized all the arguments that would later be used against him. Wright was old hat by the general election in the fall as was the 3AM phone call.
I thought she developed as a candidate as well as she moved out of Bill's shadow and found her own voice. The end resutl of the primaries was they both became stronger players on the world stage. We are in a heap of trouble now, more than one individual can possibly deal with alone. Obama will be harnessing her strength and considerable talent to add to his own. There is no doubt Hillary shares his passion for doing right for America. Furthermore each additional strong person he taps (like Dasche today) will make Obama a formidable force for change.

lilybart · 1 year ago

I was torn on Primary day. I opted for Hope and the Future but I am fine with Hillary at State. I am happy about it really. She is smart, tough and knows the players. And I believe she would be motivated to finish Bill's almost legacy of Middle East peace.

And I don't think she is such a hawk. I think she thought that women had to seem tough militarily to be taken seriously as CIC, more than any man would. I forgive her this. If she was stupid but pretty like Palin, I guess she wouldn't have cause to worry.

HereinDC · 1 year ago

All I know is that when the next big Hurricane hits America's shores.....Hillary Clinton won't be shopping for shoes and going to Broadway plays.

grandma · 1 year ago

that is for damn sure !!

SCLiberal · 1 year ago

LOL, good point.

fostert · 1 year ago

I don't support Hilary's nomination for Sec of State, nor did I support her in the primary. But the idea that Hillary hasn't been a supporter of Obama is ridiculous. Yes, she campaigned against him in the primaries. That's what candidates do. And she said some nasty things (candidates do that too). But she turned a lot of McCain's potential attacks into old news. In the end, those attacks helped Obama and prepared him well for the general election. And when it came time to get behind Obama, Hillary did. She gave a great speech at the convention and did a lot of campaign events afterwords. She may have been a bitch in the primary, but she was a gracious supporter in the general. She deserves credit for that.

That said, I think she'd be a fine Secretary of State. I just think Richardson would be better. Part of the reason is that we will have to negotiate with a lot of Muslim leaders and I think it would go smoother with a man doing the negotiations. That is simply an unfortunate truth. The Supreme Leader of Iran rarely meets with non-Muslims, but would probably make an exception for the US Sec of State if the meeting were very important. But he will not meet with a woman under any circumstances. That's not a show-stopper, as Obama would certainly be able to meet with him, but it doesn't help.

Andon · 1 year ago

Assuming Clinton is appointed, which I think is a generally bad idea owing to general lack of skills and experience in diplomacy, I would imagine that her latitude for manoevre will be very constrained. She would be told what positions to take, what policies and outcomes to pursue, and would in my view have no particular impact on what will be made to occur. For the next few years, the task facing American diplomacy will be a multi-front liquidation of positions: missile defense. greater Israel, the Iraq occupation, the Afghan adventure, and American exceptionalism with respect to Kyoto, international banking, and the (ill) treatment of prisoners. Almost everything on the plate is in fact a defeat of sorts. A skilled diplomat might make defeats seem like wise and laudable reassessments of national interest. An unskilled one given to scolding and posturing will just be ignored or worse. Just look what happened to Rice for example. Clinton would start with a very meagre supply of good will, credibility, and favors to cash in. I suspect she would end up with the same -- and in a short period of time as well. I give it 18 months max before the accumulating burdens of rebuffs gets to be too much. If she was wise, she would run away from this prospect now and let a pro finesse the aggravation which is certain to come. I am willing to grant her good intentions but they won't get you very far talking to the Russians for instance. I think they would enjoy toying with her as an indoor sport, ditto Sarkozy. Sign up Nicolas Burns for the duration as SoS. He is slick, well prepared, and can lie convincingly for his country.

John · 1 year ago

I agree with John. Say what you want about Hillary. The woman is smart and well-respected internationally. While she is tough as nails, she also understands the intricacies of diplomacy and cultural differences. I hate some of the things she said and did in opposing Obama, and I am absolutely impressed by the forgiveness, humility and foresight Obama has shown both in tapping Hillary and coaxing Lieberman back into the fold. As far as I'm concerned, if Obama thinks she's a good pick, there is no one whose judgment I trust more than his. We got him into office, now lets let him lead without his own fans second-guessing him.

zavlin · 1 year ago

I'm not so sure i'm over the hillary we saw in the primaries. Honestly i think shes as good a Sec. pick as she wouldv been a VP pick. Which is to say gimmicky while low on substance and high on scandal vulnerability.

tigergrrldc · 1 year ago

Well, she did say that she had experience, McCain had experience, and Obama gave a speech in 2002. Even though she didn't stump for McCain, she did make several comments in support of him during the primaries. She could have said whatever she wanted to about Obama without bringing up McCain's name. And there was the comment about assassination which may or may not have been on purpose.

Mark in Florida · 1 year ago

Hillary is a great choice. Period, end of story. She is the best person for the job.

I would be more interested in what the salt of the earth, the un- elitist elitist Lady Forester de Rothschild thinks of these unlikely bedfelllows.....LOL. I miss the "Lady"

Miss De Rothschild and Palin in some hot lesbian porn? Hmmm I think we are on to something.....sorry, I could not resist.

Indigo · 1 year ago

Hillary's the right voice in the right place as Secretary of State. I'm with John.

David · 1 year ago

Hillary's foreign policy experience(Bosnia) is a joke. Obama seems not to care about qualifications or experience. Just like Bush. He seems to be doing this for political reasons. Just like Bush. With a torture appoligist as AG and Hillary as SoS, looks like he'll end up. Just like Bush

zavlin · 1 year ago

Yeah seriously, we're supposed to forget how she made a total fool of herself about foreign policy during the campaign? All politicians lie but the clintons do it with astounding ease. And we want this woman to be our highest ranking diplomat?

Eric on the Beach · 1 year ago

I agree with John here. I think Hillary is a brilliant pick for SoS. She is legions better than the other two names floated around. The Clinton's are beloved world over. Moreover, I think this is what Hillary is best doing. This is how she won her Senate race by meeting with people face-to-face, talking to them, and showing her humanity. Why not upsize this from residents of New York to the world?

Neal Jansons · 1 year ago

I'm sorry, what about "get over it" is a compelling argument? She showed what kind of person she is, like we all do when the chips are down; why exactly should we ignore her unethical behavior now? She showed how she is willing to play to get her way, and that is not a person who should be in government at all. Culpability and social accountability is the only means we have of confronting and censuring such behavior.

P.S. "Get over it" is what the Prop. 8 supporters keep saying as well...what about this is a compelling argument? It's like Family Guy, where the strongest rhetorical device is just saying "C'mon" or "9/11" over and over. "Get over it" is not an argument, it's an attempt to avoid, discredit, and devalue valid arguments from the other side by acting like they are ridiculous.

Older_Wiser · 1 year ago

Not a valid comparison at all, IMHO. One was just politics; the other is a lethal assault on human rights.

Neal Jansons · 1 year ago

Then I guess that's what's wrong with politics...when lies, manipulation, and fearmongering are "just politics", we are on a poor road. We should demand a higher ethics from our leaders than ourselves because of the power they wield, not a lesser one. I wouldn't hire someone I knew was a liar and manipulator who will drop any pretense of ethics when it suits their agenda to sweep my floor, much less help govern a nation. Why are our ethical demands of our leaders less than those of average people?

Ann · 1 year ago

Exactly, John. I think the toughness of the democratic primaries only served to make the Obama campaign leaner and meaner when the GE came around. By the time McCain got around to throwing that shit at Obama most of the smear stuff had already been aired, Obama had weathered it and succeeded in defining himself for the American public before John McCain and Palin ever got going. And when they did start throwing shit at him it only served to make them look desperate, stupid and bigotted and turned the press against them. And if he hadn't been able to weather it, it would have been good to know that before he became the nominee. I believe this is what Hilary Clinton was thinking and I have also read that her advisers, some of them, wanted her to go much farther down that road than she actually did go.

terra · 1 year ago

So glad to read this, John. It was really hard to read your stuff when you were being so tough on Hillary. I am glad to see that you have not thrown out the baby with the bathwater.

Older_Wiser · 1 year ago

I don't trust a lot of what I read over at Huffington Post. They encourage LIbertarians to post regularly, and the lot of them always seem to be against one Dem or another. I'm OK with HRC as SoS actually, if Bill can clean his money-making activities up. And he's a Dem...down in GA politicking for Martin, so the party is more important to him than old fights.

Meanwhile, did anyone notice the Dow closed down at 7997? Yikes. That's a psychological low that's going to blow...

Chris From Maine · 1 year ago

I dont read the comments overe there.. lots of idiots.

And yeah.. closing below 8000 will send shockwaves around the world, and on Wall Street.. but didnt King Henry tell us if we only gave him 700 billion with no strings that everything would be fine???

scottinsf · 1 year ago

OT. I was just reading that with all the final tallies done, it turns out Obama actually won Salt Lake County, Utah's most populous county. The difference was less than 300 votes though.

zavlin · 1 year ago

really, people want to close their eyes and ignore that hillary ran a campaign bankrupt into the ground while hurling every dirty trick in the book . She risked a party civil war for her moment in the sun. "Oh but her campaign made obama stronger" Its easy to say now...Well maybe obama was just that strong; if hillary had her way an election where obama's name WASNT ON THE BALLOT wouldv been counted in full!

Chris From Maine · 1 year ago

I have no problem with Hillary as Sec'y of State (although Richardson or Kerry would probably be better), however I am worried about her trying to run a mini-white house over there. Its the same reason that I didnt want her as VP.

If she knows that she serves Obama, not serves WITH Obama, then there is no problem.

bluestockton · 1 year ago

Secretary of State could be Hillary's last best shot at being president. In 2012 Joe Biden will be 69. He's not going to run for president in 2016, so instead of Biden serving two terms as VP, Obama may pick a new running mate in '12, someone younger and healthier candidate who CAN run on his or her own in '16. Hello, Hillary?

CTHankster · 1 year ago

I'm not particularly happy with Clinton as a pick for Secretary of State. Two reasons: I think she's a hawk and will reinforce the worst tendencies of those around Obama, and Obama himself, to view foreign policy through a macho prism (international swagger as a defense against right wing attacks for being "soft" on national security). The second reason is that I think Bill, with his insatiable need for attention, will end up being a distraction for the Obama Administration. I wasn't fond of the Clinton Administration and, in fact, bolted the Dem ticket in 1996 and 2000 for Nader (Stop! I live in Connecticut, not Florida, and learned my lesson!) Clintonism is corporate centrism. Can't stand it.

On the other hand, Hillary's conduct in the primaries no longer bugs me as it did in the spring. I think there is a strong argument that her "kitchen sink" campaign against Obama did him a big favor (although it was hardly her intention). She was right in saying that the GOP would use those attacks in the fall. Of course, by the time the fall came around, the Wright/Ayers/bitter attacks were yesterday's news with little bite left, thanks to Hillary. Her intent was to damage Obama but she really made him stronger. AND she campaigned strongly for him in the fall. As far as the primaries go, I've moved on.

zavlin · 1 year ago

Oh and also, being "rather tough" on hillary is kind of an understatement dont you think john? I cant count the number of times she was called a total monster on this blog.

jebauer · 1 year ago

Geesh, there was a point very late in the election that I began to wonder if Hillary and Bill would endorse McCain... seriously. And the eventual Obama endorsements from both of them were tepid at best.... until it became fairly obvious he was within reach of the presidency... like right after the third debate. So yeah, my support of Hillary and her tag along liability Bill are now, tepid at best. I trust Obama on this.... but Kerry was effin awesome in his support giving valuable contributions and backing for the Dems without hesitation and frankly, without the baggage. Kinda hoping Hillary's not able to grace us with her presence and it goes to Kerry, who would be equally successful in this role.

zavlin · 1 year ago

agreed, the clintons waited to throw their full support behind obama until it was clear mccain's chances were bad. We dont need them in this administration. I cant wait to see if this blog flip-flops again if clinton gets the position and embroils the administration in controversey.

atariageguy · 1 year ago

That's bullshit. from just before the convention onward they were there - especially Hillary. Reality-based, people. Did you happen to watch the convention?

zavlin · 1 year ago

Yes, they were lukewarm at the convention. Bill didnt use obama's name at all, hillary only once. Somthing that this blog pointed out at the time. And then really Bill was pretty quiet up until the very end.

jebauer · 1 year ago

Lived ate and breathed every single freakin moment every single interview.... I know what I saw. Was always a Clinton supporter... it took alot for me to second guess that support. Unfortunately, the Clintons gave me alot to work with. Hey, it's all good.... we'll always have the 90s. Like I said, I trust Obama... not thrilled, but trust his decision. It's up to the Clinton's to win me back.

sherifffruitfly · 1 year ago

She's a race-baiter. Fuck all those who defend her via idiotic false equivalences.

atariageguy · 1 year ago

And there, John A., is my point.

sherifffruitfly · 1 year ago

(shrug) One wonders if you folks would be as easygoing about it if Clinton's baiting campaign had been based on teh ghey, rather than teh black.

Actually, I'm lying. I don't wonder at all. I already know the answer.

Older_Wiser · 1 year ago

Sorry to shout, but--

THE CA SC WILL HEAR THE PROS AND CONS ON PROP 8. (Just heard on MSNBC)

eagleye · 1 year ago

It's worth noting that the Eric Holder (DOJ) and Tom Daschle HHS) nominations were received with no fanfare. Quick and easy, done deal. But with Hillary we get an unfolding melodrama that is eating up way too much space and energy. I wish Obama had just gone with Bill Richardson or John Kerry, and we could move on. Mark my words-- Bill and Hillary will make us regret her appointment as SOS. She couldn't even do a responsible job of running her own damn primary campaign, and still has leftover debt from that debacle. How is she going to run a massive, complicated agency like the Department of State? When I look at the resume of Hillary Clinton, I just don't see a list of significant policy accomplishments that impact our lives in any significant way. Can somebody name a few?

atariageguy · 1 year ago

The reason it's a drama is because so many Democrats have decided to hate the Clintons out of absolute irrationality.

If no one cared about the primary rivalries, there would be no story.

But if it helps to continue the drama by implying it's all the Clinton's evil doings... go right ahead. But you're making your own bed.

Ed_S · 1 year ago

I perused the comments and am quite surprised you guys don't get it. Hillary did a lot for Obama during the general campaign. If memory serves, she did more for Obama than the runner-ups did for McCain after each picked their respective VP's.

Regarding her bona fides, I think Goldberg sums it up best over at The Atlantic. Obama has stated in the past he believes the Israeli/Palestinian conflict is the greatest threat to our national security, therefore if Hillary is as sharp as Goldberg says on these issues, we may really be able to get somewhere...especially with BO's direction. For me, I trust Goldberg's opinion on this matter much better than my own WASP ass.

kh7463 · 1 year ago

When I worked as an election inspector in the primaries, I told the precinct captain that if Hillary didn't win, I'd love to see her as Secretary. I'm glad a few others think so too.

TopherL · 1 year ago

In 1992, I worked at a polling and research firm in DC. Bill Clinton was our client in many states. The man is brilliant. Hillary is brilliant. Barack Obama is briliant. As a team of intelligent people who can move past their differences to benefit not just this country but the world, there would be no others on par.

I admit, I had some trepidations about Bill's ego; both when he was running as first spouse, and now that he may have to play second fiddle in the power section again. But I have met this man and if you ever get the opportunity, you would realize that despite his shortcomings, he is singularly concerned with advancing his causes, all of which benefit the greater good. Having him back on the side of this nation in a semi-official capacity would only help.

As for Senator Clinton, what more can possibly be said that people have not already? Both negative and positive. yes, she did do quite a bit of bashing during the primaries. But the interesting thing is that the media did not cover the number of times she was out campaigning for Obama. It was not interesting enough that she was not playing the rold of the scorned woman. Statistically, she has done more for any other former opponent than any other candidate in history. She has also learned from her mistakes. That is what intelligent people do.

Why should we behave like Republicans? By that I mean why should we hold grudges and not try and cultivate relationships with truly talented people. Both of the Clintons have made it this far because they are gifted and smart people. The President-Elect recognizes that and wants to heal the wounds that have divided us all for so long. It has been much longer than the past eight years; back to the reprehensible Newt and his cronies.He is approaching this like a plastic surgeon, and attempting not to leave no scars. Just picture if the war-mongering McCain were there and we had to listen to how he would "fight" for us all the time. The scars we'd have left would look like the worst battlefield triage.

lovepeaceandallthat · 1 year ago

I thought the media covered Clinton campaining for Obama fairly well.

And what evidence do we have that she has learned from her mistakes? Please explain. :-)

I don't get how we are acting like Republicans if we criticize Hillary. I really don't. And how do we define 'grudge'? It is demeaning to be told you are holding a grudge. I think of grudges as being about holding onto anger about a small thing someone has done to you. Something long ago, and of no relevance at all in the present. I do respect the "good parts" of the Clintons, but I have trouble liking them, or trusting them. Does that mean I am holding a grudge or acting like a slimy Republican?

And if Bill Clinton is working so damn hard for the greater good, why does he hang out with Bush Sr. on fishing trips? Because he is bringing "foes into the fold?" Kinda a stretch with Bill, don't you think??

TopherL · 1 year ago

Hi,
You do bring up some valid points.  But I know from friends who I used to work with at MSNBC and at CNN that there were many rallies held shortly after the conventions that the mainstream media did not cover. A quote from one of them was that a Clinton without a grudge is not news. When Bill would be rather tepid, they would explode that into more of a story than perhaps it warranted.

Please believe me when I say that so much of what we see has to be filtered through the lens of common sense. That being said, I was disappointed for some time that a joint press release was not issued sooner that was stronger and more vociferously for Barack. I think that there would have been no way for MSM to cover that.

As for Hillary learning from her mistakes, I would posit that she learned from her own forays into the health care mess back in the nineties.  She and Bill went in there gangbusters and much more idealistcally than they are today.  They believed they were the outsiders about to change the world. They were slapped roundly in the face.  She learned that is not how Congress works, and that to affect change she had to work from the inside.  Yes, she had to sell out some of her own ideals, but the woman does get things done in negotiations and if she is not SOS, then I could see her emerging as a powerhouse Senator not unlike Teddy Kennedy.

And finally, as for acting like slimy Republicans: I think that for the past 14 years, we have had a political climate that alienates the opposition in any respect, from within and from without. There is nothing wrong with having persons of dissenting opinions on your side. It shows a strength of leadership and a willingness to meet in the middle which is what this country needs right now. In making those references, I was not so much speaking of Hillary, but rather the Lieb-hole. I think what he did was petulant and showed a lack of judgment and foresight, and I would like nothing more than to hog-tie his political powers. But to completely alienate him would not have served us any purpose at all. I am loath to reference biblical lore, but he is somewhat like the prodigal son.  We have a powerful stance now, but it would be shortsighted of us to assume that will last given what we know of the American electorate and their inability to be patient and
understanding for more than 18 months.  We need to build our own stronghold now, while we have the resources.

Thanks for your comments.
TL

brad · 1 year ago

The idea that someone as intelligent and deliberate as Barack Obama would offer Secretary of State to Hillary just because he like a book about Lincoln's cabinet and he wants to copy that is ridiculous. Our standing in the international community is a joke at this point and teaming Hillary with Barack (not to mention Biden's presence) plus all the international goodwill harbored for Bill will be ( to quote John) and incredible opportunity for America. I couldn't agree more and think it's a brilliant move on Obama's part. I do have to disagree that during the primary we got "as nasty" towards Hillary as she did towards us though... but I agree, that was the primary and that's what happens in primaries.

atariageguy · 1 year ago

well, if it was to be argued, while Obama was extremely professional and courteous, Obama-supporting BLOGS were *the* worst in terms of vitriol. I mean, it didn't even compare.

But, yeah, that's what happens in primaries.

SociologistTina · 1 year ago

Boy are you and I on the same page, John. I just READ that piece by Bromwich. Although I'm more ambivalent than you, I tend to think the Obama people are doing what is best for the country regarding this.

BarbaraGordon · 1 year ago

I had no candidate in the primaries; I voted for Hillary but was very open to support whoever won the nomination. I subsequently contributed to Obama's campaign. I think that Hillary would be great. I hope that they work it out.

ezpz · 1 year ago

It's not just 'someone at Huffington Post' who isn't happy about this.
There are MANY people who have expressed opposition to Hillary becoming SoS. MANY, MANY, including, I would venture to say, a huge chunk of the millions who voted for Obama.

And doesn't it raise some serious red flags when war criminals like Henry Kissinger, and other Republicans are in favor???

Whether he thinks she made him a better candidate or not, he won fair and square and while the Clintons still project a sense of entitlement, he doesn't owe her, especially one of the most powerful posts in the country.

Besides, I thought we needed to regain our standing and respect around the world. Name recognition does not always translate to respect, especially in light of her comments about obliterating Iran and her overall hawkishness.

And once again, Clintons are dominating the news and the question "what does Hillary want" seems to be issue #1, rather than who would best represent the US and promote Obama's vision of diplomacy.

While she may know a thing or two about the world, I would suggest she take a refresher course in physics and astronomy to relearn that the earth revolves around the sun, and NOT the Clintons.

Ed_S · 1 year ago

ezpz,
Regarding Hillary and the media, I put the blame of the frenzy on the media themselves. When it comes to the Clinton's, the media goes bat shit crazy!

Generally speaking of course.

ezpz · 1 year ago

Ed_S,

I think they feed each other.
The Clintons know how to work the media to their advantage.

If I'm not mistaken, Hillary herself said after her meeting with Obama in Chicago that she was pleased to see the attention the media was giving it (the meeting and the possible SoS appt).

Let's not kid ourselves, the Clintons thrive on attention so much that they wither without it.

Speaking of the media, wasn't it Clinton loyalist, George Stephanopoulos, the first to float this to Andrea Mitchell (also with close ties to the Clintons)?


E T A: Assuming you're right that "when it comes to the Clintons, the media goes bat shit crazy", isn't that alone reason enough to NOT pick her?

A secretary of state job is too important, especially during these critical times, to have the attention be around Hillary rather than actual issues that the SoS would be addressing.

Psyche · 1 year ago

Have to agree with you. Although I don't hate the idea of Hillary as SOS, I certainly have reservations. She is hawkish whether because it's her native state or she's trying to be one of the boys. She's also a tough politician with presidential aspirations and that's not the same thing as a diplomat.

I'm also concerned about the leaks. Obama has run a tight ship and doesn't like drama. I doubt the leaks are coming from that source but suddenly we have a sieve and plenty of drama that may box Obama into choosing her.

Another concern is the "Clintonian" approach to the Arab-Israeli conflict. The Clintons are clearly pro-Zionist when we need an even-handed approach to the problem. Obama has already wavered from his earlier, more balanced position. Heard Dennis Ross speak a while back and it was clear where Clinton (and he) were coming from.

Finally, don't think anyone can keep a leash on Bill - including Hillary, who hasn't done a sterling job thus far. And the SOS requires executive experience. The way she ran her campaign and chose and managed her staff leaves me less than sanguine in this respect. Maybe Kennedy senses this as well and is offering to ease her out with the lure of ceding his health care mantle to her.

DougStamate · 1 year ago

"...the Clintons still project a sense of entitlement..."
I think you're confusing what the media disseminates about the Clintons with the actual positions/sentiments of Sen. Clinton and her husband. I have never seen any quote from either Clinton about what they feel they "deserve" from an Obama administration.
The media writes this stuff up in an attempt to grab attention, but that doesn't mean what they write is factual or even connected to any reality other than the one of selling their product (news). And in view of that we should probably all be very cautious and take anything written about Mr. Obama/his cabinet picks/his policies/Democratic plans, etc. with a very big chunk of salt.

eagleye · 1 year ago

Hillary Clinton was (and probably still is) a staunch supporter of Bush's war in Iraq. To my way of thinking, anyone who gets it wrong on such a fundamental foreign policy issue should be out of consideration for the position of Secretary of State.

In addition, she lied repeatedly about her experience flying into Bosnia. And if you followed the primary campaign closely, it's clear that her devious machinations to try to steal the bogus votes out of Michigan showed us what her character is lacking. Am I setting the bar too high for one of the most important jobs in the world by expecting that we should have an honest person?

duchessofbilgewater · 1 year ago

I kinda feel that we have to trust Obama on this His insticts have been right so far. (although I AM having trouble with his support of Lieberman!) He pledges to bring us together -- let's empower him to do it! This is about saving our country, not about grudges and who said what about whom! I really started to hate Hillary during the primaries, but she is undoubtedly a brilliant woman with a lot to bring to the table. If she is Obama's choice, I will support her! But with all her "it takes a village" experience, perhaps she would be even better as Education Secy??

1000turtles · 1 year ago

I'm hoping that Obama appoints somebody who actually has some hands on experience with teaching and pedagogy to fill the role of Education Secretary ...

duchessofbilgewater · 1 year ago

Good point!

anarchy · 1 year ago

I want to trust President-elect Obama's decision(s)
but truthfully, I don't really seem to have any other
choice but to do exactly that.

i voted for Obama because I saw him as the better
candidate for a job that I wouldn't wish on my very
worst enemy.

let's try to not bust his balls before he's even sworn
into office - and yes, there's going to be plenty of
opportunities to hold him to some key campaign
promises in the coming months and years.

I do appreciate everybody's opinions, thoughts,
and comments - so all of y'all have a nice day!

1000turtles · 1 year ago

Despite some of the questionable tactics that Hillary used during the campaign, let's not forget that during the primary, she was FAR MORE specific about issues regarding healthcare, education, and foreign policy than was Barack Obama. And let's also not forget that Barack Obama made some major gaffes as well--supporting faith-based programs and the FISA bill for instance. We could nit-pick about what happened during the primaries endlessly.

I think that HRC is the most qualified for the job. I liked Richardson, but he's proved himself to be fickle and self-serving (moreso than HRC). She's a smart and shrewd thinker, and well loved around the world (her AND her husband).

johnosahon · 1 year ago

" And I say this as someone who was rather tough on Hillary during the primaries " LOL

i remember you saying this "GO AWAY YOU HORRIBLE PERSON" lol, that was too funny, i used to LOL for hours waiting impatiently for that header whenever hillary attacked obama. oh GOOD TIMES.

anyways all that is history, hillary would be great, she is already known all over the world, she only just needs to get straight into work Jan 21 2008.

people are complaining about obama's choices while i am on top of the moon. he is wisely choosing experienced people that can start working ASAP. the country is DEAD that's what is needed.

lovepeaceandallthat · 1 year ago

I highly respect Obama's judgement. And I am blown away by his intellect and his foward-thinking. It isn't that.

It is just that how can we be supporting someone who was IMMORAL during the primaries? Lying, letting racist stuff fly around. And the people on her campaign!! Hello? Remember -- oh, shoot, I am forgetting his name -- the guy who runs a PR company that supports some of the most evil companies on the planet.

You don't get to be immoral and then pretend it never happened. Perhaps she has apologized to Obama, I don't know. But it is about so much more than her actions during the primaries. Obviously, her vote on the war and the fact that she didn't even read the papers they give Senators to read about it. And why does her personality and "winning ways" matter so much? My goodness, what a country we are.

It is just depressing. We spend all this time and energy researching the Clintons, following their actions, looking into their pasts. It is totally confusing to me why people on the Left have such divergant opinions of her. It is exhausting to even think about. I just want some new blood.

But, it is Obama's choice and our job is to critique his choice if we choose to. I am sure he would welcome criticism, and I hope he is getting an earful from his inner circle. Or, better, from Michelle! Not really sure what her opinion would be, however.... and, yes, we didn't elect her.

PJay · 1 year ago

I think it speaks volumes about Obama's emotional maturity and keen intellect. He wants someone smart who knows the world to be Sec of State. He wants someone who will tell him the truth as he or she sees it, and not just what he wants to hear. I think Hillary would be great. She ticked me off at the end of the primaries, but her concession speech and speech at the Dem convention were classics. Especially when she asked, "Were you doing it just for me?" She released everyone to go work for Obama.

anarchy · 1 year ago

hear, hear - I totally agree with your comment.

KMartDad · 1 year ago

Hillary, as SofS, would be doing the bidding of BO. While I don't discount that she would have some influence in this high profile position, she wouldn't be setting policy. The Clintons are extremely popular around the world, and I truly believe she would do America proud.

lovepeaceandallthat · 1 year ago

Yeah, but would she do a good job? Is she a good manager? Can she run a large dept? I read over and over that in NY she hasn't done much at all.

And I don't really care that the Clinton's are popular around the world (and didn't they pay attention during the primaries?)

And where do we have proof that she would be loyal to Obama? Sooooo many people who really know the Clintons say they are in it for themselves. Of course, I don't know and most of us here don't really know.... but I have read enough by writers I respect to have me very nervous about having either of them in any position of power.

I don't trust her.

SirRobin · 1 year ago

I agree! There's a dynamic at work, on a psychological (not psychobabble) level that a national leader can't be expansive, inclusive, and manage complex issues and energies....why is this might you think? (chuckle, chuckle)
Give this team a chance.

Kcunac · 1 year ago

Not attacking John personally but anyone who shares this thought -- and there are a lot of them -- just make me shake my head in despair:

"It was a primary, things get said, things get done, you get over it. Hillary was vicious at times, and we were vicious back at her. Yeah, and so what."

Sorry, what is said and done in primaries should count. Real people, outsiders to the process, they don't see it that way. That's why they have so little faith in politicians. And frankly I think that elitist, insider view has infected this blog and a lot of others at times. The carryings on here over the last few days are just the same shoe on another foot. Now we're up, so we get our revenge and vengeance on Lieberman and the Republicans and anyone else who has or is perceived to have stood in our way. And by the way, don't you dare forget how important we behind the blogosphere are because we have power! Fuck the ideas we promoted, kiss our ass now because we've measured our impact and we're important! You know what? Personally, I don't give a fuck who did what. I am interested in who's going to do what, who's going to put the country back on the right foot, who's going to be progressive, not in the interest of the liberal elite anymore than in the interest of the conservative elite, but in the interest of regular Americans. All this inside baseball ugliness is totally losing the plot. It has nothing to do with fixing the economy, or health care or the country. It's all about who's got the biggest dick.

DAB · 1 year ago

I don't want to see Hillary as SoS for the very simple reason that I want her to continue as my senator. I would forgo that benefit, however, were she to be named to the Supreme Court, but for Sec'y of State? Get Richardson. He's just as good, and probably even better at the diplomacy stuff.

critter · 1 year ago

Didn't we not vote out family dynasties? Did we not vote for a plainspoken man who cuts through the basic political logic of reading tea leaves?

Opportunity?!?!

When did politicians actually fix shit?

mmedefarge · 1 year ago

I guess Shillary must have some diplomatic skill----Bill is alive. But I am nauseated at the thought of her in this role. It is as though all of the people who helped Barack the most, like Kerry and Richardson, are being totally ignored. And to explain this insanity away by saying it is like some Lincoln model that Barack liked when he read about it in one of Doris Kearns Goodwin's books is totally hard to believe.

The Clintons are a more polished, better educated version of the Palins, with the gender roles reversed. The main difference is that Bill married up (and still didn't have the good sense to treat his wife with respect), and Sarah married another hillbilly.

nancy cadet · 1 year ago

John, Josh Marshall at TPM makes the observation that the State dept needs a good manager (Condi is and was obiviously a disaster at all aspects of the job) and that one only needs to look at Hillary's recent Presidential campaign and her management of health care reform while First Lady to see that she, too, in fact is a bad manager.

I agree. As a New Yorker, I can't name one thing she's done as Senator except visit all the counties and get re-elected. She certainly doesn't represent the millions of her constituents who were vociferously against the Iraq war, or a possible Iran incursion.

lovepeaceandallthat · 1 year ago

John, if you have time I would love to read a more detailed argument for your "switch" from supporting her, to despising her, and make to liking her again now. What is your thinking on this? I am especially curious about looking at this from a moral and ethical standpoint. Where do you draw the line when you make the "that's just politics" argument?

And, what are your blogger cohorts saying? Are others now switching back to liking her?

And you mentioned that "we were vicious also". Really? Obama ran a vicious campaign? I thought he always responded with incredible grace and forgiveness. Now, WE responded with viciousness, but that is not what we are talking about here. You said over and over that Hillary is responsible for what her campaign does, no one else. Okay, then. Responsible? Um, meaning? Any teeth in that?

And what about the folks she depends on for advice? That gross Mark what's-his-name. I am sorry, but he really scares me and he has been a "friend" of hers for years!!! And what about how she mis-managed her campaign? Is that "just politics, too?" What has she really managed well? She did a poor job with dealing with people during her health-care push, she reportedly isn't doing much for NY as Senator , and she did a horrible job with managing her campaign? Why do people think she would be so great as SS? Because she is well-traveled and well-known? I don't want other countries to already "know" our next SS. That sounds stupid to me. But, hey, what do I know about world affairs at the highest level?

Please tell us more if you have time!! :-)



I need to hear a much more convincing and detailed argument from those supporting her.

lupesanchez · 1 year ago

"rather tough"???

you were vicious. and that's putting it mildly. Go back and read what you wrote, John.

At the time I thought, 'I generally agree with him but damn."

go back and read what you wrote, if you want any of us here six months from now.

badger3k · 1 year ago

Shiiiiiiiit - if the democrats can suck up to traitorous, serviceman-hating, rape gurney joe lieberman, surely we can work with Hillary - she did far less damage to Obama and the democrats (and the entire United States population, especially those serving overseas and those living in, say, New Orleans) than that scum-sucking phallus.

Jim Olson · 1 year ago

Hillary has all the diplomacy of a bag of flaming dog poo, and I will never, never trust the Clintons again. What a disaster this will be.

wmforr · 1 year ago

I can not help but agree with you, John. I was HUGELY disappointed with Hillary's behaviour in the primaries. She is my Senator, and despite several disagreements, I have stood behind her, right up to the point of the New York primaries, when my vote for Edwards had to change to Obama.

But Bromwich seems to be saying that personal grudges should come before the good of the country. And that is just not the way Obama operates. Bush, yes. McCain, yes. We voted for more adult behaviour from our President, and I think we are going to get it.

Besides, despite all the Clinton-haters in this country, their prestige abroad cannot be discounted when considering a position like State. It will be refreshing not to have the rest of the world laughing at our diplomats behind their backs.

grandpajohn · 1 year ago

AS I read through the blogs and the criticism that has already started before he is even sworn in, I find it somewhat amazing, after 2 years of campaigning, did these critics not here a single word of what Obama said, did they not make a single observatlon of how he thought and acted, are they all so fucking clueless that none of them heard him hundreds of times over repeat his core theme; UNITY, end of partisanship, promote competence in government by selecting competent people instead of incompetent loyal party hacks. Its also nice to observe that he is not listening to any of their bullshit but following down his predetermined path for establishing competent government for all people and run by the adults

anarchy · 1 year ago

I'm about as sick and tired of the Clintons
as I am of the Bush Crime Family - but the
rest of the world still seems to like Slick
Willie - and Hillary simply could not be
worse than Condoleeza "Exxon" Rice
who has chalked up quite a record for
herself as:

1) the WORST National Security Advisor
2) the WORST Secretary of State

"keep your friends close, but keep your
enemies closer"

CodeSense · 1 year ago

A President Obama is doing the right thing about gathering many Clintonites into his administration. At first I thought why can't he have a mind of his own and pick all new people. But then I realized our country needs people right now who have been there, done that. We can't afford to have any one who needs on the job training. Also, if he is to be re-elected in 2012 and I am sure he is looking forward to that, he has to accomplish a great deal during his first four years.

Ferdiad · 1 year ago

John I somewhat agree with you, however, had I wanted the entire Clinton administration back I would have voted for Hillary. Rahm, Lieberman, Daschle, Hillary.......

Amicus · 1 year ago

Richardson is a more forward looking choice. He is good for the party.

Holbroke is much better on foreign policy than Hillary.

Hillary - might do best by continuing to stack up seniority in the Senate, both for the party (there are a lot of senior senators on the way out) and for the State of New York.

Ferdiad · 1 year ago

I continue to be amazed by the line of thinking that "change" is keeping in power the people that won't "change" their substantive policy beliefs and positions.

nainam · 1 year ago

Let me put it this way: When I voted for Obama, it was because he seemed to be the most rational, intelligent ane smart guy in the race.

And at this time in history, he literally holds the future of the U.S. and its citizens in his hands (and brain.)

Any choice he makes in terms of Cabinet members or key officials, I figure I'm going to have to accept without question. Obama, in short, knows what he's doing and I'm not going to be one of those who criticize or argue with his decisions.

We got ourselves a winner!! Now let's let him do his thing and keep on trusting and believing in him.

patrick · 1 year ago

if Hillary becomes the Sec. State, hopefully she will not be excessively distracted by outside drama or personal career plans, etc.