Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State?

[medusala]

How could you get it so wrong? Well at least I hope you're pleasantly surprised! I think she'll be a wonderful SecState!

Well I guess we can all look forward to constant changes of the heart on Iraq.

On the upside at least we can rest easily knowing that entering a war zone and dodging a hail of bullets won't faze her in the least.

 

[Southerntakeover]

I wonder where this leaves all those loonie Hillary supporters who were claiming Obama stole the election, and insisted theyd keep fighting against him for Hillary...

 

[KissStephanie]

I wonder where this leaves all those loonie Hillary supporters who were claiming Obama stole the election, and insisted theyd keep fighting against him for Hillary...

Which "looney Hillary supporters" are you referring to? I personally know a number of her supporters, and none of them are "looney." I personally know a number of Obama supporters that are in fact "looney." Ignorant as well.

Many of Hillary Clinton's supporters were understandably upset by the treatment she received from the media and her party during the primaries, but do you fair dinkum feel that they were not going to eventually accept it? Particularly after the general election?

If people had realised during the primaries that the change Obama had in mind for Washington was the appointment of so many members of the Clinton administration, then I'm sure that she would have won the Democratic nomination. He has made good choices from a successful adminstration of course, but he definitely misled the voters.

 

[medusala]

He has made good choices from a successful adminstration of course, but he definitely misled the voters.

Disgraceful, next he will be making up stories of personal heroism.

 

[Galactic]

He has made good choices from a successful adminstration of course, but he definitely misled the voters.

Well, some good ones. As for that misleading part,I feel like some people who voted for, or just liked Obama, forget the most important part. He is a f***ing DEMOCRAT! What was the exact kind of change you expected from one of the two party system here? If you have a choice between a cow poop sandwich and a goat poop sandwich and you chose the cow poop and then compain about the taste, your simply an imbicile. Back to the hird folks, (sheep sound)Mahahahaha! Unfortunatley for some,there was also a seafood platter on the menu in small print,I ate that, but for some reason most poeple in this country, didn't see it.Only 13 million of us did. If only we lived in the population of Aus

 

[Southerntakeover]

Which "looney Hillary supporters" are you referring to? I personally know a number of her supporters, and none of them are "looney." I personally know a number of Obama supporters that are in fact "looney." Ignorant as well.

Many of Hillary Clinton's supporters were understandably upset by the treatment she received from the media and her party during the primaries, but do you fair dinkum feel that they were not going to eventually accept it? Particularly after the general election?

If people had realised during the primaries that the change Obama had in mind for Washington was the appointment of so many members of the Clinton administration, then I'm sure that she would have won the Democratic nomination. He has made good choices from a successful adminstration of course, but he definitely misled the voters.

There was a forum which was linked to on here after the election.

The postings on it would instantly be rejected by any sane and rational person, so ive got no hesistation calling them loonies. Rantings like 'Obama isnt even an American citizen! I found this out on the internet!' dont exactly do them a credit.

 

[KissStephanie]

There was a forum which was linked to on here after the election.

The postings on it would instantly be rejected by any sane and rational person, so ive got no hesistation calling them loonies. Rantings like 'Obama isnt even an American citizen! I found this out on the internet!' dont exactly do them a credit.

They were Hillary Clinton supporters that you speak of here? I don't think so. I have not read or heard any such comment from a Hillary supporter. Some that oppose the political views of the Democratic Party I can believe. Some that oppose the political views of both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama I can believe as well.

 

[Southerntakeover]

They were Hillary Clinton supporters that you speak of here? I don't think so. I have not read or heard any such comment from a Hillary supporter. Some that oppose the political views of the Democratic Party I can believe. Some that oppose the political views of both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama I can believe as well.

It was a Hillary Clinton supporters forum.

 

[KissStephanie]

It was a Hillary Clinton supporters forum.

Ha ha ha ha! So what if it was a "Hillary Clinton forum?" What exactly does that prove? You're going to have to do a lot better than that, or are you really that gullible? These people could be Obama supporters pretending to be Clinton supporters to make them look bad of course.

Ever since this presidential election season began almost a year ago, there has been many instances of so-called Obama supporters and their sexist attacks on Clinton. The same goes for certain McCain supporters and their sexist comments toward Clinton, and racist comments toward Obama. It doesn't prove anything though.

These people could be anybody, and they could support anybody, as with the McCain supporter that carved the letter 'B' into her own face and then stated that Obama supporters attacked her. If you have actual proof though, then please share it. If you don't have proof, then it means absolutely nothing of course. Except to those that believe everything they read on the Internet from random, unknown people that they have never met before.

If you are one of those people, then that is quite sad. I am not myself, and I'm glad to say so. Again, I know quite a number of Hillary supporters personally, and none of them are "looney" of course.

 

[evo]

Haha. It is a great sentence when isolated like that.

 

[Southerntakeover]

Ha ha ha ha! So what if it was a "Hillary Clinton forum?" What exactly does that prove? You're going to have to do a lot better than that, or are you really that gullible? These people could be Obama supporters pretending to be Clinton supporters to make them look bad of course.

Ever since this presidential election season began almost a year ago, there has been many instances of so-called Obama supporters and their sexist attacks on Clinton. The same goes for certain McCain supporters and their sexist comments toward Clinton, and racist comments toward Obama. It doesn't prove anything though.

These people could be anybody, and they could support anybody, as with the McCain supporter that carved the letter 'B' into her own face and then stated that Obama supporters attacked her. If you have actual proof though, then please share it. If you don't have proof, then it means absolutely nothing of course. Except to those that believe everything they read on the Internet from random, unknown people that they have never met before.

If you are one of those people, then that is quite sad. I am not myself, and I'm glad to say so. Again, I know quite a number of Hillary supporters personally, and none of them are "looney" of course.

So, thousands of Obama supporters created a forum under the name hillaryclintonforum.net, and then spent hours each day slandering their own candidate on it, spending all this time and effort (after Hillary had been defeated no less) just so hillary supporters would look bad?

Thats a slight bit more complicated, and involved than one McCain nut faking an attack.

Occams razor.

If you're willing to believe that, rather than the more simple and obvious explanation, that Hillary, like all political candidates probably has her share of looney fanatical supporters, then theres nothing more to say to you.

 

[KissStephanie]

Well, some good ones. As for that misleading part,I feel like some people who voted for, or just liked Obama, forget the most important part. He is a f***ing DEMOCRAT! What was the exact kind of change you expected from one of the two party system here?

Some of the Obama supporters I have spoken to expected change. His appointments do not reflect the change he was going on about during his campaign and those hope-filled speeches that left the media drooling. His choice of SecState was a very good one, but for one, I would have preferred to see Wesley Clark replace Roberts Gates as Secretary of Defence.

So, thousands of Obama supporters created a forum under the name hillaryclintonforum.net, and then spent hours each day slandering their own candidate on it, spending all this time and effort (after Hillary had been defeated no less) just so hillary supporters would look bad?

I don't think so, and nor did I either say or even suggest that Obama supporters created that forum. Anybody though could post on it though. Even Obama supporters pretending to be HRC supporters.

Thats a slight bit more complicated, and involved than one McCain nut faking an attack.

I have not seen the thread that you're referring to, or when it began. I have little interest in reading it because it could have been created by anybody. However, I certainly have not said that the web site was created by Obama supporters to attack their preferred candidate. But if it was just a thread within that forum, then of course it could have been started by an Obama supporter pretending to be a Hillary Clinton supporter. If you have proof to show otherwise, then please share it.

If you're willing to believe that, rather than the more simple and obvious explanation, that Hillary, like all political candidates probably has her share of looney fanatical supporters, then theres nothing more to say to you.

Firstly, of course I don't believe that Obama supporters created the forum. You said that. I certainly didn't. Secondly, of course it's possible that Obama supporters could have started a thread within that forum while pretending to be Hillary Clinton supporters though.

I'm sure she has fanatical supporters like most powerful politicians have, but your initial post did not suggest that she simply has a share of looney supporters as you're saying here. Again, I personally know quite a number of HRC supporters, and none of them are looney. If she does have a share of looney supporters, I doubt any of them top these misogynist morons...

Obama Supporters Call Sarah Palin a C#*t

Monday, October 13, 2008

Yesterday we asked why the media was reporting a McCain supporter calling Barack Obama an "Arab" and completely ignoring Obama supporters calling Sarah Palin a c#*t, even wearing T-shirts with the phrase "Sarah Palin is a c#*t" on them.

This morning I see a quite a few links to yesterday's post, as well as some news outlets finally reporting it (ABC's Political Punch, LA Times' Top of the Ticket, The Politico and it was mentioned on Fox News at 9 a.m.)

In following a couple of the links to the original piece written here at WUA, I find there are more wearing those T-Shirts, named and posing proudly.... members of WOW staff, to be exact. This is the mentality of certain Obama supporters...is anyone surprised? I bet their parents are just so proud of them.

 

[Galactic]

Some of the Obama supporters I have spoken to expected change. His appointments do not reflect the change he was going on about during his campaign and those hope-filled speeches that left the media drooling. His choice of SecState was a very good one, but for one, I would have preferred to see Wesley Clark replace Roberts Gates as Secretary of Defence.

I know I may come across as a total buzz kill and to be entirely honest, I hope Obama makes me eat my words. I really do. I don't wish for him to fail, I just look at what I see and don't see anything different. Its become the norm for politicians to lie through their teeth and once they win, do the exact opposite of what they said they would. People just dont seem to learn and for a man who ran and won the election on the wings of change, more so than any other candidate I have ever seen in my lifetime, its going to be one giant anti climax, if not toatal disappointment for a great many people.

I just don't share your love for Hilary and I think Gates was a great decision, he's going to need all the experience he can get when it comes to the comming escalation in Afghanistan and the continuing presents in Iraq.Clarke is no scrub, but I think Obama is trying to build a foundation of an admin of that in which he said he would.My skeptisism is not in the transition however it is the comming years.There are so many things at play, its changing and mutating by the day, he has a monumental task in front of him.

 

[KissStephanie]

I just don't share your love for Hilary and I think Gates was a great decision, he's going to need all the experience he can get when it comes to the comming escalation in Afghanistan and the continuing presents in Iraq. Clarke is no scrub, but I think Obama is trying to build a foundation of an admin of that in which he said he would. My skeptisism is not in the transition however it is the comming years. There are so many things at play, its changing and mutating by the day, he has a monumental task in front of him.

I don't have a love for Hillary Clinton because I've only met her once, but I do believe that she has been a wonderful Senator, and that she would also have been a terrific President, and she will be a great SecState. You don't agree? If you don't, then why not? Who would have been better in your opinion? Anybody that isn't a female maybe?

Clinton absolutely has the ability to turn the worldwide image of the US around following the low created from Bush's politics and the war in Iraq. She is already well known to Americans and those around the world, and with this comes authority because she won't have to work as hard to prove she is qualified, and she also has eight years White House experience and her husband's overall successful presidency to draw upon when needed to make certain difficult decisions.

Condoleezza Rice has been under the control of the Bush administration, and unable to steer him along the correct path, so therefore she will not leave any significant legacy. This will not be the case with HRC though. She has proven her commitment and strength on issues that are different to Obama's policies, so she'll bring varied opinions instead of one collective view which has been the case for the past 5-8 years of Bush. Clinton is not afraid to speak her mind and let her thoughts be heard, but she has also shown to be flexible. She is perfect for the job.

I also think that Wesley Clark would be a better choice from Secretary of Defence than Robert Gates for a number of reasons, but I don't think he can be until 2010. It will be interesting to see if Obama makes a change to that position at that time.

 

[medusala]

This will not be the case with HRC though. She has proven her commitment and strength on issues that are different to Obama's policies, so she'll bring varied opinions instead of one collective view which has been the case for the past 5-8 years of Bush. Clinton is not afraid to speak her mind and let her thoughts be heard, but she has also shown to be flexible.

Commitment and strength yet flexibility?

I guess you might be right, sounds just like her efforts on Iraq. Very flexible.

 

[Galactic]

I don't have a love for Hillary Clinton because I've only met her once, but I do believe that she has been a wonderful Senator, and that she would also have been a terrific President, and she will be a great SecState. You don't agree? If you don't, then why not? Who would have been better in your opinion? Anybody that isn't a female maybe?

wooo!, Easy Steph lets not draw up false conclusions here, I can assure there is no bigger fan of the fairer sex than I. My views on Hilary on not based on her gender, I assure you. I do believe her and Michele will be throwing white house lamps at each other in the first year, however. What makes me dislike her is that my fundamental views on politics are quite different from hers and her husbands.The reason I think she was not a great pick is for sos is because I think she won't be like Condi, she will be independent of B.O. Her streangth will become a weakness for B.O. The world wide image is not the point here, it will be the internal one most of us will never see. Condi is not supossed to be steering the pres, it should be the other way around. I do question her flexability.I wait and watch in that area. I love Condi though, she would make a great NFL commish after her days are done in politics. Clark said he liked the Gates decision, so it's all looks good to me there.

 

[KissStephanie]

wooo!, Easy Steph lets not draw up false conclusions here, I can assure there is no bigger fan of the fairer sex than I. My views on Hilary on not based on her gender, I assure you.

I didn't jump to any false conclusions. I simply asked a question. Many people that have an issue with HRC is only because she is a woman, so it is a reasonable question to have asked.

I do believe her and Michele will be throwing white house lamps at each other in the first year, however.

Come on now. Surely you aren't going to throw up that old one. Michelle Obama will be the First Lady. She will not be a member of the Obama administration. Any input that she may have will not have anything to do with the job that HRC will be doing, and I doubt very much that they will even ever see each other. If they do bump into each other, maybe Michelle Obama will seek even more advice from her again as she has already done. Give that one a rest please.

What makes me dislike her is that my fundamental views on politics are quite different from hers and her husbands.

Mine are not. They are very similar. The same goes for Barack Obama too for that matter. So, who should BO have appointed as SecState instead? You have been clear that HRC is not the right choice in your mind, so you must have someone else that would be better. Who is that person?

The reason I think she was not a great pick is for sos is because I think she won't be like Condi, she will be independent of B.O.

I disagree completely. Of course she won't be like Condoleezza Rice, but that is a good thing. Bush and Cheney completely controlled her, and that is not a good situation for a SecState, and it is the reason that she will not leave any significant legacy. However, that doesn't mean at all that HRC will be independent of Barack Obama whatsoever, and I'm sure Obama realises that himself as well, otherwise he wouldn't have been so keen to appoint her. He wanted her more, for very good reason, than she wanted the job.

Her streangth will become a weakness for B.O.

How so? Her strengths certainly didn't hurt BO when he sought her advice and help during the Presidential campaign, otherwise he wouldn't have done so.

The world wide image is not the point here, it will be the internal one most of us will never see.

Firstly, of course the worldwide image is an issue here. Her job is SecState for goodness sake! Secondly, what on earth could the internal issue possibly be that we will never see? At the DNC in Denver last August, HRC gave a speech for Barack Obama that went far beyond she to needed go, and that any previous defeated Democratic Party candidate had previously done.

She then went on to campaign for BO around the US until she was hoarse, despite just having spent more than twelve months campaigning for herself. During the presidential campaign, BO sought advice and help from HRC on numerous occasions. If this is a guide to what will occur internally that many of us will not see, then how is that possibly a bad thing?

Condi is not supossed to be steering the pres, it should be the other way around.

Since when? Part of the function of a SecState is to advise the President on US foreign policy, and is also responsible for departmental activities of the US Government overseas. Condoleezza Rice was supposed to be steering Dubya on these issues. The same applies for the new SecState Designate when she takes office in January.

I do question her flexability. I wait and watch in that area.

She has shown her flexibility on many occasions numerous times. Why do you question it?

Clark said he liked the Gates decision, so it's all looks good to me there.

Possibly because he feels he will become Secretary of Defence in 2010 when he is eligible. He is not yet. Maybe BO has Richard Danzig in mind. Either way, Robert Gates will not be the Secretary of Defence following the 2010 midterm elections.

 

[Galactic]

Oh oh....a biologist.These are my opinions Steph, well, for the most part.
I feel like Im stepping on one of those carnival rides that goes round and round and malfunctions and wont stop, but I will answer your points to the best of my ability.

- It sounded like you jumped to a conclusion, maybe from other posters in the past have been sexist, I dont know, but the question bothered me.

- The lamp throwing was a little humor, I wanted smiles not roll eyes.I do think they will but heads though.

-I gathered that Steph,you have a right to like her.Im not bashing you for it,I just don't share your veiw.Anyone other than Hil would have been better if you want my real opinion.The other options were Holbrooke, Kerry or Richardson right? I would have pref all of them over her, but if I had to pick one it would be Holobroke.I dont like Kery or Richardson.

- She is the exact oposiste of Condi, she'll have her own agenda and she'll be telling people what to do instead of advsing them.What's going to happen when B.O doesn't go her way? Instantly she is poison from there on.

-Her strength being a force to be reckoned with to other leaders,she'll also be a force to be reckond with for B.O. which will be a weakness.

-I've confused you, the issue I stated above.The question is, do you believe H.C is a team player?I do not. I have yet to see any evidence of it,because the problem lies with her personal agenda and nothing will ever get in the way of it,inc her counrty.Look past the political masterbation and see the big picture.She is totaly self indulgent. You will prob have a problem with this part, but here we disagree Im sure.

-Thats right,advise.H.C won't be adviser IMO she will be telling people what to do.

-Here is hoping on the flexabliltiy.

-You know maybe Gates doesn't want this for the long haul, Im sure he'd be happy elsewhere.I think he will prob be gone sooner rather than later,but for the good of all inc B.O he will stay and guide for a while.

phew.....

 

[KissStephanie]

It sounded like you jumped to a conclusion, maybe from other posters in the past have been sexist, I dont know, but the question bothered me.

I didn't jump to any conclusions of course. I'm not sure why it bothered you because I simply asked a question because I haven't seen anything from you that shows that HRC is a bad choice for SecState.

The lamp throwing was a little humor, I wanted smiles not roll eyes.I do think they will but heads though.

But you gave it as a reason that this choice is bad. As I said, i doubt they will even see each other in the White House, and Michelle is not part of the administration anyway. If they do see each other, then maybe she will seek more advice from HRC as she has already done. I don't see this as a reason not to have appointed her.

I gathered that Steph,you have a right to like her.Im not bashing you for it,I just don't share your veiw.Anyone other than Hil would have been better if you want my real opinion.

Anybody? Come off it. What sort of "opinion" is that? You have yet to give any compelling reason why you feel that way, and it's quite clear that you have simply based this "opinion" because you have different political views or some other...ummmmm...reason or issue.

She has been a wonderful Senator. She was the strongest presidential candidate from either major party during the debates, and she definitely finished the primaries stronger than her Democratic opponent. Her policy details were definitely the most thorough of any candidate from either party. She didn't win the Democratic nomination for other reasons, and even then it was a close contest where she had received 17,493,836 votes to Obama's 17,535,458. One of her undeniable accomplishments as First Lady, were the global journeys that she undertook on behalf of women’s issues.

She was surrounded by very well-informed advisers who specialised in a number of important issues such as women’s important roles in the third world countries and in raising educational levels, managing population growth, building up micro-credit economies and containing environmental deterioration. The advice and experience she will receive from her husband will be invaluable, and her choice as SecState was a 'no-brainer.' I can continue if you would like more reasons of why I feel this way.

The other options were Holbrooke, Kerry or Richardson right? I would have pref all of them over her, but if I had to pick one it would be Holobroke.I dont like Kery or Richardson.

Firstly, lets agree that both John Kerry and Bill Richardson were never going to be the SecState. There is no way that either of them were fair dinkum chances of being appointed for that position. That leaves Richard Hollbrooke.

What's his nickname again? The 'Bulldozer' and the 'Raging Bull.'

Firstly, Hollbrooke is a centrist, and there was no way that another centrist would be appointed because too many of Obama's supporters have been complaining about the lack of liberal candidates in his Cabinet. Secondly, Hollbrooke has too much history of conflict with core members of Obama's foreign policy team, so such an appointment would have been a recipe for disaster. Obama obviously realised this as well by not appointing him.

Richard Holbrooke is a Democrat, but I don't understand why he is not a Republican, and he would do whatever it takes, immoral or not, to achieve his goals. Thank goodness he was not appointed. What was the chant from Obama's advisers again? Oh, yes, it was... "we've got to stop Hollbrooke," and that is because they fear him.

She is the exact oposiste of Condi, she'll have her own agenda and she'll be telling people what to do instead of advsing them.

Ummm...that's not a description of Hillary Clinton. That's a description of Richard Holbrook. In reality, you have just given a reason why your preferred candidate for SecState would have been a bad choice. That said, she will not be controlled as Codoleezza Rice has been by Dubya and Cheney, but that is a good thing.

What's going to happen when B.O doesn't go her way? Instantly she is poison from there on. Her strength being a force to be reckoned with to other leaders,she'll also be a force to be reckond with for B.O. which will be a weakness.

You've been reading too many made-up blogs it seems. Where did you get that from? If anybody would be poison if things don't go his way, it is your preferred candidate, the Bulldozer....the Raging Bull!

I've confused you, the issue I stated above.The question is, do you believe H.C is a team player?I do not.

Of course she is a team player, otherwise Obama wouldn't have appointed her and she wouldn't be as popular as she is the Senate. Now Richard Hollbrooke on the other hand is definitely not a team player. Somehow I think you should be directing these posts to yourself regarding your preferred choice of the Bulldozer....the Raging Bull!

Thats right,advise.H.C won't be adviser IMO she will be telling people what to do.

No, that's what your preferred choice of Richard Hollbrooke for SecState would be doing. Somehow I get the feeling that you may be getting the candidates mixed-up. Each one of the criticisms that you've shown toward HRC are actually the characteristics of the person that you would have preferred to see as SecState...the Bulldozer....the Raging Bull!

Here is hoping on the flexabliltiy.

Another thing that I don't get. How can flexibility be an issue to you when you would have preferred to see the stiff and rigid Richard Holbrooke as SecState? I just don't understand your thinking regarding these criticisms of HRC when compared to Richard Hollbrooke at all.

You know maybe Gates doesn't want this for the long haul, Im sure he'd be happy elsewhere.

He will get that chance in 2010.

 

[Galactic]

I feel like Im stepping on one of those carnival rides that goes round and round and malfunctions and wont stop.

"Krusty wants out!"

But you gave it as a reason that this choice is bad.

WHAT! No I did not.Read it again.

Anybody? Come off it. What sort of "opinion" is that? You have yet to give any compelling reason why you feel that way, and it's quite clear that you have simply based this "opinion" because you have different political views or some other...ummmmm...reason or issue.

I reserve the RIGHT to express any opinion I wish,but you like HRC are against that kind of behaviour aren't you?

She has been a wonderful Senator. She was the strongest presidential candidate from either major party during the debates, and she definitely finished the primaries stronger than her Democratic opponent. Her policy details were definitely the most thorough of any candidate from either party. She didn't win the Democratic nomination for other reasons, and even then it was a close contest where she had received 17,493,836 votes to Obama's 17,535,458. One of her undeniable accomplishments as First Lady, were the global journeys that she undertook on behalf of women’s issues.She was surrounded by very well-informed advisers who specialised in a number of important issues such as women’s important roles in the third world countries and in raising educational levels, managing population growth, building up micro-credit economies and containing environmental deterioration. The advice and experience she will receive from her husband will be invaluable, and her choice as SecState was a 'no-brainer.' I can continue if you would like more reasons of why I feel this way

I hope your getting paid for this,lord knows Im not.

Firstly, lets agree

Wohooo!

'Bulldozer'

You know how much fun these things are to drive?

'Raging Bull.

Awesome movie!

Richard Holbrooke is a Democrat, but I don't understand why he is not a Republican, and he would do whatever it takes, immoral or not, to achieve his goals.

You asked me to choose 1 I chose 1.You do realize I voted libertarian? I also like another republican by the name of Ron Paul esp his foreign policy views for the U.S. Would you like a speech on them? I can provide one if you like.

Bulldozer....Raging Bull! Bulldozer....Raging Bull! Bulldozer....Raging Bull!

I know, I know! There awesome!

I just don't understand your thinking regarding these criticisms of HRC when compared to Richard Hollbrooke at all.

Really?
Open the other eye Steph, sorry just...........forget it.

"Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!Turn it off!"