6 Reasons Obama is Mad to Pick Clinton: UK, Telegraph

DanS. · 11-21-2008, 07:58 PM

Posted By: Tim Shipman at Nov 21, 2008 at 20:55:22 [General]
Posted in: Foreign Correspondents , Eagle Eye
Tags:Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Secretary of State

So she has taken the plunge. The New York Times reports authoritatively that Hillary Clinton will give up her senate seat and accept the post of Secretary of State, the most powerful and high profile post in the new Obama cabinet that is slowly taking shape.

Mrs Clinton took the decision, surprising some of her aides, after a chat with Mr Obama in which he provided reassurances about how much influence she would have in the role.

It should have been Mr Obama getting the reassurances.
I'm a member of the camp who considers this an act of stark staring bonkerdom on Mr Obama's part.

Yes, I know Mrs Clinton is qualified, she knows foreign leaders, she has taken tea with many of their wives too.

But what Mr Obama has done, in his slightly vainglorious quest to be compared with Abraham Lincoln, (the campaign launch where Lincoln made his most famous speech on slavery, the cabinet constructed in Doris Kearns Goodwin's phrase, form a team of rivals) is to revive a political dinosaur that many believed, and hoped, had finally had a stake plunged through its twitching heart. I speak of the Clinton machine and its all-encompassing psychodrama.

Here are six reasons why Mr Obama is nuts:

1) It's all about the Clintons:

The last week is proof, as if anyone could forget, that whenever the hydra-headed Clinton beast is in the public eye, it sucks up the political oxygen and starves all else of media interest.

2) It's all about the Clintons' leaks:

Every twist and turn of the saga has been subjected to self-serving leaks by Clinton supporters, a taste of what Obama can expect over the next four years.

3) The civil war:
Mr Obama seems to think that he is reaching out to the wing of the party, led by Mrs Clinton, which opposed him in the primaries. But the civil war was long over (and Mrs Clinton mucking in during the campaign contributed to that) after the Democratic convention. Mr Obama largely won Mrs Clinton's supporters over on election day. It's an unnecesary gesture. Worse, any future disagreements will stoke these rivalries again.

4) The management issue:

Mrs Clinton has shown during her campaign that she is poorly equipped to run a corner shop, let alone a major government department. She has proven utterly incapable of controlling her erratic, paranoid and aggressive aides, either in their fights and briefings against the Obamanauts and amongst themselves. This is not what embattled US diplomats need.

5) The policy issue:

Foreign policy was the one area about which Mr Obama and Mrs Clinton disagreed the most during the primaries. Mr Obama has committed himself to three major foreign policy moves; withdrawal from Iraq, talks with rogue dictators and a get tough policy with the Pakistani government. Mrs Clinton opposed him on each and every one of them.

6) What it tells us about Obama's state of mind:

Sympathisers will tell you that this is evidence of Mr Obama's supreme confidence, his belief that he can tame Mrs Clinton as a big beast in his government. They will tell you it is a cunning move to keep her from challenging him from a perch in the Senate, where she might have had dangerously independent thoughts about healthcare.

But all this shows is that Mr Obama has not yet fully realised the great power he is about to inherit. The US president is the nearest thing to God that human government has devised and if he is smart he can dominate the agenda and the headlines throughout his time in office.

Mr Obama has shown himself quite capable of eclipsing Mrs Clinton when there were just the two of them in the spotlight. He did not need to hand her a platform through which she could, if she chose (and her supporters may not be able to help themselves) challenge him.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/tim_shi...etary_of_state

Heretic · 11-21-2008, 08:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DanS.

Here are six reasons why Mr Obama is nuts:

1) It's all about the Clintons:

The last week is proof, as if anyone could forget, that whenever the hydra-headed Clinton beast is in the public eye, it sucks up the political oxygen and starves all else of media interest.

Barack "Mothra" Obama is about to get Gidora'ed with all three heads.

Quote:

2) It's all about the Clintons' leaks:

Every twist and turn of the saga has been subjected to self-serving leaks by Clinton supporters, a taste of what Obama can expect over the next four years.

3) The civil war:
Mr Obama seems to think that he is reaching out to the wing of the party, led by Mrs Clinton, which opposed him in the primaries. But the civil war was long over (and Mrs Clinton mucking in during the campaign contributed to that) after the Democratic convention. Mr Obama largely won Mrs Clinton's supporters over on election day. It's an unnecesary gesture. Worse, any future disagreements will stoke these rivalries again.

4) The management issue:

Mrs Clinton has shown during her campaign that she is poorly equipped to run a corner shop, let alone a major government department. She has proven utterly incapable of controlling her erratic, paranoid and aggressive aides, either in their fights and briefings against the Obamanauts and amongst themselves. This is not what embattled US diplomats need.

5) The policy issue:

Foreign policy was the one area about which Mr Obama and Mrs Clinton disagreed the most during the primaries. Mr Obama has committed himself to three major foreign policy moves; withdrawal from Iraq, talks with rogue dictators and a get tough policy with the Pakistani government. Mrs Clinton opposed him on each and every one of them.

6) What it tells us about Obama's state of mind:

Sympathisers will tell you that this is evidence of Mr Obama's supreme confidence, his belief that he can tame Mrs Clinton as a big beast in his government. They will tell you it is a cunning move to keep her from challenging him from a perch in the Senate, where she might have had dangerously independent thoughts about healthcare.

But all this shows is that Mr Obama has not yet fully realised the great power he is about to inherit. The US president is the nearest thing to God that human government has devised and if he is smart he can dominate the agenda and the headlines throughout his time in office.

Mr Obama has shown himself quite capable of eclipsing Mrs Clinton when there were just the two of them in the spotlight. He did not need to hand her a platform through which she could, if she chose (and her supporters may not be able to help themselves) challenge him.

Whoops! Browser Settings Incompatible

It's as if my brainwaves are spreading throughout the more astute journalists around the western world, yet my voice is trapped in the Cone of Silence.

Zane · 11-21-2008, 08:13 PM

You HAVE to believe that Clinton will be kept on the shortest, tightest leash possible...

Heretic · 11-21-2008, 08:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zane

You HAVE to believe that Clinton will be kept on the shortest, tightest leash possible...

Hillary once said Obama was "dangerously naive." His appointing her to the State Department lends credence to the claim.

Insipid · 11-21-2008, 08:31 PM

I thought that would be a real editorial. That's just a hit-piece and a dumb one at that. Nearly all of the ACTUAL talks of negotiations between the two camps say that they've been cordial and professional. Most of the "leaks" that i've heard about are reported to of come from the OBAMA camp and they're done for the same reason they're ALWAYS done: to gauge public reaction. Since most of it is positive, and those few negatives are comprised of stupid-ass- name calling posts like this one i'm sure he decided full steam ahead.

Here's the Cliff notes version of that "article"

1: reason not to appoint Hillary Clinton:

1. She's a bitch and i hate her!

That is all.

EvilMonkey · 11-21-2008, 09:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Insipid

I thought that would be a real editorial. That's just a hit-piece and a dumb one at that. Nearly all of the ACTUAL talks of negotiations between the two camps say that they've been cordial and professional. Most of the "leaks" that i've heard about are reported to of come from the OBAMA camp and they're done for the same reason they're ALWAYS done: to gauge public reaction. Since most of it is positive, and those few negatives are comprised of stupid-ass- name calling posts like this one i'm sure he decided full steam ahead.

Here's the Cliff notes version of that "article"

1: reason not to appoint Hillary Clinton:

1. She's a bitch and i hate her!

That is all.

Heretic · 11-21-2008, 10:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EvilMonkey

The sycophants can't undderstand how much of a disaster Hillary would be. 'Course, it complicates their vision and hearing to have their head up her ass.

anhailla · 11-22-2008, 01:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Heretic

The sycophants can't undderstand how much of a disaster Hillary would be. 'Course, it complicates their vision and hearing to have their head up her ass.

Give me one viable, realistic reason she is going to be a "disaster", you think she's going to undermine her own President and the safety of country? Geezuz.

She is going to Deliberatly... WHAT?, going to DO WHAT!?

sorry, this all just utter nonsense. Joe Biden adores Hiliary, they are friends. So what...now Joe Biden and Barrack Obama are "dangerously naive"

It's one think not to like her, but for the love of god...I do not get the rest of this.

Some may think she wasn't the best choice, that others may be more qualified...that's fair. But the notion that she is dangerous or a disaster.

sigh, whatever...I need to keep skipping the Hate Hiliary posts

anhailla · 11-22-2008, 01:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Insipid

I thought that would be a real editorial. That's just a hit-piece and a dumb one at that. Nearly all of the ACTUAL talks of negotiations between the two camps say that they've been cordial and professional. Most of the "leaks" that i've heard about are reported to of come from the OBAMA camp and they're done for the same reason they're ALWAYS done: to gauge public reaction. Since most of it is positive, and those few negatives are comprised of stupid-ass- name calling posts like this one i'm sure he decided full steam ahead.

Here's the Cliff notes version of that "article"

1: reason not to appoint Hillary Clinton:

1. She's a bitch and i hate her!

That is all.

I have to agree.

itsmeeeeeee · 11-22-2008, 07:03 AM

hillary won't be a problem.
she'll be an asset.

you'll have to pardon heretic.
he's like chris mathews when it comes to being blinded by clinton hate.
...or like lou dobbs when it comes to immigrants.
and there's no point trying to convince him he's wrong.
we'll just have to endure his endless obsessive rants,
cuz there's no way to stop them.

11-21-2008, 07:58 PM	#1 (permalink)
DanS. DanS. is wishing he could start his own country Administrator Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 13,027 Thanks: 891 Thanked 2,246 Times in 1,519 Posts Nominated 64 Times in 36 Posts TOTW/F/M Award(s): 1	6 Reasons Obama is Mad to Pick Clinton: UK, Telegraph Posted By: Tim Shipman at Nov 21, 2008 at 20:55:22 [General] Posted in: Foreign Correspondents , Eagle Eye Tags:Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Secretary of State So she has taken the plunge. The New York Times reports authoritatively that Hillary Clinton will give up her senate seat and accept the post of Secretary of State, the most powerful and high profile post in the new Obama cabinet that is slowly taking shape. Mrs Clinton took the decision, surprising some of her aides, after a chat with Mr Obama in which he provided reassurances about how much influence she would have in the role. It should have been Mr Obama getting the reassurances. I'm a member of the camp who considers this an act of stark staring bonkerdom on Mr Obama's part. Yes, I know Mrs Clinton is qualified, she knows foreign leaders, she has taken tea with many of their wives too. But what Mr Obama has done, in his slightly vainglorious quest to be compared with Abraham Lincoln, (the campaign launch where Lincoln made his most famous speech on slavery, the cabinet constructed in Doris Kearns Goodwin's phrase, form a team of rivals) is to revive a political dinosaur that many believed, and hoped, had finally had a stake plunged through its twitching heart. I speak of the Clinton machine and its all-encompassing psychodrama. Here are six reasons why Mr Obama is nuts: 1) It's all about the Clintons: The last week is proof, as if anyone could forget, that whenever the hydra-headed Clinton beast is in the public eye, it sucks up the political oxygen and starves all else of media interest. 2) It's all about the Clintons' leaks: Every twist and turn of the saga has been subjected to self-serving leaks by Clinton supporters, a taste of what Obama can expect over the next four years. 3) The civil war: Mr Obama seems to think that he is reaching out to the wing of the party, led by Mrs Clinton, which opposed him in the primaries. But the civil war was long over (and Mrs Clinton mucking in during the campaign contributed to that) after the Democratic convention. Mr Obama largely won Mrs Clinton's supporters over on election day. It's an unnecesary gesture. Worse, any future disagreements will stoke these rivalries again. 4) The management issue: Mrs Clinton has shown during her campaign that she is poorly equipped to run a corner shop, let alone a major government department. She has proven utterly incapable of controlling her erratic, paranoid and aggressive aides, either in their fights and briefings against the Obamanauts and amongst themselves. This is not what embattled US diplomats need. 5) The policy issue: Foreign policy was the one area about which Mr Obama and Mrs Clinton disagreed the most during the primaries. Mr Obama has committed himself to three major foreign policy moves; withdrawal from Iraq, talks with rogue dictators and a get tough policy with the Pakistani government. Mrs Clinton opposed him on each and every one of them. 6) What it tells us about Obama's state of mind: Sympathisers will tell you that this is evidence of Mr Obama's supreme confidence, his belief that he can tame Mrs Clinton as a big beast in his government. They will tell you it is a cunning move to keep her from challenging him from a perch in the Senate, where she might have had dangerously independent thoughts about healthcare. But all this shows is that Mr Obama has not yet fully realised the great power he is about to inherit. The US president is the nearest thing to God that human government has devised and if he is smart he can dominate the agenda and the headlines throughout his time in office. Mr Obama has shown himself quite capable of eclipsing Mrs Clinton when there were just the two of them in the spotlight. He did not need to hand her a platform through which she could, if she chose (and her supporters may not be able to help themselves) challenge him. http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/tim_shi...etary_of_state __________________
	Top

11-21-2008, 08:13 PM	#3 (permalink)
Zane Zane is wishing this function was GONE I Gets Money! Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 2,097 Thanks: 96 Thanked 852 Times in 523 Posts Nominated 33 Times in 16 Posts TOTW/F/M Award(s): 1	You HAVE to believe that Clinton will be kept on the shortest, tightest leash possible...
	Top

11-21-2008, 08:31 PM	#5 (permalink)
Insipid Insipid has no status. Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 488 Thanks: 10 Thanked 52 Times in 38 Posts Nominated 3 Times in 3 Posts TOTW/F/M Award(s): 0	I thought that would be a real editorial. That's just a hit-piece and a dumb one at that. Nearly all of the ACTUAL talks of negotiations between the two camps say that they've been cordial and professional. Most of the "leaks" that i've heard about are reported to of come from the OBAMA camp and they're done for the same reason they're ALWAYS done: to gauge public reaction. Since most of it is positive, and those few negatives are comprised of stupid-ass- name calling posts like this one i'm sure he decided full steam ahead. Here's the Cliff notes version of that "article" 1: reason not to appoint Hillary Clinton: 1. She's a bitch and i hate her! That is all.
	Top

11-22-2008, 07:03 AM	#10 (permalink)
itsmeeeeeee itsmeeeeeee has no status. punk nun Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: 53 miles west of venus Posts: 5,575 Blog Entries: 3 Thanks: 441 Thanked 1,399 Times in 841 Posts Nominated 94 Times in 47 Posts TOTW/F/M Award(s): 4	hillary won't be a problem. she'll be an asset. you'll have to pardon heretic. he's like chris mathews when it comes to being blinded by clinton hate. ...or like lou dobbs when it comes to immigrants. and there's no point trying to convince him he's wrong. we'll just have to endure his endless obsessive rants, cuz there's no way to stop them. __________________ THE RIGHT WING IS A DOMESTIC TERRORIST ORGANIZATION!!!! ...and ANY conservative who doesn't aggressively and actively demonize them is, in fact, a supporter domestic terrorism! PERIOD!!!!
	Top

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode