• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans


Adverts help to support the work of this non-profit organisation. To go ad-free join as a Member.


Photo
- - - - -

Clinton named secretary of state


  • Please log in to reply
26 replies to this topic

Poll: Was it a good decision? (10 member(s) have cast votes)

Was it a good decision?

  1. Yes (7 votes [70.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 70.00%

  2. No (3 votes [30.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 30.00%

Vote Guests cannot vote
⌛⇒ MITOMOUSE has been fully funded!

#1 Cyberbrain

  • Guest, F@H
  • 1,755 posts
  • 2
  • Location:Thessaloniki, Greece

Posted 01 December 2008 - 05:19 PM


[url="http://"%20<a%20href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7758673.stm""%20target="_blank">http://news.bbc.co.u...cas/7758673.stm"</a>"]Clinton named secretary of state [/url]

Posted ImagePosted Image

OBAMA'S SECURITY TEAM:

Secretary of State: Hillary Clinton
Defence Secretary: Robert Gates
National Security Adviser: General James Jones
Department of Homeland Security: Janet Napolitano
Ambassador to the UN: Susan Rice
Attorney General: Eric Holder

#2 Lazarus Long

  • Life Member, Guardian
  • 8,090 posts
  • 237
  • Location:Northern, Western Hemisphere of Earth, Usually of late, New York

Posted 01 December 2008 - 05:42 PM

You only mention it in passing but Gates is the current Defense secretary and while not only a Bush appointee, represents a true attempt at bipartisan solution and continuity of working experienced management of the situation on the ground, however the strong signal is the return to diplomacy as a critical aspect of foreign policy and a change in the mandate for what Gates is being instructed to achieve.

We are not only changing strategy and tactics but overall objectives and it is a change which is long overdue.

Perhaps one of the most significant changes is really Susan Rice at the UN. Did you hear her comments?

They are worth quoting but she began by reminding everyone that the UN is our baby and we are not only not going to throw it out but we are about to begin re-strengthening it.

#3 brokenportal

  • Life Member, Moderator
  • 7,046 posts
  • 589
  • Location:Stevens Point, WI

Posted 01 December 2008 - 05:48 PM

It looks like the forums just jammed for you too. I also had a post appear multiple times. I voted yes because I want to see Bill Clinton as close to the white house as possible. I think there is something a bit to contrived about Hillary Clinton, but with Bill as her advisor I think she would be great.

sponsored ad

  • Advert
Advertisements help to support the work of this non-profit organisation. [] To go ad-free join as a Member.

#4 Ghostrider

  • Guest
  • 1,996 posts
  • 56
  • Location:USA

Posted 01 December 2008 - 09:08 PM

It looks like the forums just jammed for you too. I also had a post appear multiple times. I voted yes because I want to see Bill Clinton as close to the white house as possible. I think there is something a bit to contrived about Hillary Clinton, but with Bill as her advisor I think she would be great.


It's probably a good choice. I am a bit surprised though given all the stuff Obama said about Clinton and vice-versa during the campaign, only about 3 months ago. Wonder if he has alzheimers, he seems to be forgetting a lot. Change we can believe in or old school politics?

#5 sUper GeNius

  • Guest
  • 1,501 posts
  • 1
  • Location:Phila PA USA Earth

Posted 01 December 2008 - 10:25 PM

Fantastic political savvy by Obama. Get the support of Hillary's supporters AND take Hillary out of the race for 2012.

As far as actual foreign policy, now that the warm and fuzzy glow of the general election is over, the incoming administration will face the same problems, and I suspect, the substance of the response will be very similar to Bush's foreign policy. Of course, it will be applied with the Obama smiley face. Raids into Pakistan on one side, a smiley hand-holding circle of coca-cola lovers on the other.

http://www.cnn.com/2...rist/index.html

Edited by FuLL meMbeR, 01 December 2008 - 10:27 PM.


#6 eternaltraveler

  • Guest, Guardian
  • 6,471 posts
  • 155
  • Location:Silicon Valley, CA

Posted 01 December 2008 - 10:37 PM

take Hillary out of the race for 2012.


what race for 2012? He'll be the incumbent president.

Edited by elrond, 01 December 2008 - 10:37 PM.


#7 sUper GeNius

  • Guest
  • 1,501 posts
  • 1
  • Location:Phila PA USA Earth

Posted 01 December 2008 - 11:04 PM

take Hillary out of the race for 2012.


what race for 2012? He'll be the incumbent president.


Reagan almost beat Ford, an incumbent, in the '76 primary. If Obama screwed the pooch, I think it would have been possible for Clinton to successfully challenge him in 2012.

Edited by FuLL meMbeR, 01 December 2008 - 11:15 PM.


#8 Lazarus Long

  • Life Member, Guardian
  • 8,090 posts
  • 237
  • Location:Northern, Western Hemisphere of Earth, Usually of late, New York

Posted 01 December 2008 - 11:35 PM

Don't count on that kind of infight Full Member unless this administration totally F's up and the fact is that they are all going to rise and fall together. There are some days you just gotta love New York.

Bill Clinton to be named to replace Hillary in the US Senate

The Dem's are not going to count on numbers in the upcoming Congress they are moving to put experienced deal makers in. I guess having an Ex President and Governor looks good on the resume for being an appointed Senator.

#9 Lazarus Long

  • Life Member, Guardian
  • 8,090 posts
  • 237
  • Location:Northern, Western Hemisphere of Earth, Usually of late, New York

Posted 01 December 2008 - 11:38 PM

Also it is a great way to get him out from under Hillary's skirts. The Obama administration has actually NOT wanted Bill around trying to micromanage his wife's actions. This should keep him real busy and it might be good for him to e back in the thick of it himself.

⌛⇒ MITOMOUSE has been fully funded!

#10 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 02 December 2008 - 01:43 AM

As far as actual foreign policy, now that the warm and fuzzy glow of the general election is over, the incoming administration will face the same problems, and I suspect, the substance of the response will be very similar to Bush's foreign policy.

How do you figure it will be the same? You think they are going to invade a country that doesn't pose a threat to us? Insult our allies, and for that matter, most of the world? Eschew diplomacy and nationbuilding? I don't think it will look much like Bush foreign policy.

#11 biknut

  • Guest
  • 1,892 posts
  • -2
  • Location:Dallas Texas

Posted 02 December 2008 - 03:16 AM

I'm not a fan of Hillary, or Obama, who doesn't know that by now, but as far as who he might have picked she's alright. As a matter of fact compared to O shes starting to look pretty good to me.

#12 biknut

  • Guest
  • 1,892 posts
  • -2
  • Location:Dallas Texas

Posted 02 December 2008 - 03:21 AM

I didn't vote because I don't think shes good or bad, shes just alright.

#13 biknut

  • Guest
  • 1,892 posts
  • -2
  • Location:Dallas Texas

Posted 02 December 2008 - 03:28 AM

One thing I like about her pick is that it really pisses off Obama's way left buddy's who don't like her. Either he's not as left as they think he is, or he's really stupid. Humm, centralist, or stupid, centralist, or stupid. I guess stupid.

#14 Cyberbrain

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest, F@H
  • 1,755 posts
  • 2
  • Location:Thessaloniki, Greece

Posted 02 December 2008 - 03:30 AM

Just in:



#15 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 02 December 2008 - 03:39 AM

Either he's not as left as they think he is...

Well, I'm pretty sure he's not as left as you think he is. (Or thought, anyway...)

#16 biknut

  • Guest
  • 1,892 posts
  • -2
  • Location:Dallas Texas

Posted 02 December 2008 - 03:52 AM

Either he's not as left as they think he is...

Well, I'm pretty sure he's not as left as you think he is. (Or thought, anyway...)


Here's wishin. That's one thing I'd be happy to be wrong about.

#17 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 02 December 2008 - 03:56 AM

Either he's not as left as they think he is...

Well, I'm pretty sure he's not as left as you think he is. (Or thought, anyway...)

Here's wishin. That's one thing I'd be happy to be wrong about.

I'm thinking Clinton without the zipper problem.

#18 sUper GeNius

  • Guest
  • 1,501 posts
  • 1
  • Location:Phila PA USA Earth

Posted 02 December 2008 - 04:35 AM

As far as actual foreign policy, now that the warm and fuzzy glow of the general election is over, the incoming administration will face the same problems, and I suspect, the substance of the response will be very similar to Bush's foreign policy.

How do you figure it will be the same? You think they are going to invade a country that doesn't pose a threat to us? Insult our allies, and for that matter, most of the world? Eschew diplomacy and nationbuilding? I don't think it will look much like Bush foreign policy.

\

As I wrote, the interests of the US remain the same, and the main issues and problems haven't changed. Obama's been picking a bunch of centrist old heads for his adminstration, not one that I am aware of that voted against the Iraq invasion. Obama sits on top of the tank, riding with a nice friendly smile. Hey, a racial minority and muslim background/name to boot! It can't get any better! It'll be like LBJ over over again, spending mega-billions at home, bombing the living shit of our enemies abroad. But he'll be even nicer as he performs renditions, snoops in on your phone calls (he voted for that,) and drops smart bombs on Pakistani kids.

No, he won't insult the Europeans to their faces. He'll simply do it behind closed doors, as his administration actively promotes US interests, which often times are at odds with Euro-tastes.

No, it won't *look* like Bush foreign policy at all. But it won't actually be much different in its essence. And that's the beautiful thing about Obama, (and I'm not being sarcastic.) It'll be Bush-light, with a big happy face on it. Hell, he'll probably personally pilot Predator drones from his den, in between World of Warcraft raids.

Edited by FuLL meMbeR, 02 December 2008 - 04:42 AM.


#19 Connor MacLeod

  • Guest
  • 619 posts
  • 46

Posted 02 December 2008 - 05:14 AM

Also it is a great way to get him out from under Hillary's skirts.


Umm, Hillary wears pantsuits.

#20 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 02 December 2008 - 05:40 AM

No, it won't *look* like Bush foreign policy at all. But it won't actually be much different in its essence. And that's the beautiful thing about Obama, (and I'm not being sarcastic.) It'll be Bush-light, with a big happy face on it. Hell, he'll probably personally pilot Predator drones from his den, in between World of Warcraft raids.

Needless to say, I don't agree with any of this, but I'm kind of curious how you came to this view. It sounds like you think Obama is not liberal enough. On the basis of many of your recent posts, I'd guess that you were a McCain supporter. In that light, I'd expect you to consider Obama to be too far to the left rather than the opposite.

#21 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 02 December 2008 - 05:41 AM

Umm, Hillary wears pantsuits.

L :) LZ

#22 sUper GeNius

  • Guest
  • 1,501 posts
  • 1
  • Location:Phila PA USA Earth

Posted 02 December 2008 - 06:03 AM

No, it won't *look* like Bush foreign policy at all. But it won't actually be much different in its essence. And that's the beautiful thing about Obama, (and I'm not being sarcastic.) It'll be Bush-light, with a big happy face on it. Hell, he'll probably personally pilot Predator drones from his den, in between World of Warcraft raids.

Needless to say, I don't agree with any of this, but I'm kind of curious how you came to this view. It sounds like you think Obama is not liberal enough. On the basis of many of your recent posts, I'd guess that you were a McCain supporter. In that light, I'd expect you to consider Obama to be too far to the left rather than the opposite.


I am a McCain supporter reveling in the irony of the whole thing. Obama had moveon working overtime for him, and now he turns out, (as I suspected he might be,) a pragmatic centrist.

⌛⇒ MITOMOUSE has been fully funded!

#23 Lazarus Long

  • Life Member, Guardian
  • 8,090 posts
  • 237
  • Location:Northern, Western Hemisphere of Earth, Usually of late, New York

Posted 02 December 2008 - 01:06 PM

I am a McCain supporter reveling in the irony of the whole thing. Obama had moveon working overtime for him, and now he turns out, (as I suspected he might be,) a pragmatic centrist.



Funny I think a review of the record of our debates here will contradict this claim. When I repeatedly suggested that Obama was more likely to lead from the center in a *pragmatic manner* I was challenged by hysterical hyperbole about how Obama was a secret Muslim terrorist, and/or an appeasing pacifist all too ready and willing to sell out the troops and our country.

I guess when you get to spinning so fast sometimes it gets hard to stop.

So if you actually suspected that Obama was really a pragmatic centrist why didn't you come out and say it then?

Oh and Conner, you're right, the tighter pant suits make it harder to get him out but here in New York we have ways, many, many ways. :)

#24 Lazarus Long

  • Life Member, Guardian
  • 8,090 posts
  • 237
  • Location:Northern, Western Hemisphere of Earth, Usually of late, New York

Posted 02 December 2008 - 02:06 PM

More on Bill as the replacement for Hillary in the Senate.

We should hear later today one way or another but his name continues to float to the top of a murky pool of candidates. While ever controversial him could be the least controversial candidate for a blind-black appointed Democratic governor to select.

Many New Yorkers feel the seat should be filled by a clearly identifiable ethnic or gender based selection but in the same manner that Bill was able to define himself as the first black president in NY he might be able to define himself as the first transgendered-omniethnic-leftwing-corporatist US Senator from Wall Street & Harlem. Nobody says *chimera* like Bill.

In a State Where Opinions Flourish; Everybody has a Candidate

Who Shall Replace HRC in the US Senate?

#25 biknut

  • Guest
  • 1,892 posts
  • -2
  • Location:Dallas Texas

Posted 02 December 2008 - 03:18 PM

When I repeatedly suggested that Obama was more likely to lead from the center in a *pragmatic manner* I was challenged by hysterical hyperbole about how Obama was a secret Muslim terrorist, and/or an appeasing pacifist all too ready and willing to sell out the troops and our country.


Hey I was the first person to identify Obama as a secret Muslim terrorist. How dare you give other people credit for my intuitive farseeing insight. Just look how secret he is. Even now nobody even knows about it.

#26 sUper GeNius

  • Guest
  • 1,501 posts
  • 1
  • Location:Phila PA USA Earth

Posted 02 December 2008 - 04:05 PM

I am a McCain supporter reveling in the irony of the whole thing. Obama had moveon working overtime for him, and now he turns out, (as I suspected he might be,) a pragmatic centrist.



Funny I think a review of the record of our debates here will contradict this claim. When I repeatedly suggested that Obama was more likely to lead from the center in a *pragmatic manner* I was challenged by hysterical hyperbole about how Obama was a secret Muslim terrorist, and/or an appeasing pacifist all too ready and willing to sell out the troops and our country.

I guess when you get to spinning so fast sometimes it gets hard to stop.

So if you actually suspected that Obama was really a pragmatic centrist why didn't you come out and say it then?

Oh and Conner, you're right, the tighter pant suits make it harder to get him out but here in New York we have ways, many, many ways. :)



I haven't entered any discussions here regarding Obama. Shouldn't you check first before you accuse me of spinning?

sponsored ad

  • Advert
Advertisements help to support the work of this non-profit organisation. [] To go ad-free join as a Member.

#27 sUper GeNius

  • Guest
  • 1,501 posts
  • 1
  • Location:Phila PA USA Earth

Posted 03 December 2008 - 04:05 PM

No, it won't *look* like Bush foreign policy at all. But it won't actually be much different in its essence. And that's the beautiful thing about Obama, (and I'm not being sarcastic.) It'll be Bush-light, with a big happy face on it. Hell, he'll probably personally pilot Predator drones from his den, in between World of Warcraft raids.

Needless to say, I don't agree with any of this, but I'm kind of curious how you came to this view. It sounds like you think Obama is not liberal enough. On the basis of many of your recent posts, I'd guess that you were a McCain supporter. In that light, I'd expect you to consider Obama to be too far to the left rather than the opposite.


I am a McCain supporter reveling in the irony of the whole thing. Obama had moveon working overtime for him, and now he turns out, (as I suspected he might be,) a pragmatic centrist.


The waffling continues! Detentions camps? No problem now. Just more oversight will be okay says Obama.

http://www.nytimes.c...t...tml?_r=1

"In a speech last year, Mr. Obama cast the matter as a practical issue, as well as a moral one. “We cannot win a war unless we maintain the high ground and keep the people on our side,” he said. “But because the administration decided to take the low road, our troops have more enemies.”

On Wednesday, a dozen retired generals and admirals are to meet with senior Obama advisers to urge him to stand firm against any deviation from the military’s noncoercive interrogation rules.

But even some senior Democratic lawmakers who are vehement critics of the Bush administration’s interrogation policies seemed reluctant in recent interviews to commit the new administration to following the Army Field Manual in all cases.

Senator Dianne Feinstein, the California Democrat who will take over as chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee in January, led the fight this year to force the C.I.A. to follow military interrogation rules. Her bill was passed by Congress but vetoed by President Bush.

But in an interview on Tuesday, Mrs. Feinstein indicated that extreme cases might call for flexibility. “I think that you have to use the noncoercive standard to the greatest extent possible,” she said, raising the possibility that an imminent terrorist threat might require special measures."


As I said, Bush II, but with a big fat smiley face. Bush had what ,two, maybe three guys water-boarded? According to the new found-conscience of the Demo's that might be okay now. Luv it! Maybe the bad-guy won't feel so bad when he knows that a minority with a muslim name is behind his torture. Will Old Europe give Obama a break too, lest they be called rascists?

Edited by FuLL meMbeR, 03 December 2008 - 04:17 PM.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users