Comments on: The (Clinton) Fix Is On!

By: Josh Gillespie

Josh Gillespie — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 19:54:16 +0000

I would agree that this is a terrible move for Hillary, but a brilliant move on Obama’s part. I think that choosing her for this fits right in with the Clinton’s overarching ego. But that it also plays into the mindset of “keep your friends close and your enemies closer”.

I would also argue that this was also a tactical move towards getting things passed in the Senate easier. Hillary could have always stood out as loyal opposition to Obama had she stayed in the Senate. Now, it will be tougher, though there is the possibility that the arguments get more heated.

By: Joel Harris

Joel Harris — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 19:46:55 +0000

The only reason that it could work for Hillary is if she gets the opportunity to resign in disgust for the Obama administration at some point, say in about 2 years. Saving that, I don’t see Hillary recovering from this career move.

By: Harl Delos

Harl Delos — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 19:19:42 +0000

This is a bad move for Hillary. She’d be better off remaining in the Senate.

Part of it is that her skills seem better suited for the Senate. Ed Rendell pointed out that he’d be a poor vice-president, because he’s used to running his own show. Hillary is, too – and in the Senate, she calls her own shots. As SOS, Hillary has to do what Obama wants.

What’s more, she will be unemployed in a few years. The last SOS to become President, I believe, was James Buchanan, more than 150 years ago. Has there been anyone else since then who has gone from SOS to the Senate? I don’t think so, although I might be wrong.

Ted Kennedy has been an outstanding Senator. Perhaps you don’t like his politics, but he has been very respected, and probably had more influence on American government over the years than either Bobby or Jack had. He’s obviously retiring – and there’s ample opportunity for Hillary to become the new “old bull of the herd.”

Obama offering her SOS is like Tom Sawyer offering his friends the opportunity to whitewash the fence. It’s not a very good deal for Hillary – and she doesn’t seem capable of resisting the sales pitch.

By: Nathan Brindle

Nathan Brindle — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 18:39:02 +0000

Got no problem with Hillary as SoS.

Would have preferred her as president over Obama, to be honest.

By: Joel Harris

Joel Harris — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 17:35:33 +0000

Rush had this called months ago. In spite of all of the “pull out” talk going on, no Democrat President would pull out of Iraq, etc. in a way that would look like a loss. There was also the Biden warning before the election that within “6 months” Obama would be tested, and his support levels would go down because Obama’s response would not be what his supporters wanted.

I think they were expecting to move to a more militaristic position than their campaign rhetoric would have indicated well before the election.

But I disagree that the Clinton move was for substantive foreign policy reasons. This is a political move in one way or another. There may be some payback for not torpedoing the Presidential campaign. There may be some keeping of your enemies close. There may be some trying to ensure that Clinton cannot effectively run against him in 2012.