Jay Bookman

By Greg Mendel

November 15, 2008 12:27 PM | Link to this

Hillary really has little to lose by taking the job at State. I would prefer Holbrooke or Richardson, but Hillary is certainly capable, and the Clintons have always been popular abroad.

I also have confidence in Obama’s judgment, and in the way he is going about putting together an administration. Particularly, I’m impressed with what appears to be his effort to establish a good working relationship with John McCain. Both men are smart enough to know that bipartisan cooperation is critical to getting the country through the dire crisis we now face.

Also in Obama’s favor, he seems like someone who doesn’t care that much about hogging the limelight or demanding credit for every success (unlike Bill and Dubya). That’s a mature, smart way to ensure an effective administration.

By @@

November 15, 2008 12:45 PM | Link to this

By ceding her seat Clinton would also be ceding her independence

Surely you jest, jay?

Of all the promises that OBlahMa, the candidate made, appointing cabinet positions along bi-partisan lines is the only promise PrezE Obama will be able to keep in the present environment.

It’s mostly for public consumption, but it’ll serve to fill in for his lack of know-how on every front.

He’s offering up the only experience he possesses — he’s “organizing the community” with Washington insiders.

By getalife

November 15, 2008 12:48 PM | Link to this

She did get the media to stop talking about palin and the gop but and he interviewed Richardson after she said no thanks.

She should replace Reid as majority leader but they go by seniority.

I think she will stay in the Senate.

By AF

November 15, 2008 12:51 PM | Link to this

Hillary could do the job at State. But, she is such a policy wonk, good at complexity and detail, that she could be badly missed in the Senate, particularly if health care reform comes up.

By mj

November 15, 2008 1:05 PM | Link to this

I think Hillary would be a good choice. If not her then Richardson.

By Clayton

November 15, 2008 1:13 PM | Link to this

I feel Hillary would be the best choice at anything. I did not vote because Hillary Clinton was my choice. I like her strength and her smarts. Yes she does know a lot of people in this world, but she also would have along side her as the brightess light house in the world: Bill Clinton. Ombama already is gathering many of Clinton’ admistration. Why not include the Hillary and Bill show to move this country in the positive direction. Even though you Clinton haters don’t think so. Hillary is a great choice for State Department.

By AJC/DNC Management

November 15, 2008 1:19 PM | Link to this

But associates to both Democrats cautioned that their conversation included other cabinet possibilities and that no job was offered. Democrats said late Friday that Mr. Obama had also met with another oft-mentioned candidate for the post, Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico, to discuss the secretary of state job.-Treason Times/ Oblahmi Campaign

Comfort food for the forlorn dimwit supporters of thee Bruno, nothing more.

~~~~~

Aahhh, yes, a formerly defeated enemy is now embolden for “some reason,” and the Urinal/Jihad trumpets their propaganda across the land even though they “support our troops,” of course:

Shiite leader Muqtada al-Sadr renewed threats to unleash his militia fighters to attack U.S. forces unless they leave Iraq immediately, and Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani vowed to intervene if he concludes the proposed agreement governing the presence of U.S. forces infringes on national sovereignty.

You couldn’t beat Bush, Mookie.

But this Oblahmi wimp, you may have your victory yet.

By "The Corporal"

November 15, 2008 1:23 PM | Link to this

The Corporal on Hillary

A demagogue is defined as “someone who gains power and popularity by arousing the emotions, passions and prejudices of the people”. I already have a multitude of reasons why I would never support Hillary Clinton for anything including her stance on the rights of unborn children, her disdain for the U.S. military and her socialist touch on every program or policy she proposes. However, if for no other reason, her unbridled demogoguery at the end of the 2000 Presidential election showed me just how far she would go in a disingenuous and even dangerous effort to gain popular support.

President Bush lost the popular vote but won the electoral vote and thus the election; the U.S. Supreme Court solidifying his victory with a narrow 5 to 4 ruling. Then Mrs. Clinton, a Yale Law School graduate who knew better, angrily insinuated to the American masses that Vice President Gore had been robbed of the election since he won the popular vote. She even stated that one of her first acts as a U.S. Senator would be to propose legislation eliminating the electoral college (she thankfully failed in that attempt). I guess she felt she possessed more wisdom than James Madison and our other founding fathers.

Unfortunately, the great majority of American voters are totally ignorant of the purpose of the electoral college and the incredible history of how this country was founded. Hillary used this sad ignorance to appeal to the public’s fears and to incite them during a time of Constitutional crisis when Florida’s electoral votes were still in doubt and the rule of law and calm needed to be promoted. She knew full well the electoral college was instituted to protect the influence of the smaller states, that those states would never have signed the Constitution without it and that it prevents one region of the country from dominating others in being able to choose a President. It forces a Presidential candidate to appeal to the nation as a whole as opposed to just densely populated areas. In effect, it attempts to bring us together as a nation rather than dividing us as a direct popular vote would.

This is the United STATES of America not the United PEOPLE of America; it is thankfully a constitutional republic and not a pure reactionary democracy and there’s a big difference. Our present “electoral system” allowing the States to have a proper and constitutional role in electing a President mitigates demagoguery. Hillary’s desire for a “popular vote” system would allow demagoguery to thrive. She showed me her true colors back then in her blatant effort to do anything in a quest for power and that reveals the naked soul of a dangerous demagoguerette.

By AJC/DNC Management

November 15, 2008 1:27 PM | Link to this

PEACHTREE CITY: Obnoxious leaf blowers a noisy spot in sounds of autumn By Jill Howard Church For the Urinal-Constitution

Hey, all you Oblahmi voting illegal immigrant yard boys out there, hahahaha, you’re gonna just love your new president.

Bozos.

Maybe you can get a job delivering the newspaper, no?

By CommunistAJC

November 15, 2008 1:31 PM | Link to this

CHANGE WE CAN BELIEVE IN.

Right, so change is going back to Clinton? I’m totally confused by what change really means. Why didn’t we just elect Hillary? Is Bill gonna be the new press secretary? Will Janet Reno become Secretary of Defense? Is Madeline Albright going to be back? How about Sandy Berger? This is a little ridiculous. I guess we can expect Obama to cheat with a 19 year old. Right? Yep, that’s change we can believe in. What a joke.

By Wayne

November 15, 2008 1:35 PM | Link to this

Looks like politics as usual. At least I am not one walking around with the word SUCKER on my forehead. If anyone at the AJC would get over their Obama goggle eyes.. they would see that many members of his transition team are lobbyists.. the people Obama said he was going to get away from. I guess that’s OK though.. its OK to lie if you’re name is Obama.. kind of like how he lied about campaign financing.. so far there has been ZERO integrity out of Obama.. all talk.. yet the media gives him a free pass no matter what. Sigh.. I guess we could say the same about the integrity of the media at this point as well. ZERO

By fed up in gwinnett

November 15, 2008 1:41 PM | Link to this

I’m with you CommunistAJC where is the change? I’ve yet to see anybody mentioned or appointed that is any kind of change. I hate to say it but I’m starting to believe that the only change we’re going to see is what’s left in our pockets and bank accounts after this is over. As far as Hillary goes I would think that she would not take this position as then she has to support Obama in all his policies rather than stay somewhat independent in the senate. Of course once Obama got the nomination she appeared to support him but that’s what she’s all about “appearances”. Why does Obama even have a website called change. It was a word that was overused in the campaign and it looks like it was nothing more than that.

By fed up in gwinnett

November 15, 2008 1:50 PM | Link to this

Hey Jay aren’t you getting a little ahead of yourself….the Era of Obama has begun and is likely to last a while.

He hasn’t even been sworn in yet.

By Soixante huitard

November 15, 2008 2:04 PM | Link to this

I’m sure I see where you’re coming from on this one, Jay.

Are you doubting whether it would be in Clinton’s interests to accept the post? Or do you doubt that she would serve the administration and country well in it?

I think there would be some real advantages to having her in that role - the excitement abroad it would generate, to name one - but obviously for her personally it would be a big leap. CNN commentators like D. Gergen noted that for her to remain in the Senate would mean several more years as a Jr. senator and waiting in the wings - not necessarily a great option for her either assuming she longs for high profile.

By Slick

November 15, 2008 2:08 PM | Link to this

Jay,

I do not think Obama should pick Hillary Clinton for Secretary of State. She comes with too much baggage, i.e. all of the factors expressed by “the corporal” and especially Bill Clinton.

John Kerry would be a far better choice! If not him, Governor Richardson.

By Abomi Nation

November 15, 2008 2:09 PM | Link to this

Where’s the change?…..LMAO!!!

The change is going from the destructive and mostly hated Bush administration with its 22% approval rating to an era that produced a President that exited office with a 65% approval and a good economy.

We are changing from a President that is hated throughout the world to another that is hugely popular and will attract massive crowds on foreign trips like Bill did. No matter what you say, being loved by the world is a hell of a lot better than being hated.

We are changing from an era that doubled the deficit to one that gave us balanced budgets.

We are changing from the joke of the Schiavo incident to restarting stem cell research.

We are changing hopefully from picking white male Catholic Supreme Court justices to maybe adding a little more diversity.

And mostly we are changing from an incompetent, miserable, failure of an administration to one that cannot possibly be any worse.

Change can’t get here fast enough.

By fed up in gwinnett

November 15, 2008 2:21 PM | Link to this

Sorry abomi nation you are getting ahead of yourself as well.

By @@

November 15, 2008 2:22 PM | Link to this

About Andy’s 1:27 “Peachtree City Leaf Blowers”.

I would just like to note that most Peachtree City residents are from up north.

Pompous, self-righteous, rude and boring.

Verrrryyyyyy boring!

The perfect place for small talk and “chit” chat.

By Abomi Nation

November 15, 2008 2:32 PM | Link to this

There’s change all around. Have you noticed any fake questions being asked by any gay s&m prostitute/Reporters hired by the White House?

“How are you going to work – you’ve said you are going to reach out to these people – how are you going to work with people who seem to have divorced themselves from reality?”

The irony? That would now be legitimate question.

President-Elect Obama, how are you going to work with people who seem to have divorced themselves from reality?

I’d ask it for free.

By DB, Gwinnettian

November 15, 2008 2:40 PM | Link to this

“Hillary could do the job at State. But, she is such a policy wonk, good at complexity and detail, that she could be badly missed in the Senate, particularly if health care reform comes up.”

Perhaps, but it seems to me that her policy-wonikishness would be an asset managing something as complex as State.

Like Mr. Bookman, I was surprised by the initial news accounts, and I am a little skeptical that this will go through. But I can see the appeal to someone as ambitious as Sen. Clinton.

(And, should she do a respectable job, if she decides to run again in 2016, it will be with impeccable credentials.)

By Dusty

November 15, 2008 2:48 PM | Link to this

Hillary Clinton?? Not again. Didn’t we just see her all over the TV making speeches and losing to Obama? ( although her speeches were delivered very well)!

Didn’t we see her soberly telling the world about the vast conspiracy against her husband (when she knews exactly what he had done and with whom and how many times before)!!!

Didn’t we see her Clinton era health care plan (socialized medicine) go down with such a bang that is made everybody’s health worse???

Wasn’t this the Hillary that “womanism” became her “thing” and traveled around the world to get her womanly picture taken? All that after making snide remarks about staying home and baking cookies?

Wasn’t this the Hillary that made thousands off a stock deal with one thousand dollars invested and the help of a friendly stock broker, a deal like none ever heard of before (or ever done again)?

Wasn’t this the Hillary who searched diligently for a document in her offfice which was needed for a legal decision but she could NOT find it? But..it turned up in the family quarters of the White House LATER??

That’s Hillary. Even though Richardson is as interesting as a bowl of oatmeal and couldn’t even get on the Gore ticket after messing up as Energy Chief, he is preferable to Hillary.

Obama better get over the Clinton complex or Rham Emanuel will be telling everybody in the cabinet what to do. Sounds like he might have the guts to do it, for batter or for worse, while Obama is out playing nice.

By HiIllbilly Deluxe

November 15, 2008 2:50 PM | Link to this

The really interesting thing will be to see how Hillary positions herself for her next run for President.

By Dusty

November 15, 2008 3:15 PM | Link to this

If I don’t stop typing in a hurry, I will be accused of all sorts of bad things (Soixie will soon say I exemplify all Southern Repubs or some legendary spelling monster!) Please excuse my hasty typing errors in my 2:48!! Where oh where is my old electric typewriter?? I promise to do better. Cross my heart!! (RW, I told you I should go to Dahlonega! Is it too late to go?)

By AJC/DNC Management

November 15, 2008 3:18 PM | Link to this

In addition to addressing the current crisis, we will also need to make broader reforms to strengthen the global economy over the long term. For example, nations must make their financial markets more transparent and properly regulated. The rules governing market manipulation and fraud must ensure that investors are properly protected.-George W Bush

F him.

Who’s going to protect Conservatives from “frauds” like him?

This clown grew the largest government in the history of the world, a giant, stupid monolith that feeds on it’s own nation like a humongous parasite and lives on in mindless eternity, he’s wondering how it got out of control?

Marvelous.

By getalife

November 15, 2008 3:36 PM | Link to this

I agree Andy.

w is the worst ever disaster but President Obama will clean up his mess with the Clinton team.

After they get over this economic huge hurdle, we are back in business.

Lets be “real Americans”, think “country first” and support President Obama with the Clinton team to clean up a bush’s mess again.

We did it before, we will do it again.

God bless the Clintons.

By AJC/DNC Management

November 15, 2008 4:00 PM | Link to this

If I didn’t know better, al-Gitmo, I would say you got a little religion in that last post of yours.

Those KKKlintons float your boat, huh?

You do have a point, the last time the KKKlintons were in office, they took advantage of a war won by a Bushie to cut defense spending to the bone, now it look’s like Oblahmi will turn Iraq over to Iran and the Bruno team will again go to skimping on guns and bombs, you know, the things that keep our nation safe.

And then we can squander it on another dot.com bubble.

Sounds like fun, don’t it?

By AJC/DNC Management

November 15, 2008 4:07 PM | Link to this

This is a nice synopsis of why Oblahmi is sure to be a failure:

Mr. Suckie Face Waxman’s committee exists to stage show trials; he doesn’t have jurisdiction to legislate about credit markets or anything else. But his media events are helpful to his comrade in exculpation, Barney Frank. The House Financial Services Chairman is among the most desperate to blame something other than housing, where he famously vowed to “roll the dice” with Fannie Mae. He too has fingered credit default swaps and now promises “sensible” regulation. If he does to this market what he did to housing, he will again be rolling the dice with other people’s money.-Wall Street Journal

The democrat party is full of hacks who moonlight as criminals, they destroyed the economy when people were watching them, imagine what they will do now that they own the cookie jar.

The Repugs just need to shut up and let these toadies work their wonders.

We’ll be back in power in no time.

By RW-(the original)

November 15, 2008 4:42 PM | Link to this

ABC claims the job is Hillary’s to turn down. So does this “team of rivals” BS mean his cabinet will be all the Democrats he vanquished along the way?

By TW

November 15, 2008 4:42 PM | Link to this

We’ll be back in power in no time

Aren’t you the guy who said McSame was gonna win?

Thought so.

One of these days the right is gonna have to bite the bullet and look up ‘credibility’ in the Webster. I know you guys are anti-book, but it’d really be a good idea to crack one for this.

By TN Gelding

November 15, 2008 4:44 PM | Link to this

I don’t see it happening.

But if it does, he’s getting another twofer. Bill is highly regarded in international circles. I’d rather see Hillary as majority leader.

Gov. Richardson would be a good choice, but I’d prefer Colin Powell. Maybe he could get it right with a different agenda.

No on Kerry.

By "The Corporal"

November 15, 2008 5:14 PM | Link to this

To Soixante huitard

Did you comment on my Demagoguerette essay?

Disappointed ………. :o(

By ron

November 15, 2008 5:18 PM | Link to this

Perhaps Obama figures that it’s better to have the Clintons inside the administration where they can be watched as opposed to outside where he has to keep a separate eye on them.After that,they are an experienced duo with name recognition.

Another thing—-She can be made Secretary,give up her senate seat and then be dumped as unsuitable.Then they’re both gone forever.

By mandrake

November 15, 2008 5:21 PM | Link to this

“Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss.” Lobbyists and tired old names from the failures of the past who got us into the position we are now. Now that’s change we can believe in. Welcome to the “new age” suckers.

By ron

November 15, 2008 6:22 PM | Link to this

Jay.Got a message from AJC that I post too often in too short a period of time.Have a good day.

By TN Gelding

November 15, 2008 6:44 PM | Link to this

Easy come. Easy go.

And they aren’t alone.

By jon

November 15, 2008 6:47 PM | Link to this

I doubt Hillary will accept the position of SoS, primarily because she would not give up her ambition of being the 1st female president. If Obama fails in his 1st term, as we expect that he will, she may challenge him for the nomination. If she is in his administration, she would share in the responsibility for failure.

On the other hand, I wish she would accept the selection for SoS. The confirmation hearings would be such fun. Maybe we would learn the truth about the Rose law firm billing files, the pardons Bill granted, and the fundraising activities of the former 1st leacher.

Actually, I saw Bill Ayers on TV today and I think he is bucking for the job.

By TN Gelding

November 15, 2008 6:54 PM | Link to this

mandrake

November 15, 2008 5:21 PM

Failures from the past?

After the past 7 years, 9 months and 26 days, how could you make such a statement? That doesn’t mean it’s going to be easy.

By AJC/DNC Management

November 15, 2008 7:15 PM | Link to this

In the national exit poll, slightly more than half the voters said John McCain’s choice of Sarah Palin was not a factor at all or was a minor factor in their vote. McCain lost those voters, 53 to 45 percent. Amazingly, 41 percent said the Palin choice was an important factor in their vote. McCain won those voters 51 to 48 percent. It’s also the case that McCain’s best stretch was the two weeks in early September after he picked Palin. So it seems unlikely that Palin hurt McCain’s chances.

Duh-duh duh-duh duh-duh duh-duh da duh, now wouldn’t ya, Sarah Cuda?

By AJC/DNC Management

November 15, 2008 7:23 PM | Link to this

They are not the Republican Party. They remain wedded to the idea that the party is a party of moderation — the party that can’t make up its mind about what is right to do and what is wrong to do. So they try to come down in the middle.

They forget that Abraham Lincoln, the first Republican president, warned us not to believe there “is some middle ground” between what is right and what is wrong.

The grass roots haven’t forgotten that and the election results prove it. The “values voters” are alive and well, and they spoke loud and clear where values were at stake. In Florida, which he recalls Obama won, the margin of victory for values voters was even more substantial — 62 percent of Floridians voted against gay marriage, while only 38 percent voted in favor.-Michael Reagan

Or we can do what the pinko media wants us to do, like we have the last 4 years.

By Ima Marxist

November 15, 2008 7:26 PM | Link to this

This post from a blog (macon.com)sums up the Obama socialist/Marxist group:

carpediem wrote on 11/15/2008 08:46:06 AM: “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money from the public treasure. From that moment on the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most money from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world’s great civilizations has been two hundred years. These nations have progressed through the following sequence: from bondage to spiritual faith, from spiritual faith to great courage, from courage to liberty, from liberty to abundance, from abundance to selfishness, from selfishness to complacency from complacency to apathy, from apathy to dependency, from dependency back to bondage.� Alexander Tyler writing on the fall of the Athenian Republic

By AJC/DNC Management

November 15, 2008 7:31 PM | Link to this

And yet the implications of a bailout are frightening. The Detroit Three were unprofitable well before the current financial crisis hit, and GM is reportedly hemorrhaging $1 billion a month. The huge cost of lavish employee and retiree health care benefits, negotiated with the United Auto Workers (UAW), makes it impossible for the companies to sell for a profit anything but the big cars and SUVs that, after gas prices hit $4 a gallon last spring, almost no one wants to buy.-Michael Barone

Michigan voted for the libs, let the libs put their as-ses on the line if they want to bail them out.

Stay the hell out of it, Bushie.

By Greg Mendel

November 15, 2008 7:33 PM | Link to this

TN Gelding”

RE: Failures from the past explained:

Wingnuts do not remember the past eight years. Selective amnesia prevents them from taking the personal responsibility they demand from everyone but themselves. They voted for, and fawned over, the worst president in American history — twice — but now pretend he never existed. (He’s still their president, of course, and still wrecking the nation.)

Since wingnuts don’t recall Dubya, or acknowledge times were good under Bill Clinton, who left the treasury with a surplus, “the past” must be relocated to an earlier time. Since they don’t want to recall Nixon, Bush I, or Herbert Hoover, they have to go back to Abraham Lincoln. Not much going on in Lincoln’s time — except a civil war!

Oops! I forgot Saint Ronald of Reagan — the man who ran up the largest deficit in American history — before Bush topped him — and founded the Great Wingnut Delusion. Reagan presided over a de facto coup, complete with a secret, separate government (the Iran/Contra conspiracy), but that was a Republican success — almost.

So, the “failures from the past,” in wingnut circles, pretty much boils down to failure to make a profit from the Black Death. A Democratic failure, obviously.

By AJC/DNC Management

November 15, 2008 7:41 PM | Link to this

Community bankers tell me that they are now at a competitive disadvantage for being careful about who to lend to, because others that were less disciplined will get a federal bailout. This is also true for states. Those that have been fiscally responsible will pay for or lose out to the big spenders. California increased spending 95% over the past 10 years (federal spending went up 71% over the same period). To bail out California now seems unfair to fiscally prudent states.-Mr. Sanford, a Republican, is the governor of South Carolina.

By the way, KKKalifornia is run by a moderate Republican.

See what I mean?

By AJC/DNC Management

November 15, 2008 8:10 PM | Link to this

Aahhh, yes, “change we can count on:”

Stephanie Cutter, a transition spokeswoman, said in a written statement that the transition team reflected what she called Mr. Obama’s “commitment to change the way Washington does business and curb the influence of lobbyists on our government.”

Really?

Some appear to skirt the edges of the ban on working in areas of the transition where they have recently lobbied. Handling some Interior Department issues is Keith Harper, who lobbied earlier this year for Native American tribes. Overseeing the Consumer Products Safety Commission is Pamela Gilbert, a former executive director of the agency who as recently as two years ago lobbied for a consumer advocacy group. Within the last year she has lobbied for the company Barr Laboratories, for an investor group, and for an antitrust enforcement group.

*Among the group handling the Justice Department and civil rights areas of the transition is Theodore Shaw, a litigator for an arm of the N.A.A.C.P. *

David J. Hayes, part of the 12-member group overseeing the transition and co-head of the team handling the areas of energy and natural resources, is the chairman of the environmental practice at the law and lobbying firm Latham & Watkins. He was personally registered as a lobbyist as recently as 2006, for clients including San Diego Gas and Electric.

Sally Katzen, another member of the supervisory group who is also on teams for the office of the president and government operations, was registered last year to lobby for the pharmaceutical company Amgen on Medicare reimbursements. Louisa Terrell, another member of the top working group, is on leave from the public policy office of the Internet company Yahoo! Tom Wheeler, another of the 12, is on leave from a firm that invests in technology companies and before 2004 lobbied for the cable television and wireless industries.

John L. White, a former Clinton official charged with overseeing the new Defense Department, is a partner in a firm that invests in defense contractors. Michael Warren, charged with overseeing Treasury, is chief operating officer of a firm that lobbies for clients including the U.S.-India Business Council.

Several of the officials have ties to Fannie Mae, the government-backed mortgage firm whose implosion this fall contributed to the financial meltdown. Thomas Donilon, overseeing the State Department, is a partner in the law and lobbying firm O’Melveny and Myers who until three years ago lobbied for Fannie Mae. Wendy R. Sherman, the other official charged with reviewing the State Department, once headed Fannie Mae’s charitable foundation.

Even Mr. Lu, the transition’s executive director charged with policing potential conflicts of interests, may have his own appearance problems. His wife, Kathryn Thomson, is a lawyer who represents corporate clients dealing with federal environmental regulations, while his older brother, Curtis Lu, is a top lawyer for Fannie Mae.

Is it physically possible for a democrat to open their mouth without having a lie emerge from it?

By Greg Mendel

November 15, 2008 8:27 PM | Link to this

“Is it physically possible for a democrat to open their mouth without having a lie emerge from it?”

Not if he is quoting a Republican.

By getalife

November 15, 2008 9:08 PM | Link to this

I have the audacity to hope Obama can be as great as President Clinton.

At least Obama is smart enough to surround himself with veterans of the Clinton administration.

He should hire all of them including Hillary.

By RW-(the original)

November 15, 2008 9:13 PM | Link to this

getalife,

You better muster the audacity to hope LSU can come back from the beating Troy is putting on them.

By Chad Harris

November 15, 2008 9:15 PM | Link to this

HRC will not be SOS despite the media’s 48 hour fetish binge on the topic.

1) She is terribly unqualified for the position despite all the hype. She has no real experience or background that the position requires. Her travels as wife of a President didn’t substantively advance her knowledge and she has amounted to a cipher on the 3 subcommittes of Senate Armed Forces including the one charged with Senate oversight of Afghanistan.

Afghanistan has actually been a clusterfck of an operation as has been Pakistan, Iraq, and Iran and HRC had oversight of all of them. However, it’s not as if Bushco gave a rat’s a* about what she thought anyway.

2) The Clintons, while not required to vet as rigorously for SOS as VP have refused to release the same documents now as then

Those would be

1) 2007 Clinton Tax Returns 2) Clinton Foundation Contributors 3) Clinton Library Contributors

and this is because all of them open the Clinton’s to possible investigation for illegal financial dealings.

Meanwhile, back at the Transition Ranch, the former Clinton friend who provided Hill and Bill their first love shack for $75 a month at Yale, Williams and Connolly’s Greg Craig has been appointed White House Counsel although the media is behind the curve on that one.

Craig was responsible for Obama’s reprehensibly cowardly vote on FISA voting with the thugs for wiretapping your phone, your email, and any other communications while you are in or out of the states. Welcome to 1984. You’re in it.

By Greg Mendel

November 15, 2008 9:16 PM | Link to this

*”Several of the officials have ties to Fannie Mae, the government-backed mortgage firm whose implosion this fall contributed to the financial meltdown.” — AC/DC

Ties to Fannie Mae? You failed to mention some others who have “ties to Fannie Mae.” Among them are Fannie Mae’s 6500 employees, and the employees of all the banks, etc., who have “ties” to Fannie Mae loan guarantees. That would be about half of the mortgage market, which would represent several hundred thousand people. Not to mention several million mortgagees and their “ties” to Fannie Mae.

My guess is you have “ties” to Fannie Mae. So, using your pristine logic, YOU are complicit in the financial meltdown. Congratulate yourself!

By Chad Harris

November 15, 2008 9:34 PM | Link to this

@AJC/DNC management—

The Obama transition team’s ethics on lobbing are a paradigm shift better than any other administration in this or the last century. I wouldn’t get lathered up over it. Everyone of the connections don’t rise to the level of significant conflicts, and if you want to examine lobbying seamlessly integrating with an administration take a look at the last eight years of the Bush clusterf*ck and you’ll see some genuine conflicts or McLoser’s campaign staff, particularly the recently fired tutor of Sarah Moron Randy Scheunemann who actively lobbied for more anti-American contingents than you have fingers.

Or you can examine McCain top advisor and speech writer Rick Davis, who until 8/08 was getting 30 grand a month from Fanny and Freddie.

Problems with those? Of course not.

By AJC/DNC Management

November 15, 2008 9:49 PM | Link to this

Chad: I have a problem with Oblahmi lying about lobbyists in his transition team.

Why would he even say such a thing, is it pathological or is he a moron?

You decide which.

~~~~~

Greg: I never headed Fannie Mac’s charitable organization nor do I even know why they would have one. Is this part of their federal charter, to give money away? Something tells me ACORN was probably a recipient of some large amounts of federal tax dollars.

Duh.

By california voter

November 15, 2008 10:07 PM | Link to this

to all the obama haters:

—obama won; he’s soon to be your president.

—hillary lost

—get over it!

By california voter

November 15, 2008 10:09 PM | Link to this

to all the obama haters:

—obama won; he’s soon to be your president.

—hillary lost

—get over it!

By Mr. Snarky

November 15, 2008 10:19 PM | Link to this

If he offers it to her, she’d be smart to take it. It’s not often one has a chance to be Secretary of State. There are 100 Senators, 50 Governors and only 1 Secretary of State, and its a pretty cool job. From Obama’s standpoint, having Hillary on your team would be a plus…I’m sure he would use her input not just on matters of foreign policy.

By GaLiberal

November 15, 2008 10:43 PM | Link to this

It’s very disturbing there are so many people and groups that want to see President-elect Obama killed. Gun shop owners are having Obama sales, the KKK, white supremists, and skinheads are getting record numbers of new members. Bar owners are taking bets when Obama will be killed and hoping there is a winner. These are the Republican voters that put Bush and the Rethuglicons in charge for the last eight years. This is the face of the Rethuglicon Party, The Party of Hate and Bigotry. The voters in CA banned gay marriage because these hateful and bigoted people ran ads claiming that it would harm children. A tatic right out of the Rove/Atwater Rethuglicon playbook. Tell lies and make people afraid. Makes me sick to see what these people did to this country. I hope the Democrats can hold power for many years to come.

By Chad Harris

November 15, 2008 10:51 PM | Link to this

@AJC/DNC:

He’s factual President of the US since Junia the dimwit is drooling while the financial markets crumble and he takes your money and gives it to anything that moves, and formally President Obama. That’s which.

I don’t feel sorry for all of you who are going to spend significant time in a relatively short life snarling and p** and moaning that your party pushed a right wingnut agenda that got you creamed but I would advise you it’s a waste of time. Get a book list or a hobby. Try reading for a change. I know it’s not something Palin inspires, but it can be worthwhile.

By jon

November 16, 2008 12:51 AM | Link to this

california voter @ 10:07 I’ll support Obama just as you have supported our current President.

GaLiberal@10:43 Playing the race / oppression / won’t give our man a chance card a little early, aren’t you?

By dem bones

November 16, 2008 1:04 AM | Link to this

socialism will be a failed idealogy in 4 years.

patience.

By How To Field Dress A L••••••, If You Must (Mad As Zell)

November 16, 2008 4:37 AM | Link to this

Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State?

Hitlery Rotham KKKlintoon as anything remotely involving government or leadership is a nightmare, but I’ll take it over her being President, Supreme Court Justice, or Senate Majority Leader. Even though Obama is a flaming liberal and a committed marxist, Hitlery is much, much, much more slash-and-burn when it comes to “dealing” with her opposition. So I guess that makes Obama Hussein a relative pleasure to deal with when compared to the Hitleress.

By Frederick Douglass

November 16, 2008 7:13 AM | Link to this

dem bones I might be bad wrong, but if Obama turns out to be a socialist, I’ll eat my hat. You and your ilk are just angry because your side lost, on top of that, you’re also misinformed. How about reading up on issues, instead of taking your marching orders from the trifecta of high school droputs, Limbaugh, Hannity, and Beck.

By AJC/DNC Management

November 16, 2008 7:26 AM | Link to this

So much for civility, scumbag liberals leaving b****** hate speech unmolested by the angry blog god-

By GaLiberal November 15, 2008 10:43 PM It’s very disturbing there are so many people and groups that want to see President-elect Obama killed. This is the face of the Rethuglicon Party, The Party of Hate and Bigotry.

Yeah, I know, Hillary Clinton dreams about it.

Now it’s your turn, Mofo, show us one instance of these many things you “know” about, POS.

The voters in CA banned gay marriage because these hateful and bigoted people ran ads claiming that it would harm children. A tatic right out of the Rove/Atwater Rethuglicon playbook.

Whoever thought that a “tatic” right out of the Rove/Atwater Rethuglicon playbook would work so well with black democrat voters.

GFY.

By dcp

November 16, 2008 7:26 AM | Link to this

State needs someone who knows how to lead and also possess impeccable character on a multi lateral level. Hillary would not be that type of person. She would alienate the masses at State when people need to be working cohesively. Richardson would be the better choice as he has shown to be calm, non controversial, and his personal life has been without a blemish, surviving intact the Clinton administration era. Plus, he would signal that Obama is really about change.

By AJC/DNC Management

November 16, 2008 7:29 AM | Link to this

By Chad Harris November 15, 2008 10:51 PM @AJC/DNC: He’s factual President of the US since Junia the dimwit is drooling while the financial markets crumble and he takes your money and gives it to anything that moves, and formally President Obama. That’s which.

Hey Chad, let’s try this again after you’ve sobered up a bit, K?

I’ll give you a mulligan on this one.

By Now That is Entertainment

November 16, 2008 7:48 AM | Link to this

I just thought that Andy and Dusty were the entertaining ones on this blog — ‘til now. Mad as Zell is the funny one. Sorry Andy and Dusty but you two have been brought down a few notches in the comedy rankings. Good show, Mad.

By One Voice

November 16, 2008 11:56 AM | Link to this

I’d rather see Hillary on the Supreme Court and Richardson as Sec of State. She’d have a lifetime appointment and there’d be no risk of her and President Obama stepping on each others’ toes.

By Copyleft

November 17, 2008 7:56 AM | Link to this

I think Hillary would do better as Secretary of Health & Human Services.

The one area where she beat Obama during the nomination and primaries was her superior healthcare plan.

By Carlos Navarro

November 30, 2008 9:44 AM | Link to this

Barack Obama’s decision to offer Hillary Clinton the Secretary of State post could well turn out to be his first major blunder, for these obvious reasons:

First, there’s the inseparable bond with her husband Bill. Given the duo’s unquenchable thirst for power, they would not be content to play second fiddle. From day one they would be scheming to usurp control of the White House. Once they get a foothold, Obama would be hard-pressed to rein them in.

Then, there’s the Clintons’ long history of corruption, deception and sleaze—Whitewatergate, Pardongate, Cattle-futuresgate, Chinagate, Filegate, F******, the plundering of White House property, the using of uniformed Marines as waiters, the impeachment and near conviction, the punitive IRS audits, the violent deaths of potentially incriminating witness. This alone would provide Obama’s enemies with all the grime they needed to smear his presidency.

Consider further that unlike a Condoleezza Rice or a Madelaine Albright—not to mention bona fide statesmen like Henry Kissinger, Dean Rusk and John Foster Dulles—Hillary Clinton lacks the educational and cultural gravitas to represent our nation abroad. Her lawyering in Arkansas and stint in Congress don’t quite cut it. She did get 18 million votes in the Democratic primaries, probably more than Obama, but a large proportion of those votes were cast by diehard feminists and the less educated, hardly the constituency whose support lends credibility to a Secretary of State.

Barack Obama should recall the reasons why he didn’t choose Hillary as his VP running mate. For his and the nation’s sake, let us hope that she changes her mind and spurns the Secretary of State offer. Her coyness in her reaching decision—making Obama beg, in effect—is already an ominous sign.