Is Hillary REALLY the best nominee for Secretary of State? Check this out from Germany's Die Welt.Sometimes I feel like our government's one big house of prostitution. It's all Pay AND Play, huh?
Who do you think would have been a better nominee?
z
55 comments:
Oh and Z, I'm waiting for your Trabant story...
Lets see how much $46 million can buy.
According to the linked article:
"Clinton made public the names of about 200,000 contributors to his foundation since it was formed in 1997, as part of a deal with President-elect Barack Obama to clear the way for his wife Hillary's nomination as secretary of state and to avoid any appearance of conflict of interest."
I feel sooo much better now that he disclosed this information. There is a lot of 'closure' that I get from the tone of this article.
At least Obama can count on the media to spin everything they can to benefit their chosen Messiah.
For a better Secretary of State than Hillary you can start with Fred Flintstone and work your way up.
$46m? You mean $492m, don't you, FN?
Let's face it, the millionaire's behind the UN's NGOs now own America's foreign policy AGAIN.
Looking at this list of contradictory donors I wonder who the heck actually owns this obviously bought and paid for politician.
The "party of the little guy" once again comes through for the billionaires and they're not even American billionaires.
The rich and the poor will be OK under Obama. It's the working class, middle class, and affluent who are going to bend over and take it for the Chosen One.
(Sorry about deleting, too many spelling errors.)
What contradictory donors?
The Saudis?
I don't know why conservatives are so upset about Hillary's appointment.
She's mildly hawkish and would absolutely never make a scary face to an Israeli.
What else do you want? I know, you're all just dying to drop a couple dirty ones on Iran and do more harm than good in your bumbling manner.
Love the prostitution tie-in Z.
Ducky, the left ripped Rice who had tremendous qualifications for Sec'y of State. Ripped Powell who had tremendous qualifications for Sec'y of State (until he showed his true stripes and endorsed Obama, then he was a genius). Now Hillary, who has no qualifications what-so-ever, is expected to get a pass. You guys are incredible.
Next thing I will read is that Caroline Kennedy should be Senator of NY even though she has no qualifications. That would just be rediculous.
To be fair, even though I do not like Hillary, I see her as qualified for Homeland Security. Her work after 9/11 was good stuff. Plus, she's got the biggest balls of anyone in the Democratic party.
Z, I think Carl Levin would have been a good choice for SOS in an Obama administration. He's got a significant history on foreign policy and, in keeping with the Obama theory of national security, he's got a long history of being willing to surrender at all costs. He's perfect for Obama.
Sorry, Z, I'm off my meds again. lol
This matter is UNSPEAKABLE!
American POLITICS are UNSPEAKABLE.
The Devil reigns supreme in Washington, DC.
MERRY CHRISTMAS!
~ FreeThinke
I was not planning to visit anyone. I am not in the mood for one, second that mood is because today is the 13th anniversary of my son who was Autistic - his death, which I put up on my blog. I do not even leave the house on the 22nd of December and today is the first time I sent my second Autistic child to school on the 22nd out of fear it would happen to him too.
But I wanted you to know I am not so selfish as to not want to wish you a very Merry Christmas.
FT: I fear you're right!! A bit nuts but....!! (Merry Christmas to YOU, too!!!)
Freedom, I answered your Trabant story...no biggie, but I think it's worth reading! Great article there, by the way And congrats for being picked up by that other blog.
Chuck, the prostitution thing just made SENSE, sadly. PAY and PLAY, huh?! (not that you'd know, of course!!HA!) (would you!)
Also, my favorite line about the Chicago scandals now is that we all know obama would NEVER participate in dirty illinois politics because HE got elected on his merits!....except he has none. Uhoh.
yes, Caroline will get the job; she doesn't have to know anything, just be a Kennedy. The left likes that. She adores her uncle the "Chappaquidick Water Walker", too...she's IN.
Shoprat; there are some now saying the obama people are going to make it as difficult as possible for the affluent, you're right....after all, make it harder to hire, harder to afford sweeping health care prices and you've got a whole class of hiring-types who won't be able to hire anymore: Hence, WPG, CCC, and all the big new plans obama has for PUBLIC WORKS. THE GOV'T WILL HIRE YOU! (this is AMERICA?)
Ducky; Again, I ask you to read the article. You aren't worried about a woman out making deals around the world whose husband has played LET'S MAKE A DEAL around the world...giving "WHAT?" for his huge profit ("for his library"?)....what's he done to merit to much? It's sensible to ask if there are CONFLICTS OF INTEREST.
My dear LIZ...thank you for coming by in spite of your terrible pain today.
I'll be praying that tomorrow, the memories are put aside for a bit and you and your family celebrate Christmas in the very beautiful sentiment you describe on your blog (whose re-doing looks amazing, by the way)
My most sincere thanks for coming by and know you'll be in my prayers.
Merry Christmas, honey.
Say goodbye to the Constitution. Say goodbye to any sort of scruples regarding conflict of interest in foreign relations.
We seem to be evolving an aristocracy that runs the government. Caroline Kennedy can apparently become a Senator with no better qualifications than being a not so good actress. Hillary can be Secretary of State if it buys The One some good will on the part of her supporters. Bush I and Bush II, both of whom I voted for, constitute a dynasty that hopefully we have seen the last of. Maybe we'd be better off choosing our leadership by lot.
Chuck, Rice was a nobody who got her Ph.D. at one of the biggest party schools in the country where her father just happened to be dean.
Stop with the "tremendously qualified".
Now, Hillary has yet to be sworn in so we'll see. Just what did Condo accomplish in her time in the job or as National Security Advisor.
She was severely criticized because she deserved to be criticized.
Chuck, does Kennedy meet all the Constitutional requirements? Then she's qualified.
Would you rather it be Cuomo's kid and have him fighting it out for face time with Chuck Schumer. Please, the right should learn when to count its blessings.
"Donors gave Clinton's foundation at least $492 million from its inception in 1997 through last year, according to the most recent figures available." Just wondering if we could an itemized list of what was spent and where? Just wondering out loud.
Blessings.
Saudi Arabia alone gave $10 million to $25 million to the William J. Clinton Foundation
So much for changing from GWB's family ties to the Saudis!
I'm hoping that Hillary Clinton, should she be confirmed as Secretary of State, will be more skeptical of Arab-Moslem interests in peace. But with all those donors from the Islamic nations, I have my doubts.
I have, however, read that some Islamic nations are all in a dither that some of the donations came from those with pro-Israel leanings.
I have no idea as to who would be a good choice for Secretary of State. At least BHO didn't nominate Wesley Clark!
Maybe we'd be better off choosing leaders who actually have experience and good character and dignity?
We're about the only country who gives ambassadorships as gifts to lamebrains with tons of money, too.
Most everywhere else, they have career diplomats who work themselves through the ranks, preparing them to take the bigger, more important country positions.
Ours have tea well, though, I'm sure.
I.H.S..ya, wouldn't it be nice to have things broken down? I'd like to see who gave Obama money, too, but THAT won't happen..ever.
And I'd like to see exactly why the banks we gave money to can't tell us how they spent it? WHAT THE HECK ARE THEY TALKING ABOUT?
I'll be back.......thanks for the great comments, everyone..
A study from the AP about banks who had their hands out paid their execs $1.6 BILLION dollars last year. And now THIS year they can't make it?
The best Congress money can BUY.
BZ
BZ...did you hear Congress just gave themselves a $5000 raise? I'm hoping it's not true.
I would think that Joe Lieberman would have been a good SOS or Defense in a McCain administration. He's almost as smart on foreign policy as that noted guru Average Joe Biden. And he knows there's four letter in "jobs." As for having balls, I think he has taken on his party much more than Hillary. As for his other positions, I agree with him almost not at all. I admire his courage and intellect, not his politics. BO could really show his apolitical approach to government with that appointment.
I must admit without equivocation; that when it comes to politics I am very much a neophite, and so I ask looking for an honest response..."why not leave C. Rice as SOS? Hasn't she done a good job for the country and isn't that what we want from our government officials, to do good work on behalf of the country and not the party? Help me out here.
Blessings.
Hi, I.H.S....
I am not as erudite as some of the commenters here, by a long shot, but I know one of our frustrations has been how she's been eager to divide Israel up for peace in the area, something most of us don't want to see happen.
Who knows how much of all she's done is HERS and how much is the administration's bidding, we'll never know.
I adored COndi and was thrilled when she was selected, but I haven't seen anything that I was thrilled about since. Except I admire her intelligence and talents very much.
Anybody else want to chime in better on Condi's performance these last years?
thanks, I.H.S...good question.
Blessings to you!!
A quick follow-up question to the first. Leaning on what you have given me concerning Condi and the idea of dividing Israel for the sake of peace then I can understand why not her, but seeing as how this position is crucial to our influence and reputation as a country then why not someone that has done the job before as opposed to someone just coming in. I mean just because you have visited many different countries while your husband was president doesn't make you qualified for the post of SOS does it? Hope I'm not beating a dead horse with my questions.
Blessings.
why not ask J-lo to be the next Senator from NY duhkkky
"I don't know what Caroline Kennedy's qualifications are. Except that she has name recognition, but so does J-Lo."
-- Rep. Gary Ackerman, D-N.Y.
The problem with Caroline Kennedy's presumption to Hillary Clinton's soon-to-be-vacated Senate seat is not lack of qualification or experience. The Senate houses lots of inexperienced rookies -- wealthy businessmen, sports stars, even the occasional actor.
The problem is Kennedy's sense of entitlement. Given her rather modest achievements, she is trading entirely on pedigree.
I'm not sure I understand your question, IHS....I'm not for Clinton coming in mostly because of her husband's connections(at least she does seem to understand the terror threat better than most in the upcoming administration, from what I can tell)
Who's been in the job before?
I'm hoping we have someone who still does love America as WE know her, not the new "lean on the govt for everything" America we're having pushed on us these days.
I don't know who I'd pick for SOS but I think Liberman wouldn't have been a bad choice...except he's ticked the Dems off by having supported McCain, so he's barely alive politically right now.
"trading entirely on pedigree." E.B. it seems these days that's enough.
Blessings.
I.H.S....don't you think it should never be enough, never have been enough?
Yes, pedigree gives an advantage of elegant manners at public events, knowing the 'right people', and we can't deny those things ARE important in political life...Caroline Kennedy and, for that matter, Hillary Clinton, have those things, no doubt about it. And Condi Rice, come to think of it...beautifully raised, beautiful demeanor, ALWAYS.
For Senator, I guess somebody's got to start somewhere, and Caroline has experience of having been in the public eye, but it seems to me it's so clear that she's cashing in on her name since she's never held any public office at all.........
Hillary's connections with her husband's new millions is what's bothering ME, BIG TIME. I hate thinking America's for sale and Mr. Clinton seems to have thought it was.
Condi's going to write a book....that might show where she differed with the administration, etc..should be very interesting.
Z, maybe not so much someone that has done the job before, but maybe like someone stated earlier; perhaps move someone up in the ranks that have been doing foreign policy work for at least 15years. I think Ret.Gen. Colin Powell had it before Rice, not sure though. Maybe I should just stick to the church and leave the politics to everyone else, besides I don't fall in the "mold" that society says I should be in anyway seeing as how I don't believe in the "government to the rescuse" premise.
Blessings.
It was I who mentioned that career type of job, but that works mostly with ambassadorships.
One should move up in the ranks so one learns along the way, right? I think so. BUT, we have had great senators who didn't. EXCEPT many have been mayors or governors or owned business or SOMETHING..and I think all of that helps.
Women who married fame or grew up in famous families don't seem to me to be automatically equipped to represent us in such important jobs.
I will accede that Hillary's done a lot of work in the senate so, were it not for the very questionable husband connections, I'd not be too dismayed at her nomination.
I'm glad you don't believe in 'government to the rescue'..I'm not surprised, though.
Blessings! So happy to have you here.
- Charles Krauthammer wrote that last quote. Sorry. I thought I included his name at the end of it, but here's some more. He makes sense.
the Founders were not democrats. They believed in aristocracy. But their idea was government by natural -- not inherited -- aristocracy, an aristocracy of "virtue and talents," as Jefferson put it.
"Democracy means government by the uneducated, while aristocracy means government by the badly educated."
Chesterton, Gilbert K.
I'm waiting to see if Hillary vacated her Senate seat just to be fired later by Obama.
THAT would be fitting.
Oops sorry, $492 million.
Thanks FJ
The $46m was my contribution in return for Hillary's Senate seat...
You know, if the Clinton creatures weren't so OVERWHELMINGLY corrupt and rotten to the core, Hillary wouldn't be that bad a pick. She's smart, tough, she could lick ANYONE in a pinch (okay I'll stop :-), aaaannnddd she's corrupt as hell! Too bad. We'll just have to survive these Cleptocrats for the next 4 years. BTW do you think she'll bring Huma Abedin with her on these foreign trips?
Morgan
Funny, Morgan...I once heard a radio DJ say something about Martina and the gals on the tennis court! LOL!
tsk tsk tsk!!
Ya, Hillary wouldn't be SO bad. If she weren't corrupt, she'd be probably pretty good. But, then, she'd not have made it this far, right?
"Ducky's here said...
Chuck, does Kennedy meet all the Constitutional requirements? Then she's qualified."
LOL!!! Is this the tune you were singing when Sarah Palin was chosen? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!
YOU ARE A JOKE DUCKLING!!!
You GOTTA tell us what they said about Martina Navritalova! Some of the funniest things happen on the radio in unscripted moments.
Morgan
Morgan..!! Exactly what you said about Hillary who can.......you know!
I almost died laughing..blowing my hair dry, I remember the moment, and the guy says "Boy, you know that Martina..she can ......any of the girls on the tennis court!"
HILARIOUS! but, of course....I'd never TELL you what he said !!!!
I am a big fan of SOS Rice. That said, I don't agree with some of the actions she has taken including the solution in Israel. However, SOS may be the hardest office to hold and be successful. By the very nature of it, it is a long term process and when it's all said and done you are negotiating with a whole group lunatics. When you depend on the word of some of these people you are basically barking at the moon. Ask Chamberlain post Munich Conference. It isn't surprising there have been very few successful ones. George Marshall and probably the most successful, John Quincy Adams, to name but two.
Law & Order, could you be specific about what you do like about Condi's years as SOS?
I'd like to know because while I haven't followed it SO close, I've always been disappointed as I had great hopes.
Oh, you're so right, Elbro......what chance did a conservative SOS like Condi have, anyway?
I think every dept in the US gov't needs cleaning out.......
but, I fear there aren't the people we need to go into the vacated jobs.
I once heard a hair raising lecture by a bigwig FBI guy, 20 years ago, who said "We get NO new applicants from the best schools and that's all we used to pull from...we can't get ONE person who hasn't done drugs or stolen.....we are in a terrible situation" I'll never forget it..it kind of haunts me to this day.
Did you see the HEADLINE on gleeful Yahoo yesterday? FBI ADMITS THEY HAVE TO SPEND TIME ON SCANDALS AND HAVE TO TAKE THAT TIME FROM ANTI TERRORISM WORK!
hONESTLY, it must be far easier to be a terrorist in this country and it feels to be an innocent American.......especially with our media working so hard against us.
Z, the sad part I'm beginning to see is that they do clean out the US gov't, unfortunately they call it the Presidential election.
Blessings.
Well, that's true, IHS...but the clean outs don't bring much improvement!
We just have to pray that we get America back as we know America, with respect for the constitution, an honest media (that'll be the day!) , and people putting the country before their careers.
I don't think it will ever happen.
"I don't think it will ever happen"...You're right Z. Especially since the country started embracing the "ME" concept. We are a country that sadly as a whole we're no longer our brother's keepers. There are a few, or as the scriptures put it, a remnant, that still believe, "WE ARE OUR BROTHER'S KEEPER".
My right arm no matter how important it is, can't live apart from the rest of my body it has to maintain connectivity to not only just be a part of the body, but most importantly to survive.
Blessings.
I kinda like that there will be no wing of the Democratic Party under-represented in the upcoming Obama thugocracy.
It makes it far easier to marginalize the whole lot of them.
Beamish....you never fail to make me laugh!
I.H.S...(DUH, it just now occurred to me that you are In His Service, is that right?!..what took me so long?)
How do you justify 'brother's keeper' and 'self-reliance' (giving people the fishing pole instead of the fish?) I believe some churches go overboard and are almost babying people in an effort to make others dependent on the gov't, almost applauding welfare, etc.; Now we'll have obama creating public works so people will work, BUT, it's the old Depression "antidote" which actually prolonged the depression...forcing people not to do on their own but to reach out to the government...when we should be reaching out to neighbors and friends for help......Maybe those days are over; particularly in times like this.
Maybe this is why we're in trouble and there is no optimism coming from obama (the single biggest problem I see in his administration is a lack of vision relying on the constitution and a lack of optimism) and that is contributing to a sense of doom which is scaring people into not buying, etc etc......well, I'm rambling, but I hope you get my question!!? OPTIMISM helps greatly and it could help Americans fight for their futures instead of going to gov't which, I believe, is what obama and his ilk are desirous of.
Z, yes you are correct, "In His Service". The way I look at 'brothers keeper' is this way.
I have brothers naturally and when I see they are in need of my help on whatever level that may be, I never just give them a hand-out of some type to satisfy their need right then I give them the tools to be able to take care of themselves.
The Lord said it this way, "follow me and I will make you fishers of men" he never once said follow me and I'll give you fish.
Unfortunately this is what I fear may be the mantra of the new administration..."follow me and i'll give you fish, it maybe somebody else's fish but I'm going to give it to you anyway".
Hope I explained my answer to your question well enough to make some sense.
Blessings.
I.H.S.
What a response! I couldn't agree with you more and I admire you very much.
that answer really touched me, tell you the truth!
Z,
As a manager and advocate I think Rice has been strong. She has not allowed the cult of liberalism based in the State Dept to override her goals. She has always tried to work within the framework of the president's plans while operating in a lunatic environment.
She has represented the US in an honorable way and I think generally has kept the lid on the Middle East, Iraq, India, Pakistan, Russia, Georgia, North Korea, etc.
The ruminations of our friends on the left aside, Iraq is going to be a success in that their fledgling democracy will survive. Unless throwing a pair shoes at the president is indicative of failure.
These areas are going to have the problems they've had for years to come. Any SOS for the forseeable future will have a great problem achieving a signature success. The people of these areas have to want to see their problems come to an end and right now that ain't happening anytime soon.
So the SOS is basically reduced to being a forest ranger for the world, trying to keep small fires from becoming big ones. Compared to the SOS of the last 40 or 50 years she's done fine. The only real success that a SOS has had recently, was George Schultz under Reagan with the missile treaties.
Otherwise, Kissinger got a cease fire in Vietnam, not so great, and opened negotiations with China, better. The job itself is almost by defintion not given to raving success. Who would want a job that almost guarantees failure is beyond me. I think the only measure of success is putting a brave face on foreign policy and being willing to back it up. The Bush administration has done this, I hope BO does the same. We'll see.
L&O..we know Obama's idea of foreign policy will be bending over backwards to apologize to the world for all we do; great philanthropy, saving whole civilizations, curing diseases...all those things which somehow get cast aside when WAR is in the picture!
WE DID WAR.....we BAD. *#@&$^#&
He's already all set to deliver a speech to muslims hoping to "REBOOT" OUR reputation..isn't that rich? Ya, we saved THEM and they attacked US and we need REBOOTING? I could SPIT (pardon me, but...seriously)!
As for COndi; I believe you might be right; that the Israel thing is Bush's idea, not hers. Sadly, it overshadows all my feelings about her..AND HIM, frankly. I hate 'squishy'...
I've got such a divided affection for Bush. I think he's a very good man but I think he ruined our party through not being able to be more articulate (not to mention the media detests him and wouldn't give him a break if he COULD put a simple sentence together which might have made Iraq, for example, more palatable to more Americans...we shouldn't ever have lost Tony Snow...as Media Person OR to death, of course, God rest his dear, sweet soul....though he was a member of the Trilateral Comm. too, so that worried me a little).
I'm rambling....thanks for your good response; I will be very eager to read COndi's book she's said she's going to write..and I don't usually read many works like that.
I have no problem with rich people being public servants, but see, the key word here is servant.
Democrat or Republican or Independent or what ever: a bunch of theives is what rules on Capital Hill.
THAT is the problem.
Biden's son is supposedly going to take his vacant seat.
This type of stuff is bad for the country.
And by the way , we are not supposed to be a democracy , but a republic.
This that we are witnessing is exactly what is wrong with a democracy.
Obviously we have a horrible bunch of people in the country who believe in nothing but enriching themselves and see all things in those terms.
They are corrupt, selfish and easily bought.
You realize that there would be no scandals really, if we had people , what ever their party , of high moral fiber, with honor ?
Character counts.
WVDOTTR
Post a Comment