Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

I like the idea of Sen. Clinton as Secretary of State.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Guaranteed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-07-08 06:19 PM
Original message
I like the idea of Sen. Clinton as Secretary of State.
Edited on Fri Nov-07-08 06:20 PM by BullGooseLoony
More than Richardson or Kerry, even, both of whom I think would do a great job.

But there's something about putting the Clinton face on our foreign policy- that mixture of kindness and toughness- that I think would do our country and the world very well.


It just sounds right, more than any other position for her, more than her staying in the Senate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Captain Hilts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-07-08 06:22 PM
Response to Original message
1. I don't know.
I know the Middle East wants Bubba back.

Hard to say about her. Or any of Obama's whiz kids for that matter.

They really like Bubba over there. Send Bubba as an envoy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Guaranteed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-07-08 06:23 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Well, that's part of what I'm saying- Bill can't be SoS because
he'd be in the line of succession to the Presidency.

But Hillary could- and she and her husband would have the whole world in front of them to work with.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Captain Hilts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-07-08 06:26 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. I think he could, but it would be weird. He needs a bigger sandbox than the one he's got. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cosmocat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-08-08 06:47 AM
Response to Reply #3
33. It's not going to happen ...
1) I don't think Hill steps away from her Senate seat - really, you can count on one hand the number of positions that have more power/influence than senator. And, SHE maintains control of her career. People kind of lose sight of this when they toss around Senators/Governors for these jobs. These people work DARN hard, invest A LOT into getting elected into those jobs. And, in the case of senator, they have nice 6 year terms and often look like locks to be reelected (this is the case for Hill).

IMO, she stays in the Senate, maintains control over her own destiny, and figures out for herself if she wants to do anything difference.

2) BO already has tapped some Clinton people, and the Rs are already starting to shout about it being another Clinton term. BO's primary promise was to CHANGE Washington. Bringing in Hill in any capacity, or Bill outside of maybe some kind of specially appointed foreign relations type of position, actually legitimately offers fodder for people to say he isn't making good on that promise.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mikelgb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-07-08 06:28 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. I think that is bull just means that he is not eligible to assume office
Edited on Fri Nov-07-08 06:28 PM by mikelgb
off to the next one down the line
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-07-08 06:33 PM
Response to Reply #2
9. Albright was ineligable to be President
as was Kissinger and they were SOS.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-07-08 06:35 PM
Response to Reply #2
11. Actually, that's not true.
For starters, the term limits only apply to being elected, not assuming the office. Even if they did, though, you can have people in the line of succession who aren't eligible for the presidency: they're simply skipped.

That said, I don't think it's a good idea to have either Clinton in the cabinet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GodlessBiker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-07-08 07:06 PM
Response to Reply #2
16. But the 22nd Amendment says that no person shall be *elected* to be president more than twice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Guaranteed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-08-08 05:06 AM
Response to Reply #16
30. Wow- so Bill COULD have been tapped for V.P.
Edited on Sat Nov-08-08 05:12 AM by BullGooseLoony
22nd and 12th Amendments, Wiki:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

"While it is clear that under the Twelfth Amendment the original constitutional qualifications of age, citizenship, and residency apply to both the President and Vice President, it is unclear if a two-term President could later be elected—or appointed—Vice President. Some argue<5> that the Twenty-second Amendment and Twelfth Amendment bar any two-term President from later serving as Vice President as well as from succeeding to the presidency from any point in the United States presidential line of succession. Others contend that while a two-term President is ineligible to be elected or appointed to the office of Vice President, he or she could succeed from a lower position in the line of succession which he or she is not excluded from holding. Still others contend<6><7> that the Twelfth Amendment concerns qualification for service, while the Twenty-second Amendment concerns qualifications for election. Neither theory has ever been tested, as no former President has ever sought the Vice Presidency, and thus, the courts have never had an opportunity to decide the question."



Doesn't make much sense to me that he can't be V.P., but he can succeed to the Presidency from below.

Can you reconcile that with some kind of reasoning?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GodlessBiker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-08-08 09:44 AM
Response to Reply #30
35. "No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice." The Amendment seems...
to make it clear. It doesn't say "No person shall become President more than twice."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mass Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-07-08 07:14 PM
Response to Reply #2
21. Not true - Kissinger and Albright are ineligible for the presidency, but still were SoS
They would just be skipped to the next person.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Guaranteed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-08-08 05:14 AM
Response to Reply #21
31. Delete nt
Edited on Sat Nov-08-08 05:15 AM by BullGooseLoony
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TexasProgresive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-07-08 09:50 PM
Response to Reply #2
28. I believe that would not prohibit him
He is barred from a third elected term but to succeed to the presidency is allowed. Order of succession:
The Vice President
Speaker of the House
President pro tempore of the Senate
Secretary of State
Secretary of the Treasury
Secretary of Defense
Attorney General
Secretary of the Interior D
Secretary of Agriculture
Secretary of Commerce
Secretary of Labor
Secretary of Health and Human Services
Secretary of Housing and Urban Development
Secretary of Transportation
Secretary of Energy
Secretary of Education
Secretary of Veterans Affairses
Secretary of Homeland Security
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eleny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-07-08 06:27 PM
Response to Original message
4. It would be hard for her to be at the center of health reform
I've been anticipating her spearheading this effort with President Obama. How exciting and it's also justice for her that she is the one who can get it through the Senate. She's waited patiently for many years to see this happen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-07-08 06:33 PM
Response to Reply #4
10. Waited....instead of fighting harder for it.
.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eleny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-07-08 06:58 PM
Response to Reply #10
14. That's not how I remember it
The Republicans slapped it down with the help of the American public who fell for the Insurance company fear tactics. There was only so much they could do given the political climate. Before it was over she was demonized.

We Americans are as much to blame for not fighting for it, for being just do dumb, imo.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-07-08 06:31 PM
Response to Original message
6. Trust.
Edited on Fri Nov-07-08 06:32 PM by blm
And why would anyone want those who protected IranContra and BCCI matters for BushInc to be involved at this point in our history? If it was up to Clintons Dubai would be in control of our ports TODAY. The fascist agenda continued? Please....NO!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Faygo Kid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-07-08 06:32 PM
Response to Original message
7. She's needed in the Senate. This isn't going to happen.
She is building seniority, and has a chance to move health care, if we can straighten out Bush's destruction of the economy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
4themind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-07-08 06:32 PM
Response to Original message
8. I think she's more concerned about heath care reform, and the senate or
Edited on Fri Nov-07-08 06:35 PM by 4themind
HHS would be a better job for that purpose (although Dean apparently wants it). Also they disagree under which circumstance foreign leaders should be talked toRegardless of which method you or I think is right, it was a pretty public spat and I think its important that both people be on the same page on such an important matter, especially so that foreign leaders get a better sense that the negotiators and the president are on a unified front and that both believe what they say. I favor richardson because he has actually put the "hours" in., with negotiating with foreign leaders, and has had recordable successes (Bush administration fucked up his work with the North Koreans after he left)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beacool Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-07-08 06:37 PM
Response to Original message
12. Well, I don't know..........
She would have to pry it from Kerry's cold hands. I hear that he's actively lobbying for the job.

As for Richardson, screw him. I don't like people who backstab friends.

:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mass Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-07-08 07:13 PM
Response to Reply #12
20. And both men would be better than her. It would be nice for the Clintons fans to grow up
Edited on Fri Nov-07-08 07:15 PM by Mass
She could be a great senator and a future majority leader, if she wants. Why would she want to be in the cabinet, taking orders from Obama.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beacool Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-07-08 08:40 PM
Response to Reply #20
26. I'm fully grown, thank you.
But I do agree with you that I don't think that Hillary would want to be in Obama's cabinet. Why would she when she has more power in the senate?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Whisp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-07-08 07:18 PM
Response to Reply #12
22. """I don't like people who backstab friends.""""
hahahah!

I won't say it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
qwlauren35 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-07-08 06:45 PM
Response to Original message
13. Please, no. Keep her in the Senate!!!
At the end of one's cabinet term, there's no reclaiming a Senate seat. I can't see how it would be worth while. She could be the next Kennedy. I think that's more important.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Poseidan Donating Member (630 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-07-08 07:05 PM
Response to Original message
15. clinton face on foreign policy?
Edited on Fri Nov-07-08 07:07 PM by Poseidan
Rather not. I'd take Richardson over Hillary.

Mrs. Clinton belongs in another role. Attorney General? Somewhere a dominatrix could be useful.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beacool Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-07-08 07:11 PM
Response to Reply #15
19. Dominatrix?
Please grow up!!!

x(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Danger Mouse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-07-08 07:20 PM
Response to Reply #15
23. Not funny.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beacool Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-07-08 08:41 PM
Response to Reply #23
27. Little boys will have their fantasies.
:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-07-08 07:07 PM
Response to Original message
17. No, no, no. Give her HHS. Give BILL SoS.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Faygo Kid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-07-08 07:24 PM
Response to Reply #17
25. Bill at the UN would be cool. But this isn't the 90s redux.
This isn't Clinton Administration II.

She needs to be a powerful voice in the Senate, and I frankly think others would be better as SoS than Bill.

As UN ambassador, he would be fine, but even there, potentially a loose cannon. I want him to play a role, but let's trust President Obama to use his talents best.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mass Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-07-08 07:10 PM
Response to Original message
18. Best way to say Obama is not his own man: put a Clinton in the cabinet, particularly
Edited on Fri Nov-07-08 07:12 PM by Mass
when there are people better qualified than she is for the job (and quite a few).

In addition, why would she quit a job where she can be an important figure for years, for a place where she will be there for 4 years?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Danger Mouse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-07-08 07:20 PM
Response to Original message
24. No thanks. She will be more effective in the Senate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spider Jerusalem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-07-08 09:52 PM
Response to Original message
29. I think it's a dreadful idea, personally.
And I don't see where her foreign policy experience is as extensive as either Richardson's or Kerry's. Exactly what qualifications does she bring to the office apart from being named Clinton?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mtnester Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-08-08 06:30 AM
Response to Original message
32. She would be perfect for SCOTUS
after all, John McCain thought she had plenty of experience didn't he? That argument could absolutely be used on any Repub objection. McCain absolutely swooned over her trying to get her supporters to vote for him (they did not)...and I had plenty of pieces of mail on my table where he had her face, her image, and her words touting her as completely qulified for damn near anything (I live in Ohio, we got it ALL)

Yet one more way to swat McCain with his own ugly campaign. The damaging stuff we can use against he and the entire party is priceless.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vinca Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-08-08 07:21 AM
Response to Original message
34. I'm concerned about depleting the Senate of our most powerful members. nt
Edited on Sat Nov-08-08 07:21 AM by Vinca
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon May 06th 2024, 05:04 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC