SOS: Kerry or Clinton?

[ecstatic]

[Occam Bandage]

1. Richardson.

[LisaM]

14. What is it with this Richardson choice?

I think he would be a terrible choice. What do you see in him? (And yes, I'm prejudiced against him because he wanted to pipe Great Lakes water to New Mexico).

[karynnj]

What!

As a former Hoosier from a county boarding Lake Michigan, I think that is crazy. Aside from the ecological nightmare, how would he move the water? Create new rivers?

[LisaM]

30. Read it and weep

http://aquadoc.typepad.com/waterwired/2007/10/sharing-water-i.html


I do believe he's backed off a little (after an outcry). But still.

[karynnj]

54. Yuck - Then the rumours in that "leaked" flow chart of Dept of Interior

are worse than Secretary of State. That idea is asinine.

[blue_onyx]

49. This bothered me too

Back in 2007, when he announced he would run for president, I was excited to get to know him. Based on his experience, he seemed like a good option. But then he said that it's Iowa's god given right to go first in the primaries and followed that up with the crazy taking water from the Great Lakes idea. Sorry, but if you want water, don't move to the desert.

[LisaM]

52. Or build golf courses there.

Or think that Las Vegas doesn't need to take a serious look at itself.

[karynnj]

60. That idea is completely ridiculous

I wonder if someone should send him a copy of the movie Chinatown where water from a rural area of California was diverted to LA. The pictures of the former lake are like a lunar landscape.

[Life Long Dem]

61. We all voted for Obama because of these things.

Richardson didn't just pop up out of the blue today. He's been talked about being the SOS way back in the primary.

[Hippo_Tron]

67. He was UN Ambassador which is great prior experience for Secretary of State

Madeleine Albright was also UN Ambassador before she was Secretary of State.

[Honeycombe8]

94. Of the three of 'em, Richardson is the only one with actual negotiating experience with...

foreign leaders.

Kerry has been an excellent senator. He speaks several languages. He's very intelligent. But he has never negotiated a deal with a foreign leader. And he's not exactly known for his ability to communicate well with others. (I love him...don't get me wrong. But facts is facts!)

Clinton has been a good senator. And she was a good First Lady. In some ways, I think she could relate better to foreign leaders than Kerry, but in some ways not. She, like Kerry, though, has never negotiated a deal with a foreign dignitary, or even had to try to. Ever.

Richardson, for some reason, has negotiated at least a couple of deals with foreign leaders. He was a UN ambassador, head of the energy dept., and has been a governor, which took him for some reason into further contact with foreign leaders. He's got the experience, and oddly enough (I mean that), he seems to relate well to foreign leaders. They like him.

[MadBadger]

2. John Kerry if not for me wanting him in Biden's old job...I'm not sure

[ecstatic]

3. I think both of them should get cabinet positions, but since Kerry

was the first to ask, it should go to him. :)

Clinton should do something involving healthcare reform.

[deadmessengers]

6. I still think she would be incredibly effective in the Senate in that role n/t

[Aqaba]

4. Sharpton!

It would truly be the end of the Rethuglican party as all of their heads spontaneously combusted.

[sabbat hunter]

28. What has sharpton done

to deserve being SoS? What are his qualifications for such an office?

[ecstatic]

41. That would be funny. I'd like him as SOS, but I know 98% of

America would probably disapprove.

[BrotherBuzz]

70. The great Reverend Al Sharpton should be appointed Press Secretary

He was born for that job. Seriously, he would be fantastic at it.

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[TwilightZone]

10. Does that include Kerry?

[mollymongold]

11. um, no Kerry then either.

[Fabio]

17. Kerry is a warmonger?

lol.

[Sebastian Doyle]

7. Bill Richardson

Kerry would be my second choice.

[walldude]

8. Powell is probably looking to redeem himself

he might make a wise choice. Experience plus the knowledge that he fucked up royally might keep him in line.

[Mid_FL_voter]

15. Hillary would be a fine choice.

Richardson would also be a good pick.
I don't know why but I just don't like the idea of Kerry for SOS.

[rosesaylavee]

9. Kerry has the better background.

Senator Clinton needs to assist on health care. Or SCOTUS would be mighty fine too.

[Lena inRI]

12. WESLEY K. CLARK. . .

. . . Dayton Accords. . .against Iraq war



:kick: :kick: :kick: :kick: :kick:

[BOSSHOG]

13. WESLEY CLARK

The best choice. Period.

[Kalyke]

43. Yep.

And he already has all the foreign leaders' names and numbers in his Blackberry.

[jenmito]

16. Richardson with Wes Clark as Sec. of Def.

[Fabio]

18. Clark cant be SecDef

it's not that his heart isnt in the right place or that he isnt effective at things, he just has too much scar tissue with the uniformed military (as would Kerry as SecDef).

[tekisui]

27. Clark can't be SecDef, he hasn't been retired long enough.

[ecstatic]

48. Maybe Kerry SecDef, Clinton SoS?

[jenmito]

53. I thought it was 8 years. I could be wrong. n/t

[Spider Jerusalem]

83. 10 years

[ecstatic]

51. How about Richardson as National Security Adviser

Kerry SecDef, Clinton SoS

[vanderBeth]

19. Personally, I like Kerry

More his field. I think Hilary's good in the Senate.

[Blarch]

20. I voted.

:bounce:

[Miss Chybil]

23. I voted, too. nt

[mollymongold]

21. C L I N T O N

[Kitty Herder]

22. Bill Richardson

[harun]

24. Kucinich or Conyers

[ProSense]

25. This is stupid. Hillary is a horrible choice for SoS. n/t

[Whoa20]

29. why? Seeing your John Kerry links

I think there's some hypocrisy here, if you're basing it on the war vote. You see, John Kerry also voted for Iraq for the same reasons as Hillary says. Hillary has been alongside a President dealing with international figures in her life, and yes, being the kind of First Lady she was, as opposed to the rest of them, absolutely counts for something. It will also shore up more Dem base for the future, as we sure wouldn't want to leave her 18 million primary voters out in the cold. More importantly, she's also far more articulate than Kerry, which matters in diplomacy. We can't afford Kerry gaffes like he did in 2004 when dealing with Kim Jong Il, Ahmadinejad, et al. Face it, the Clintons not only have been a force in Dem politics, but will continue to be so. Kerry is a nothing.

[fedupinBushcountry]

33. FYI

This isn't about primary votes and if it was Kerry got 59+ million votes. Just begs to ask who you were for in the primary? BTW, I am a Kerry supporter and IMO even if Kerry doesn't get SOS, I do not believe this is the job for HRC.

[ProSense]

34. Oh, you really don't want me to lay it out.

It would be epic.

[TheKentuckian]

39. Kerry is a nothing? Are you fucking nuts? You might want to review the record

Kerry has spent his life fighting for US. If you think Hillary should have the job, fine but that case can be made without a stupid attack on one of the finest public servants this nation has ever had.

A NOTHING?!?

That's fucking infuriating.

[fedupinBushcountry]

50. Ditto

:patriot:

[beachmom]

64. Kerry is also WELL regarded internationally. You don't know what you are talking about.

[karynnj]

72. Thank you

[karynnj]

68. Kerry and HRC did not have the same position

HRC may have given similar reasons, though they weren't really as specific - but Kerry spoke out in 2002 and 2003 when it was clear that Bush was not letting them complete the inspects. The most prominent time was a speech at Georgetown when he said that if Bush went to war it was not a war of last resort. He was also on a December Meet the Press where he spoke of not supporting Bush if he went without doing as he said. ( http://www.cfr.org/publication/5438/remarks_on_nbcs_meet_the_press.html ) During that time both Clintons were quiet. If HRC voted for the same reasons, why did she with one of the strongest Democratic voices stay silent.

In addition, there was 2004 - 2007. Kerry led in that time period by putting forth exit strategies - where the components were similar and changed as the conditions in Iraq worsened In 2006, the Clintons preferred that the Democrats not put forth legislation in the Senate or stand behind a specific plan. Kerry and Feingold pushed their resolution against the Clintons' wishes - and Kerry in particular was vilified by the media - including quotes from anonymous Democrats. Months later the entire party was behind what was essentially Kerry's plan - with even Hillary paroting lines Kerry said nearly a year before.

Kerry is as articulate as the the Clintons - as they know from all the times he was an Obama surrogate against her. If he wasn't HRC wouldn't have borrowed so often from things he said first. As to gaffes, Hillary had more of them in the 2008 primary than he did in 2004. He never spoke of having snipers shotting when they didn't. That was a far more troubling gaffe than anything Kerry said. Not to mention the NYT called his 2008 convention speech the best non-acceptance speech at a Democratic convention in 2 decades - more importantly Obama opted not to have his people vet the speech that Kerry wrote. In addition to being articulate, Kerry is also more eloquent than either Clinton. Consider the most famous line Kerry and Clinton are each remembered for.

Speaking of Hillary's 18 million primary votes is as silly as Kerry claiming that his 59 million general election votes - and his FAR more convincing win in the 2004 primaries before several states voted were still his.

Kerry is a very senior Senator, who if he stays in the Senate has the choice of Chairing the SFRC, Commerce (Innoye is chairing appropriations) or Small Business. He is also a senior member of the Finance committee. Not to mention, in a time when many Finance issues have international components - he is the only member of Finance also on SFRC, making him extremely influential on those positions. It is true that neither he or HRC are likely to be President, as Bill was, but I think that history may in the long run see in Kerry a man of principle and intregrity who stood up many times when it was not easy to do so - against the Vietnam War, arming the Contras (which the Clintons were for), and against BCCI (Stephens, a top Clinton fundraiser was entangled).

Far from being nothing, Kerry is a close advisor to Obama and a Senator, well positioned to write landmark legislation that will be signed by a President Obama. He is very likely to follow Senator Kennedy's on that. The fact is that Kennedy as Senator did MORE in his career (and it is not over - he is currently hard at work writing the healthcare bill) than any President in the last 3 decades to make the world better.

[Beacool]

77. Don't even bother.

You're talking to someone who spent the primary posting long and protracted posts against Hillary.


:eyes:

[Fabio]

36. Let's just all make a point to get behind whoever President Obama chooses.

The good news for JK is that his downside scenario is Chairman of SFRC, with a couple of good friends in the WH. Not bad if you ask me.

[ProSense]

42. Hey, I'm cool with Obama's choice.

Still, Hillary is a horrible choice. :)

[beachmom]

63. I will say, Prosense, that Hillary is well regarded in many parts of the world.

In fact, I had to deal with my German relatives' disappointment that Hillary wasn't the Dem nominee. So there are pluses and minuses.

Anyway, you know I am more in favor of JK in the Senate than SoS. I sort of thought it would be Richardson, if it wasn't JK, for SoS, but who knows. We will know soon.

[ProSense]

65. Hillary's primary campaign left a lot of people overseas

scratching their heads.

Regardless, this is probably a bogus rumor. There are a host of issues here, but as you said, we'll see.

[Jennicut]

26. Either would be great but I would love to see what Hillary can do

[Omerrrta]

31. I dont think hillary will be helpful in dealing with iran.

I'm going with kerry.

I want a peaceful solution to the iran situation and slamming them about human rights and trying to stir up a revolution in their country is not gonna make them very cooperative.

[ecstatic]

45. That concerns me too

I want her to have a cabinet position, but some of her comments about Iran were troubling. I want peace, not endless wars!

[DU GrovelBot]

32. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

==================
GROVELBOT.EXE v4.1
==================



This week is our fourth quarter 2008 fund drive. Democratic Underground is
a completely independent website. We depend on donations from our members
to cover our costs. Please take a moment to donate! Thank you!

[vanderBeth]

38. GrovelBot for SoS!

[me b zola]

35. Either. I will be comfortable with Obama's choice

[Change has come]

37. Richardson. n/t

[FLAprogressive]

40. Bill Richardson. n/t

[ErinBerin84]

44. Kerry

but I trust Obama to make the right choice, whoever it is.

[blonndee]

46. Richardson!

[paulk]

47. It's Kerry's job if he wants it

He has more experience in foreign policy. I don't even see why Clinton is being mentioned for this job...

[wisteria]

58. I agree with you. Clinton would be nothing more than a cronyism appointment.

And, we know how that turned out with "Brownie" being appointed to FEMA.

[paulk]

88. well, I wouldn't put Brownie and HRC in the same league

or even the same sentence...

Hillary would probably make a good SOS, I just feel that Kerry would be better. Although chair of the SFRC is a pretty powerful position, and Kerry's in line for that.

I've always seen Hillary as more concerned with domestic issues (healthcare, women's rights) rather than foreign policy, so to hear her mentioned for SOS is odd to me.

I wouldn't be surprised if Obama picks someone who isn't a Senator, actually. With the advantage we've got right now in the Senate, both Kerry and Hillary are in positions of real power.

[LittleBlue]

55. Richardson- he's not afraid of peace

Hillary and Kerry are finger-in-the-wind types that I do not want representing us abroad.

Neither should get a cabinet position. Nobody can justify why those two deserve one other than they are high profile.

[karynnj]

76. Richardson made statements AFTER the invasion in favor of it

He wasn't in Congress - so he didn't have to vote. Senator Kerry spoke out against going to war if it was not a last resort several times - the two easiest to find were a speech at Georgetown where he spoke of not rushing to war given on January 23, 2003 and a December 2002 MTP. The Georgetown speech resulted in a David Frum, Bush speech writer, rant in National Review whining that they could never go to war slow enough to please Kerry, France and Germany. Kerry still had the same position after the invasion when the war was favored by 70% plus of the people.

Kerry risked having a political career to stand up to Nixon on the Vietnam War.

Kerry also fought Bush and Reagan on the illegal funding of the Contras and the covert war in Latin America. ( Richardson backed legally funding them - even though they were RW thugs - whose was afraid of peace here. http://www.prospect.org/csnc/blogs/ezraklein_archive?month=06&year=2008&base_name=assignment_desk_bill_richardso)

Kerry stood against EVERYONE in the power elite to investigate BCCI. Kerry has a record that he can be very proud of.

Find me three things where Richardson took positions anywhere near as strong. In addition Richardson was no profile in courage on the Wen ho Lee case. The fact is that Kerry has 24 years of FP experience - far more that Richardson - and they extent to the present. (You might want to look at what each did in proposing an exit to Iraq - Kerry's is pretty much everyone's now - Richardson's was an attempt to pander)

I actually hope Kerry stays in the Senate. He then preserves his independence and he is poised to be a very power Senator, who will likely be the author of landmark legislation - and it won't hurt that he has to friends in OBama and Biden. Kerry has a role model he can follow on this - Kennedy and he is a Fifth term Senator with the seniority needed to get things done. As one who has watched committee hearings - he has the respect of his peers. In my opinion, Kennedy has accomplished more real change as Senator than any Democratic President in the last 3 decades.

[abumbyanyothername]

56. Kerry

And I was a Clinton supporter in the primaries.

Still, I wish Rachel Maddow would shut up.

[AJH032]

57. Clinton, duh

The Clintons are extremely well respected abroad. The choice is quite obvious.

[AtomicKitten]

59. John Kerry.

or Wes Clark
or Bill Richardson

[beachmom]

62. Fun fact: if it is Hillary, Kerry will chair the committee that confirms her.

Just sayin'.

I voted for Kerry out of loyalty, but really I want him to be chairman of the SFRC.

[wisteria]

73. Why? That post means so little when we have power and the President agrees with you.

Who knows anything really? I think it is a waste for Kerry to go back to the senate, but that is my opinion. He still would have to contend with Reid and Schemer for any power and major recognition and as for the SFRC chair, what is he going to do with that position when he is in agreement with the new President? Sounds very un challenging and boring to me. Senator Dodd didn't even want it because being on the Fiance Committee was much more important and interesting now. Sorry, I just don't "get" all the great things Kerry is going to be able to accomplish going back to the senate. I see this SOS post as a way for him to salvage his reputation and build on it. He won't get much notice in the Senate- not with others clamoring for attention too.

[PBS Poll-435]

66. I am actually surprised by the results of your poll. nt

[mtnsnake]

69. Wow, Hill is doing great in this poll, considering how many of her supporters got the axe or split

from here during the primaries. Dam she's pretty :smoke:

[JI7]

71. it's not like Kerry is popular around here

i'm actually surprised both Kerry and Hillary are doing better than "none of the above" option.

[wisteria]

74. Very unsientific poll when you can register under various names and e-mails and vote

under those names.

[mtnsnake]

78. No. What is happening is that fewer people are buying into the Hillary slandering

that used to take place all too frequently around here.

[mckeown1128]

80. Don't forget the Obama slandering...

pst...I voted for Hillary in this poll ( I actually think she should have been VP..but I guess I'll have to settle for sos)

[mtnsnake]

84. I hope your not saying I ever slandered Obama or anything close to that mckeown

[mckeown1128]

98. Chill out. I'm just pointing out that it was a two way street. nt

[fedupinBushcountry]

81. and you

never slandered one Dem on this board? Pleasssse!!!!

[mtnsnake]

85. Nice try

Am I supposed to know you or something?

[Honeycombe8]

96. Stop it. Don't start that again. I've been an Obama supporter since Jan & read...

thousands of posts in DU for the past year.

There was no slandering of Clinton going on. We all tend to perceive things from our own perspective: any criticism of our candidate is, by definition, a slander in our eyes.

Or, if you insist slander against Clinton, there was an equal amount, or more, of the same "slander" against Obama.

Don't go there.

[mtnsnake]

97. WTF???

Who the hell are you to tell me what to say and what not to say. Big effin deal you've been an Obama supporter since January and that you've "read thousands of posts in DU for the past year." I'm not talking about the past year. I'm talking about what used to go on long before that, so there is no need for you to jump on your pedestal and preach your self-righteous string cheese rhetoric at me. Jayeeeezus.

[Metric System]

75. Let's leave all the Senators in the Senate. Being a Senator ain't exactly chopped liver.

[tammywammy]

87. I think Hillary Clinton and do a whole lot of good while remaining in the Senate

That's where I think she should stay.

[Beacool]

79. Actually, the more salient question is whether Hillary would even want the job.

Why would she want to leave the senate to serve at the pleasure of a president? In the long term she's probably better off in the senate.

;)

[sampsonblk]

82. Wes Clark (nt)

[tammywammy]

86. Richardson. n/t

[TheDonkey]

89. I wouldn't mind Clinton or Richardson they all are qualified and have arguments. But I'd like Kerry

[Firespirit]

90. I want Kerry to get it

However, I wouldn't mind Richardson. I have no particular objection to him. He's just not my first choice.

Hillary, however... DO NOT WANT. Emphatically DO NOT WANT.

Go ahead and jump on me for saying it, but if Hillary gets chosen, that would be an incredible slap in the face to Kerry, who is eminently more qualified and has far better judgment (I for one have not forgotten Hillary's belligerent comments in the primary about Iran), but who also has done nothing but prop up and support Obama, as opposed to Hillary, who tried her damnedest to destroy him and came on board only after she was forced to. Not to mention Hillary's backstabbing of Kerry over the "botched joke" prior to the 2006 elections, which I also have not forgotten nor forgiven. It would be an absolute insult to Kerry, rank ingratitude, and I have to say I would think considerably more poorly of Obama for it.

[musicblind]

91. Clinton all the way. I think she'd do a great job.

But you know, Kerry would be a good choice too. I just hope it isn't Richardson.

[Number23]

92. I love how everyone at DU has just completely overlooked Dr. Susan Rice for SOS

Hopefully, Obama won't....

[Honeycombe8]

93. Richardson. nt

[Honeycombe8]

95. Kerry should be SOD. Clinton - HHS. Richardson - SOS. (brushing hands off...it's done!) nt

[ccharles000]

99. Hillary

[awoke_in_2003]

100. Neither...

the Senate has weak leadership and cannot afford to lose either of these 2 strong Senators.