« Rahm and Pride | Main | Odds & Sods »

November 15, 2008

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451e60569e2010535f7c792970c

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Oh My TVC One-Five ... Uh Oh:

Comments

Looks like President-Elect Oppeasement made ANOTHER big mistake! Why not appoint Osama bin Laden as SecDefense while you're at it?

These amateurs are going to start WWIII. Stupid liberals!

I always thought Hillary Clinton would make a decent Secretary of State, so as a strong Obama supporter this news doesn't bother me a whit. What DOES bother me is the prospect of more yapping from the Hillary-haters or, even more annoying in my view, the PUMAs who are still angry at Obama for not losing the primary. Neither side have very coherent reasons for their opinions, and I think we've heard enough from both.

Who knows if Clinton will accept the post. I hope she does - not because it's somehow a vindication for those of us who supported Hillary during the primary, but because she's the strongest possible partner for President Obama as he seeks to restore America's reputation in the world.

Agreed, Tom. The reaction to this leak was so odd. It did almost seem as though the primaries were still going on. As someone who is about half way through "Team of Rivals," I've got to say the book does seem to be informing Obamas' choice here, with Hillary being his former rival for the nomination, the sitting Senator from New York and being offered the Secretary of State position, she might just be the new Seward. I certainly hope so. As most of you know here, I really like Hillary, and was very impressed with her candidacy (if not her campaign, at times). Obama would be very lucky to get her, and the world would embrace her as Secretary of State, and the much loved former first lady. She brings toughness and grace to a job which demands a lot of both.

Keeping my fingers crossed.

Oh, and ronny, tell your mommy that you need your diaper changed, ok? Good boy, now go away and let the adults talk.

Well, I agree with both of you guys - so here's hoping some of the more extreme views are quickly moderated...

The reaction doesn't surprise me at all.

Clinton's as good or better an option for State as any of the other names being floated. I see risks as well as rewards for her personally but that's up to her.

*Now, I disagree with some of the "keep her close to keep her from trouble" reasoning. For one, it's offensive to the President-Elect, who may well be trying to put together the strongest possible team and has no secondary calculation in play. And for another, it discounts the unprecedented and full-throated support Clinton gave to Obama from her convention speech onward.*

Tom:

I suppose one of the problems that people who become unhinged when they speak of HRC is, they can't recognize it in thenselves.

EG: you. Do you really contend that no unsuccessful nominee has ever campaigned for their party's nominee in more of less the way that HRC did for Obama? If not, what do you mean by "unprecedented"?

How is that inconsistent with trying "to put together the strongest possible team"? Aren't those two goals complementary, or at least can't they be?

Also, how is if "offensive" to Obama to suggest that he would seek to assemble a team that would minimize party infighting?

It'll drive the Clinton bashers apeshit. For that alone, offering the post to Hillary Clinton is brilliant and ought to be applauded.

Good move on Obama's part.

"EG: you. Do you really contend that no unsuccessful nominee has ever campaigned for their party's nominee in more of less the way that HRC did for Obama? If not, what do you mean by "unprecedented"?"

I do not know of a defeated primary opponent in recent history on the Democratic side who has done as much. “Unprecedented” may not be literally true but it’s permissible hyperbole. George McGovern went into the convention without the support of his main rivals. Edward Kennedy didn’t cry uncle until the actual convention in 1980 and the bitterness between Kennedy and Carter remained. Gary Hart hung in there too, although not until the convention itself, and he had his name put into nomination. Jerry Brown, perennial spoiler, dogged Clinton’s heels in 1992 and I seem to remember him muttering that he wasn’t sure who he was going to vote for.

In other words, I don’t think our board host is suffering from CDS in reverse. Clinton went the extra mile for Obama this year and even some of the nastiest of the Clinton bashers have conceded this, albeit grudgingly.

I don't disagree, Susie. I'm just emphasizing the point that "unprecedented" is not literally true, since I know that Tom usually chooses his words with precision.

You know, I watched Hillary Clinton's speech at the convention, and I followed her performance during the campaign. She did what she had to do, and if she didn't completely throw herself on the tracks for Obama, so what? Leave the woman alone.

"I don't disagree, Susie. I'm just emphasizing the point that "unprecedented" is not literally true, since I know that Tom usually chooses his words with precision."

Point taken. :)

In any case, this may all be much ado about nothing, since it may very well not happen. But I'm enjoying the schadenfreude while it lasts.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Buy My Book!

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Blogroll


Share

Bookmark and Share
AddThis Social Bookmark Button