The Trail: A Daily Diary of Campaign 2008

Archives

Hillary Rodham Clinton

Clinton, Richardson on Short List for Secretary of State


Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton at a campaign rally in Orlando in late October. (Jim Young/Reuters)

Updated 7:16 p.m.
By Anne E. Kornblut and Michael D. Shear
President-elect Barack Obama met Friday with New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson in Chicago, Democratic sources said, who is under consideration to be Secretary of State in the Obama administration.

News of the meeting comes after a similar face-to-face meeting Thursday between Obama and Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) sparked a day-long frenzy of speculation about the possibility that she could be Secretary of State.

Sources said Clinton is now a top contender for the job. Clinton, in an appearance televised live on Friday, said she would not speculate about Obama's Cabinet selections. Her aides have referred questions about the process to the Obama transition team, whose officials are not commenting. Advisors warn that only a small handful of officials
know for certain where Clinton ranks on Obama's short list, which also includes Sen. John F. Kerry of Massachusetts.

But one Clinton veteran who is in touch with the transition team called it a "real possibility." Another said she has a "very good chance" of getting the job. Most notably, Obama advisors have done nothing to tamp down speculation about Clinton, as they did when it
became clear she would not be Obama's running mate -- even though letting her name hang in the air holds real risks for Obama if he ultimately does not select her, potentially reopening the Democratic primary's wounds.

Richardson, who served as Energy Secretary and U.N. Ambassador under President Bill Clinton, has long been considered a possible candidate to run the State Department. Richardson angered the Clintons by endorsing Obama on March 21, providing the senator from Illinois a boost in his bid to become the Democratic nominee.

The mere mention of Clinton's name raised questions about the advantages -- and disadvantages -- of selecting his former Democratic rival and former first lady, whom Obama passed over as his vice presidential running mate.

In an interview on Friday, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), a close confidante of Sen. John McCain's, said Clinton would be an excellent choice and easily confirmed by the Senate for the post. "I thought she was going to come back to the Senate. Who knows?" Graham said.

"She'll easily be confirmed if she gets chosen," Graham said. "That kinda surprised me, but she wouldn't be a bad choice at all. If she were chosen, she has the portfolio and the skills that would make her uniquely qualified for the job."

A central question is how Clinton would fare in the vetting process. Another is how well her operation, and her husband's, would blend into an Obama operation that has been famous for its discipline and collegiality. Although Clinton campaigned hard for Obama in the fall, tensions between the two camps remain.

A third political consideration for Obama is how to handle Kerry, who set Obama's political career in motion by having him give the keynote address at the Democratic convention in 2004. Kerry is a senior member of th Senate Foreign Relations Committee; Clinton is a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee.

When Obama did not pick Clinton over the summer, her advisors complained that he did not even extend her the courtesy of vetting her. But aides to both also said that, during a private meeting after the primaries ended, Clinton had explicitly asked Obama not to vet her -- a process that would involve turning over tax returns and opening up her husband's library and foundation records -- unless he intended to choose her.

At the time, Obama aides said they did not believe Clinton could have survived their rigorous vetting process, in particular because of former president Bill Clinton's work since leaving office. The question, then, is whether the standards for Secretary of State are lower than for vice president, and whether Clinton is now comfortable turning over her family's private information.

To be considered for the post, Clinton, like other contenders for high-ranking executive positions, would have to undergo an onerous and far-reaching process that would force her and her husband to disclose detailed personal and financial records.

The Obama transition team is requiring that all candidates for Cabinet and other senior positions complete a 63-question application, in addition to an extensive FBI background check before their Senate confirmation hearings, according to an Obama advisor involved in vetting candidates who spoke only on the condition of anonymity, because of the sensitivity of the personnel process.

The Obama team requires candidates and their spouses to detail their finances and all corporations, partnerships, trusts, business entities, as well as political, civic, social, charitable, educational, professional, fraternal, benevolent or religious organizations they have been involved with during the past 10 years.

It is unclear whether former president Bill Clinton would be forced to disclose the benefactors of the William Jefferson Clinton Foundation, information that has not previously been made public.

The Obama questionnaire includes a request to identify any personal financial records that the candidate or spouse "will not release publicly if necessary," and to "state the reasons for withholding them."

Among the other requests demanded of candidates by the Obama team is any e-mail, text message, instant message or diary entry that could "suggest a conflict of interest or be a possible source of embarrassment to you, your family or the president-elect if it were made public."

Posted at 1:24 PM ET on Nov 14, 2008  | Category:  Hillary Rodham Clinton
Share This: Technorati talk bubble Technorati | Tag in Del.icio.us | Digg This
Previous: McCain-Obama Meeting Set in Motion by Graham | Next: Albright and Leach Meeting with Foreign Delegations


Add 44 to Your Site
Be the first to know when there's a new installment of The Trail. This widget is easy to add to your Web site, and it will update every time there's a new entry on The Trail.
Get This Widget >>


Comments

Please email us to report offensive comments.



I like Barack Obama, but I believe his supporters are going to end up tarnishing him if they don't get behind him, instead of believing that they own him.

He's busy talking about the value in bringing politicians on board who have a different view, and they come on the blogs and spew disrespect for any politician who actually brings a different view.

As far as Hillary Clinton's remarks in the debates about not meeting with rogue leaders...
She was saying that the PRESIDENT should never agree to meet with any leader without pre-conditions.
Guess who sets up the pre-conditions for the President?
THE SEC OF STATE!!!

She would be a GREAT choice.
She consistently polls (and has for over a decade) as the most admired woman in the world.
She can do some VERY heavy lifting for the POTUS before the POTUS even has to get his hands dirty.

And as far as this being a brave pick -- come on! Hillary Clinton won 18 million primary votes. It was unprecedented. And that doesn't count among Obama's supporters?

Are the Democrats ever going to prove to the rest of us that they can actually work as a team?

If the Democrats again manage to blow themselves apart because Barack Obama is "worried" about the Clintons, then Obama is a coward. (P.S. I do NOT think Barack Obama is a coward.)

"Love her or hate her"?
I LOVE her.
I thought we were leaving all the haters behind.

Posted by: freespeak | November 15, 2008 6:41 AM

Hillary would be a bad choice. She and her husband have no record of playing second fiddle to anyone else. If her campaign demonstrated anything else, it was the sense that the Clintons feel entitled to power. Yes, she played the good soldier on the campaign trail in the fall after Obama was nominated, but so has almost every other losing candidate for a Presidential nomination. The tendency of the Clintons to want to set “their own” foreign policy is going to be strong and by choosing Hillary, Barack is going to open himself up to the question of who is running the show. One article in the Politico came close to making it explicit: “Clinton would be most attractive if Obama concludes that he will have to focus his early days in office on the domestic economy, and will have to essentially outsource heavy-duty foreign travel to his secretary of state.” This is a VERY bad impression to leave in public. Foreign policy is really the President’s number one responsibility. Yes, “the economy” is high in the voters’ minds right now and it is always fun and easy to bash the rich and talk about helping the middle class and poor, but truth be told, the President has a limited ability to affect maroeconomic trends and even then, he needs agreement from Congress. His hand is much freer and his direct impact much greater on foreign affairs. The President could order withdrawal from Iraq or bombing of Iran in minutes (Congress would weigh in at some point but he could initiate this on his own). Second, if terrorists were to set off a nuke in an American city, the composition of the economic stimulus package is pretty well moot. This is not to suggest the former is any more likely with Hillary as SOS, but rather, foreign policy is not something to be “outsourced” to Hillary or anyone else.

http://nohillaryvp.blogspot.com/

Posted by: PhilipMeyer | November 15, 2008 5:53 AM

HRC would make a far better attorney general than secretary of state. Either way, Bill would have to open up his financial records. Think he will do that? If Obama appoints her then he will have to believe that he can control her. Once she resigns from the Senate, she couldn't afford to get fired from the Sec. of State position, so I think she'd probably toe the line. Would I count on that if in Obama's position? Uh, no, but then he appears to be a lot better at this politics game than I -- or than anyone else alive at the moment -- so if he bets on her toeing the line as Sec of State, I'd still bet on him being right. She probably sees it as a way to get to be President. All that would have to happpen would be for Obama, Biden and Pelosi to die prematurely. I'd increase the security details on each if HRC winds up as Sec of State.

Posted by: dolph924 | November 15, 2008 1:20 AM

I've been pretty strongly opposed to Clinton at various times over the last two years, but I have to say I like this idea compared to the alternatives.

Biden would have been the obvious choice, but he's the VP.

Richardson came off as kind of a goofball in the primaries. Interior? Energy (again)? CTO?

Kerry? Hmmm. Maybe SecDef.

Clinton is the best available talent for this position. Good way to bring Bill into the brain trust as well. She'll need to walk back the Russia and Iran comments.

Posted by: Nissl | November 14, 2008 11:57 PM

Hillary deserves this job. How can there even be a question...

Posted by: calkid | November 14, 2008 11:12 PM

just where is all this "change" going to come from when over 30 staffers for obama are coming from clinton doles, richardson and clinton in cabinet, rahmbo as chief of staff, biden's chief of staff the same as algores, etc. I have frends that think that obama will actually change something. The only thing he will change is the color of face in the new black house.

Posted by: charlietuna666 | November 14, 2008 11:12 PM

LOVE OF COUNTRY/LOVE OF HILLARY.............. Whatever anyone may think of HRC, SHE LOVES HER COUNTRY. From a young woman, she has never faltered from that. The bottom line here is that we had a 2 year campaign and that's a lot of time to sling mud, and mud was slung. But he election is now over, we have President-Elect Barack Obama. He won because he is brilliant, he rose above everything that was thrown his way, he stuck to the issues and came out the winner. HRC was never far behind him. If we think back many of their speeches we will recall want they want for our country are the same things. Middle Class America was on top of both their lists . While many may say she did not immediately get up and get on the trail for Barack and find fault with that, I think in the same position we all would have needed some space to re-group. Once the dust settled she was able to get out there and campaign as she always does, with her all. As far as SOS, just as we trusted and elected Barack Obama, we must trust his choice of the people he puts at his side. Yes we want change, but there are positions in the administration that require experience or the change will never come about. HRC has a lot to offer, she can look back to the times mistakes were made and offer suggestions for a better way. In the end we must never lose sight of who the boss is, President-Elect Barack Obama. One thing we should not allow to happen, in party fighting. The Republicans do enough of that for the entire country. We want peace not war and while we may not always agree, we do agree to disagree. We should all be putting our energy into a new energy plan not using it up picking apart fellow supporters.

Posted by: Missmarilyn | November 14, 2008 10:57 PM

I see the right-wing scum had at it in the first few blog entries. Sore losers you are and will continue to be. No need discussing your points of view.

As for Billary - excellent choice and again for Richardson - excellent choice as well.

I think either one is a springboard for a possible 2016 presidential run for either, however, by then we may be talking about a new Obama-like star in the Democratic party.

Good choice either way in my book.

Posted by: 2greekdc | November 14, 2008 10:51 PM

Richardson is much more qualified. A great negotiator with Bosnia, North Korea, UN. Hillary is a celebrity.

Posted by: steve20082008 | November 14, 2008 10:03 PM

I think both Hilary and Richardson would be good picks for SOS. If it were my choice I would give the nod Richardson because he has stellar credentials and a proven track record as a diplomat. Hilary could really help Barack with health care reform as secretary of Health and Human Services.

Posted by: tydicea | November 14, 2008 10:00 PM

What about Hillary for Attorney General? She'd be good in that position too--cleaning up the sordid legacy of the Bush-Cheney-Gonzales gang. It would also be a stepping stone to a permanent berth on the Supreme Court, no doubt when Justice Ginzberg retires (which might be pretty soon).

An alternative would be to give her Health and Human Services and let her push through health reform. Maybe that unwieldy department could be split into a Department of Health and a Department of Human Services (each of which is challenge enough), and let Hillary have Health. Again, she might not be long in that job before the Supreme Court beckons.

Or just have an understanding that she stays a senator until the first SCOTUS vacancy opens.

In any of these cases, Bill could keep himself busy for the rest of his life by taking over Hillary's Senate seat.

That would free up Kerry for Secretary of State. Richardson could become EPA head, a post that should be transformed into Secretary of the Environment (or something along those lines), charged among other things with negotiating with the rest of the world over climate change and energy resources--surely a huge challenge for his diplomatic talents.

It's good that Obama is thinking "big"--of getting a wide range of major talents and points of view. That's what strong presidents--the Lincolns, the Roosevelts--always do.

Posted by: jm917 | November 14, 2008 9:57 PM

Richardson is scum. He wants to turn the nation into Northern Mexico by making all illegals immediate citizens. Of course Billary is worse. My God, the purple lipped freak could round up a dog catcher who would be better than these two far left jerks. then again, The Messiah is, well, a far left jerk. Water seeks its own level.

Posted by: birvin9999 | November 14, 2008 9:53 PM

Hillary is the choice. She has international buzz. She can transform the same-old-same-old by energizing people. She's tough, too.
But, I wonder if she could bare to call Barack on the phone and say `what do you want me to say, B?
Sticky issue? Bill would no doubt have to reveal his financial sources for the Will Jeff Clinton Foundation during her confirmation hearings. It would likely be a list of Who's Who of Dubai and other sleazy enclaves of world super-wealth.
Plus, with Hillary on-board we have another historic candidate...a woman..in 2016 to go up against the mighty Gidget from Wasilla, who, by that time will have earned her high school equivalency diploma and will be qualified to, therefore, rule the world, as God wills.
Regrets to Bill Richardson, though. He's a truly good public servant.

Posted by: jmf3210 | November 14, 2008 9:51 PM

Choosing Hillary would send a powerful postive message to the world.

First, it eliminates any questoon about, and therre's really no other way to put it, it eliminates any question of the size of Obama's Balls. It says they're huge.

It says that he's such a good leader that he hires the strongest person who ran against him in the primaries.

It gives Obama and the US an tremendous boost internaionally.

The Clintons are knownn and respected around the world.

Hillary's has a lot of knowledge about the politics of other countries that nobody else but her and Bill have.

By choosing Hillary, Obama shows that he's going to get the best people he can, regardless of other issues.

In two cases now, Obama's shown an ability to turn former foe's into loyal friends and real fans.

He's setting the right example.

No Democrat should have ANYTHING against the Clintons.

They're good people.

The Republicans spent millions of dollars of taxpayer money, and all they could come up with is that Bill tried to lie about being a bad boy and getting a BJ fom a pretty girl, over 18, with mutual consent, so thst he wouldn't embarass his family or put his marriage at risk.

What man wouldn't?

As I've said before, and forgive the female stereotype, the entire matter should have been between Bill, Hillary, and Hillary's rolling pin.

It was an internal family matter.

The Republicans used it to impeach Bill and almost remove him from office.

They almost succeeded.

George Bush lied to start a war that's claimed 5,000 American lives, and his inocmpetence is what led to 9/11 and thousands of more American deaths.

The Democrats didn't even try to Impeach him.

Bill Clinton was a great President.

Hillary Clinton is a great Senator who would have been a great President, and will be great in any role working for President Obama.

Don't fall for Republican mind tricks.

We're not the idiots they think we are.

Hillary Clinton would be a brilliant choice as Secretary of State.


Posted by: svreader | November 14, 2008 9:50 PM


Hamlet needs to name his Treasury Secretary. Everything else can wait. Time to make an executive decision. Don't look at Emanuel. Don't ask Plouffe or Axelrod or Podesta what they think. Campaign's over. You're the boss now. Time to step up.


Posted by: WylieD | November 14, 2008 9:49 PM


Richardson rose to his level of incompetence in the House of Representatives, and it's been downhill ever since.

His intelligence and ability shone so brightly in the primaries that he won not a single delegate, and placed 4th in his home state of New Mexico, getting less than 1% of the vote there.

Richardson's appointment as Secretary of State would signal that Obama is placing politics over ability. If Obama feels that he absolutely must pay back hispanic voters, then he should name Richardson to a spot where he can do little damage, like Interior, Agriculture, or HUD.


Posted by: WylieD | November 14, 2008 9:40 PM

"if this turns out to be true then there was a deal struck back in June. Rodham Clinton is so ill equipted to be a diplomat she defies logic. She has already promised to "obliterate" Iran, been shot at by snipers and projects to the world a "hard working white people" divide and conquer mentality."

Angiestdogintheworld has mommy issues. He dislikes women, white people, and homosexuals. And he is rabidly pro-obama. He'll take any comment he can get out of context. Team-Obama made plenty of quotable gaffes. "I want to tear his eyes out", "She is a monster", "Bitter ... clinging to guns and religion", "He was like an Uncle to me before he wasn't", not to mention "Absent", "Rezko", "I had nuclear regulations in the bill before they donated to my campaign and I took them out", "Typical white woman", etc .........

Posted by: hdimig | November 14, 2008 9:34 PM

One other thing...I like the Clintons, but the cabinet doesn't need the distractions that come with Clintons anymore than the presidential ticket did. Obama was right not to pick Hillary for VP and he'd be wrong to now reopen that door when it comes to picking his cabinet.

Posted by: jabalong | November 14, 2008 9:10 PM

Clinton? Kerry? Since when is being a senator chopped liver? I don't get this at all. Why would two influential senators want to leave the Senate to be in cabinet? I'd have thought they'd have much more influnence on a much wider range of topics by staying in the Senate. And now with the Democrats firmly in the driver's seat in Congress, wouldn't you want to be a part of that as a senator? The lifespan of a secretary of state isn't that long, where as popular senators seem to be able to stay until they die or well into old age. Kerry might be at his peak, but is Clinton really ready for her swan song? They should both stay in the Senate where they belong. The obvious choice is Bill Richardson, a true diplomat with the conciliatory presence to help restore America's standing with other countries and leaders.

Posted by: jabalong | November 14, 2008 9:06 PM

Hillary is prefect for the job as Secretary of State. She may be a hardliner but highly intelligent and advocate a diplomacy that advocates war as a last resort much like Obama and unlike the current administration.

Posted by: citystreet | November 14, 2008 9:00 PM

Hillary is the choice. She has international buzz. She can transform the same-old-same-old by energizing people.
I wonder how she is at the nuances and subtleties of negotiation. I wonder if she could bare to call Barack on the phone and say `what do you want me to say, B?
Sticky issue? Bill would no doubt have to reveal his financial sources for the Will Jeff Clinton Foundation during her confirmation hearings. It would likely be a Who's Who of Dubai and other sleazy enclaves of world super-wealth.
We have another historic candidate...a woman..in 2016 to go up against the mighty Gidget from Wasilla, who, by that time will have earned her high school equivalency diploma and will be qualified to, therefore, rule the world, as God wills.
Regrets to Bill Richardson, though. He's a truly good public servant.

Posted by: jmf3210 | November 14, 2008 8:57 PM

it would be madness for president obama to have deal with the ego's of both clinton's...which is what he'll get. in fact, some might think this a test of his political resolve : stroke her, then offer something she can refuse. bill richardson is a smart, seasoned and capable public servant. a mistake to buy into billary and their craziness !!

Posted by: areubel | November 14, 2008 8:54 PM

There's a point about Obama that I think a lot of people are missing, that's critical when thinking about him and Hillary and him and Bill.

Obama isn't afraid of anybody.

He's not going to feel threatened by having other high-power people around, because he's confident in his abilities, an he knows that he's the most powerful boss on earth.

There isn't a person in America that wouldn't stand up and say "yes, sir" or "yes, Mr. President", if they got a real call from the Whitehouse.

The other reason why there's no reason to be afraid of the big, bad, Clintons, is that they're not big and bad, they're Loyal and American.

There is no way in the world any Clinton would undercut the policies of the US.

There is no way in the world any Clinton would undercut the President of the United States in any way when working for them.

Both Clintons are loyal Americans.

Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State is a brilliant idea.

Bill as "Special Envoy for Peace", then sent to negotiate peace in the mid-east, would be a bold and brilliant move.

Posted by: svreader | November 14, 2008 8:36 PM

I'd be surprised to see Obama give HRC the job. Not that she wouldn't be good. Richardson did not live up to my expectations on the campaign trail, though Sec State qualities don't nec. show up in that venue.
Noam Chomsky as sec of state. Yeah, right. Talk about a dogmatist. Another John Bolton but with a coherent (but incomplete) story from the left.

Posted by: steveandjanereed1 | November 14, 2008 8:14 PM

This is not change. This is not what we voted Obama in for. This is just like the Clintons: like a bad penny, they just keep coming back. This will mean big trouble for Obama, to have Bill roaming the World as a co-Secretary of State on the Air Force fleet. Good grief !!

Posted by: lionelroger | November 14, 2008 8:14 PM

it's clear that sen clnton should be a close informal advisor to obama- she is however, overqualified for the SoS post- esp as a former first-lady. her appointment would certainly confuse world leaders and create a triumvirate- along w/ bill (i guess technically 2 fellas and a lady). anyway, a triumvirate is as attractive as a unitary presidency. kerry to me is the clear pick- he brings clout as a sen, and former presidential nominee- without an entourage like clinton. clinton as Sos only works if kerry takes another post like defense, as a counter-weight all i can say is sen clinton get w/ pilates- and be ready for 2016 because people like me will work like fiends to get you elected.

Posted by: jacade | November 14, 2008 8:12 PM

"The Washington, D.C., culture lives and thrives on rumors. It's akin to the winter baseball league where there are kinds of rumors about trades, 99 percent of which are not based on any real facts or insider information," said Chris Lehane, a former aide in the Clinton White House.

"It's a place where people make their living trading information, whether it's accurate or not."

Often, it's impossible to know what's true until Obama announces his decision. His aides, for example, have yet to confirm or deny leaks that Ron Klain, a former chief of staff to Vice President Al Gore, has been selected as the chief of staff to Vice President-elect Joe Biden.

"There's lots of excitement and interest in who will serve in the Obama Administration," Cutter said.

"Until final decisions are made by the one person who can make them, President-elect Obama, we unfortunately can't assist in that speculation by confirming or denying alleged names or positions."

Added Lehane: "There is so much speculation that is based on very little information that most of it should be taken with an enormous grain of salt."

McClatchy a voice of sanity within an insane media circle jerk/rub of speculation.

Posted by: ChrisBrown11 | November 14, 2008 8:12 PM

"The Washington, D.C., culture lives and thrives on rumors. It's akin to the winter baseball league where there are kinds of rumors about trades, 99 percent of which are not based on any real facts or insider information," said Chris Lehane, a former aide in the Clinton White House.

"It's a place where people make their living trading information, whether it's accurate or not."

Often, it's impossible to know what's true until Obama announces his decision. His aides, for example, have yet to confirm or deny leaks that Ron Klain, a former chief of staff to Vice President Al Gore, has been selected as the chief of staff to Vice President-elect Joe Biden.

"There's lots of excitement and interest in who will serve in the Obama Administration," Cutter said.

"Until final decisions are made by the one person who can make them, President-elect Obama, we unfortunately can't assist in that speculation by confirming or denying alleged names or positions."

Added Lehane: "There is so much speculation that is based on very little information that most of it should be taken with an enormous grain of salt."

McClatchy a voice of sanity within an insane media circle jerk/rub of speculation.

Posted by: ChrisBrown11 | November 14, 2008 8:11 PM

I think Hillary Clinton would be Great as Secretary of Stste. Look at it from someone in Barack's shoes.

Here's someone that's so smart, so knowledgeable, and so well prepared, that she came very clcse to defeating him.

Here's someone that is such a "trooper" that they then "sucked it up" and put everything they had into getting him elected, and helped quite a bit.

Without Hillary's support, and the timing of the financial meltdown, the election could easily have had a very different outcome.

Look it from the standpoint of someone in Barack's shoes.

She's great with people, in anything ranging from 1 on 1 to giant (although not "Obama Sized") crowds of 1000's.

She's good enough in convincing people that she almost beat him.

If I were him, she'd be one of the first people I'd try to hire, because you always try to find and hire the best people -- people better than you are if you can.

Hillary Clinton was a tough competitor who, then, for good of party and country, worked tirelessly to get Barack elected.

During that time, She did a great job for him.

He's seen her incredible mind and range of skills.

He's been her boss, directly and indirecly already, and its worked out very well.

Look it from the standpoint of someone in Barack's shoes, and it makes perfect sense.

I'm starting to think its brilliant.


Posted by: svreader | November 14, 2008 8:03 PM

Peace in the Middle East. There is no bigger political prize to be won.

HRC as SecState and Bill as special envoy to the m.e.

It is a no brainer. Right now, the so-called preconditions for peace aren't supposedly around because the leaders over there all have their heads you know where. HRC and Bill will have to kick a little butt and help engineer consensus in the streets in the middle east. It's a tough job, and it needs to be done. They have the gravitas, and the smarts, and the tenacity to make it happen.

The Arab-Israeli dispute has a ripple effect throughout the middle east, and it impacts our national security.

Hillary and Bill are perfect for that job. But I'd still want McCain as SecDef, just in case the irrational actors over there decide to throw us a curveball.

Posted by: jrob822 | November 14, 2008 7:59 PM

I hope it's just some special interest groups lobbying on her behalf (or she's working on their behalf). It would reflect poorly on Obama's executive judgment if he actually nominates her. She is no diplomat and too hawkish for any improvement to come out of the ME (Bill Clinton could be a different case) and the rest of the world.

Hillary would do much better in the Senate. On the other hand, John Kerry would be a very good choice of Secretary of State.

Posted by: KT11 | November 14, 2008 7:44 PM

emainland --

Its not AIPAC that rules the world, "Major League Base Ball" is.

Basball is so boring that they create all the conflict, strife, injustice and indigestion in the world so that people will have their TV on, and might tune past a Baseball game, and have their tuner break.

Then there are those of us that really love Baseball, but that's another story.

In all seriousness -- please do not post racist material. Here's a hint if you don't know what is or is not anti-semitic -- if is says that AIPAC or the Jew, or Israel, rules the world, or controls any US politician, is racist.

Try plugging the name other minority into your posts and you'll see how racist they are.

I've been to AIPAC meeting.

They don't rule the world or control members of congress.

They can't even decide what to have for lunch.

Posted by: svreader | November 14, 2008 7:39 PM

Do we have the memory capacity of gnats? Wasn't Hillary among those who voted for the Iraq debacle and stuck with Bush for years? Wasn't Hillary the senator who flirted with the AIPAC position of military action against Iran? Wasn't she the one for NAFTA until she was against it? Obama is digging his own hole as, one by one, he fills administration positions with neoliberals and AIPAC favorites and Clinton retreads. Woe is us. Emanuel was bad enough. Clinto would be worse.

Posted by: emainland | November 14, 2008 7:28 PM

It would be surprising if Hillary Clinton travelled all the way to Chicago for a casual chat. I certainly would not have predicted her as a candidate for Secretary of State. But it has been pretty obvious that all drama in the media about conflicts between Obama and her were highly overdone. One big benefit of an appointment of Hillary Clinton to Secretary of State is the possiblity that Chris Matthews might not survive the shock.

Posted by: dnjake | November 14, 2008 7:22 PM

There's an interesting twist on this that may be an additional reason Obama is considering Hillary.

The Secretary of State job is a lot about personality and name recognition, as well as smarts and technical competence at the particulars of the job.

The Clinton name is still "magic" to lots of Americans and arround the world.

Bill Clinton had an incredibly successful presidency and almost all Americans had a much better quality of life than theyy do now.

Anti-Clinton Bashers, whether they're attacking Bill or Hillary are usually repeating Rush Limbaugh, whether they know it or not.

Bill and Hillary Clinton are amazing people.

They're two of the best of the best that America has to offer itself and the world.

Hillary Clinton would be great as Secretary of State.

Posted by: svreader | November 14, 2008 7:03 PM

Please...no more Clintons, not in the Obama administration...we voted for CHANGE...and no way will Billary ever be loyal

Posted by: BarbarainPalmSprings | November 14, 2008 7:01 PM

Real Brother here.

Who are any of us to speculate or judge Barack Obama and his choices, when few of us recognized or anticipated his brilliance until Nov. 4th?

The man is obviously a genius and trust if this is what he wants to do it will be brilliant.

I trust Barack Obama, if he wants to make Flava Flav the Secretary of State I trust he has good reason.

TKCAL

Posted by: Realbrother0003 | November 14, 2008 6:52 PM

I know that Health and Human Services isn't viewed as a top-tier cabinet post but it seems to me that Sec of HHS would be a much better fit for Clinton since health care and child welfare are the areas she is passionate about. That said, I think Clinton's Senate career shows that if she takes the job she'll master it.

Would be nice to see Hillary be the one the finish an Israeli-Palestinian peace accord, wouldn't it?

Posted by: exco | November 14, 2008 6:43 PM

"The Obama team requires candidates and their spouses to detail their finances and all corporations, partnerships, trusts, business entities, as well as political, civic, social, charitable, educational, professional, fraternal, benevolent or religious organizations they have been involved with during the past 10 years."

I especially like this quote in the article. This from the guy that locked all of his educational records among many others and can't come up with an original birth certificate; classic.

Posted by: Cryos | November 14, 2008 6:40 PM

She would be waaay better as a U.S. Supreme Court Justice.

Posted by: map529 | November 14, 2008 6:39 PM

"I heard that John Kerry was also short-listed for this appointment. I would love to see him in this role."

He can try to convince us that metrosexual is in ;)

Posted by: Cryos | November 14, 2008 6:38 PM

Oh of course, I heard that. . because its in the article. I love commenting on things that I don't read, obviously.

Posted by: vanjascholls | November 14, 2008 6:38 PM

As GF is in no way going to suborn herself to playing "follow the leader", especially a guy like Bill and Jimmy before him, who are all residents of Venus.

Don't let anyone fool you, GF is from Mars, and she will have no compunction about making her own Foreigh Policy and recruiting minions for the Foreign Circus, I mean Foreign Service.

Posted by: murraygwjr | November 14, 2008 6:35 PM

Gosh what a sexist insult. Obama pays his female staff 20% less than the men, ignores the sexism towards Hillary, then demeans Hillary by asking her to be his secretary. Can't help but poke some fun :)

Posted by: Cryos | November 14, 2008 6:33 PM

Robert Strange McNamara would easily be the best option. I will soon write an opinion piece concerning this under my assumed identity. I will not reveal who I am just yet, though be warned, I have inside knowledge of the Post. I have previously submitted an anonymous tip on a classified subject to the investigations section. I hope it was considered seriously.

Posted by: rorschach34 | November 14, 2008 6:32 PM

Hillary is whip-smart. Don't get me wrong. But, I have to agree on the "monumental blunder" comment if President-Elect Obama was to appoint her Secretary of State. Not a good match-up for these two. I heard that John Kerry was also short-listed for this appointment. I would love to see him in this role.

Posted by: vanjascholls | November 14, 2008 6:31 PM

Great folks of the United States!! Here is what is about to happen: Hillary accepts as Secretary of State, Leaving a vacancy in the Senate for New York. This leads to the Democratic New York govenor to appoint Bill Clinton as the interim Senator from New York, who will then run as Clinton on the ticket again!!!

Posted by: jhodor | November 14, 2008 6:22 PM

SecState: HRC
Special Envoy to the Middle East: Bill Clinton
SecDef: John McCain

Given the rise in latino voting, Republicans are likely to lose his Arizona senate seat in 2010; this way it wouldn't be McCain capping off his career with a losing senate run. And he'd probably be pretty good as SecDef.

And it would send a strong message to potential enemies: we can do this the easy way (talking to Hillary and Bill) or the hard way (unleashing the Pentagon).

Posted by: jrob822 | November 14, 2008 6:20 PM

monumental blunder.......... you don't nominate anyone who talks about "obliterating" humans.

Posted by: angriestdogintheworld | November 14, 2008 6:16 PM

I think it would not be a good choice and she should discourage her consideration as a secretary of state nominee.


The skills needed of SOS are really quite different from elected office representing one state's interests.

think of those who were secsof state: James Baker, Warren Christopher, M Albright, C Rice to name some recent sos.

Do you think any one of them were make a good senator from any one of the states?

I don't think so. But they all were good sos.

So why think a seantor woudl make a good sos.

nah.

she should remain a senator and shine in a deomocratic congress.

Posted by: JohnAdams1 | November 14, 2008 6:15 PM

Other than marrying well, I *still* don't see Hillary's qualification for anything more important than dog catcher.

You might see Bill doing this, but why would he want the hassle?

Hillary? I'd rather throw random people (or even short-bus people) into the job.

Posted by: Ombudsman1 | November 14, 2008 6:10 PM

Bring her on! And Bill too. All that nonsense about change is swept out with the autumn leaves. We need the Clintons back full force. They are gracious and patriotic to help out after being so trashed by NoBama.
Hillary we miss respect and need you. Step on, please. Joe who??

Posted by: OrlandoNan | November 14, 2008 6:10 PM

would it be possible if just once we had a serious discussion here about a potentially impt cabinet appt and tried to withhold your personal animous against the Clintons? I voted for Obama and I can tell you that it was a diffiult choice I made just prior to Nov 4 delayed by the needless trashing of the Clintons here at the Fix. I was not alone. In case some of you Clinton haters have not heard, the election is over, you won, and the country is in a sour mood and not interested in hearing pettiness. Move on, get over it and appreciate that the election is over and its time for uniting, not divding our troubled nation. I am sick of it as are most Americans.

Posted by: leichtman | November 14, 2008 5:58 PM

How ironic that Obama is tapping into to the Clinton-era experts for assistance after he so harshly critized Hillary during the Democratic primaries. Who better than Hillary to know the best ones to choose? The bottom line is that Hillary would better serve the USA as a Senator ... and not as Obama's official international parrot.

Posted by: john_doe_washington_dc | November 14, 2008 5:54 PM

Dear readers of Washingtonpost newspaper.
The great lady former first lady of the US. Hillary Clinton is the best person who work as Secretary of State .
I believe that she has an ability to be a president for the United States and she tried to be.
Now if she Contender for Secretary of State she will repair the US. international diplomatic relationship which damaged by G.W . Bush ( Nero the second ) and the Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice which will leave this position in Jan.20,2009 .
I am requesting kindly the great lady former first lady of the US. Hillary Clinton to accept this position to serve the United States and the world wide policy .
with best wishes and my best regards to Hillary Clinton

Posted by: gabraeal | November 14, 2008 5:52 PM

There are non partisan specialists in government agencies who should be considered for leadership positions. We have already too many career politicians running things.

Posted by: LHO39 | November 14, 2008 5:52 PM

if this turns out to be true then there was a deal struck back in June. Rodham Clinton is so ill equipted to be a diplomat she defies logic. She has already promised to "obliterate" Iran, been shot at by snipers and projects to the world a "hard working white people" divide and conquer mentality. Even her lying about the Good Friday Accords tells you everything you need to know about this political hustler.

Posted by: angriestdogintheworld | November 14, 2008 5:48 PM

I would rather they offer this post to Gov Richardson then Sen Clinton. I think he is more suited to this post then she is. Go figure.

Posted by: canrdfast1 | November 14, 2008 5:47 PM

Personally I am more concerned and would like to hear who he is choosing for Treasury Secretary a.s.a.p. Hopefully after the G20 meeting is over we will get that choice. The markets are waiting with baited breath with wild gyrations waiting for assurances of the sundness of that choice. Is Bill a possibility as her Senate replacement? He could then step down and relinquish that seat back to Hilary in 2012.
Kerry/Richardson or Hagel for Secy of Defense as soon as Gates steps down. Is Obama trying to take Hillary out of the healthcare debate so he can put his stamp on his own plan? Anyone thought of that motive?

Posted by: leichtman | November 14, 2008 5:40 PM

Call me skeptical but I see an opening for Obama to pass the buck to Hillary if things go sour internationally while he is President.

Unless Hillary is allowed great latitude to operate, she shouldn't take it.

Posted by: ghokee | November 14, 2008 5:38 PM

Hillary Clinton is highly intelligent, politically astute and has an insightful, realistic grasp of global issues. If she feels thatas Secretary of State she will be serve the country and the world, we will only be better for it.

To the angry writer who takes umbrage with Obama's selection of advisers: Yes, many were part of the Clinton Administration; an administration that kept us out of war and left the current resident of the White House with a surplus. Not only was the surplus squandered, but our good standing in the world was squandered as well. Clinton may not have been perfect, but my goodness compared to the current administration the US was like eutopia. Yes, that is the way I meant to spell it. Look it up-although I am sure Hillary would not have to.

Posted by: nicgrac1 | November 14, 2008 5:31 PM

How do you get change with recycled folks?

Madeline Albright? [ptui]

John Kerry? [hack ... loser]

Clinton as Sec State, hmmm... might work.

I'd like to see Robert Gates remain as SecDef.

Posted by: AWWNats | November 14, 2008 5:29 PM

Talk about letting the viper into the tent. I believe I voted for change, no a re-run of the Bill N Billary show.

Posted by: kinoworks | November 14, 2008 5:21 PM

Hillary might serve the people better where she is at.
I didn't like seeing people getting thrown under the bus during the election.

If Hillary holds herself away and above his fray, she remains with her credibility intact, to make a bid for President.

It is best for the next new President of the USA, not be at risk for blame or holding any of the BO administration's leftovers in bag.

Obama seems to enjoy indulging in the SCHULTY "I KNOW NOTHING", mantra.
If he is not impeached before the 4 year stint over the empty AKA box on his bar application, he may not be popular enough to run again.

The end of 4 years was more than enough for numerous Presidents in the past.

Posted by: dottydo | November 14, 2008 5:20 PM

Hillary was a real trooper once she got over her lose in the primaries. She is more than capable of being a great Sec of State and is well deserving of the position. I'm happy to see that Prez Obama has found an agreeable place for Hillary in his cabinet. I was always impressed with their interactions on the general campaign trail. I've always thought that Obama had great respect for Hillary even when they were in a tough battle during the primaries. I'm happy to see that both of them can put the past behind them and move forward with getting
America back to its glory days.

And for all of you out there who questions Obama's Change message simply because he's appointing seasoned Clinton folks in his administration; you obviously don't understand that change is an idea implemented not a person.

GO OBAMA!
GO HILLARY!
GO BIDEN!

Sarah Palin--shut up!

Posted by: Beingsensible | November 14, 2008 5:19 PM

I think that she would be an excellent Secretary of State.

This is a serious important post to be filled and drives home to everyone the importance of the job of president to appoint qualified people to these positions.

They both realize the importance of our standing in the world and would make a great team restoring our reputation as compassionate world leader.

Posted by: lndlouis | November 14, 2008 5:18 PM

hdmig: I share your sentiments but I also see it as an excuse for Pres Obama to keep HC out of the way until 2016. It would make it impossibl for her to think of running against the Pres who appointed her to Sec of State, in the 2012 election.
Question: What would HC do after Obama's first term when he would likely want a new Sec of State? Its not exacly like in 2012 she could go back to voters in New York and say she wanted her Senate seat back from her relacement. And I can asure you she won't be ready to retire in 2012, so my querry would be if she is chosen as Sec of Sate what then for her career in 2012?

Posted by: leichtman | November 14, 2008 5:01 PM

I think Mrs. Clinton ought to be given the job of answering the late night calls for Obama and take messages. Just kidding.

She is a lot wiser about who and what Obama is now, and she'd make a good cabinet member, for the good of the nation.

Posted by: ElMugroso | November 14, 2008 4:57 PM

Senator Clinton would be a fine Secretary of State. Perhaps Bill Clinton could serve out her term in the Senate.

Posted by: ex-Washingtonian_in_NH | November 14, 2008 4:57 PM

If Obama is smart, which he certainly seems to be so far, he'll work by finding great people, who believe in the same basic principles thst he does, listening to them and learning from them in private, and making them superstars in public.

Imagine what would have happened under Bush if he hed listened to Colin Powell's experience-based judgement against going to war or even Powell's advice on the way to do a war so that its over the quickest and the fewest people die on both sides.

The way to build a great organization of any kind is to hire the absolutely best people, listen to them,, make them stsrs in public, and support them just as much as you want them to support you.

That only works, by the way, if hiring is merit-based.

If it's politically based, you get "heck of a good job, brownie", and that's not what I'm talking about.

If Obama is smart, and he certainly seems that way, he'll build the best Whitehouse team the world has ever seen, manage with a light steady hand on the tiller, give them all the credit, and get his satisfaction seeing his policies implemented.

Posted by: svreader | November 14, 2008 4:47 PM

THE CHANGE WE NEED!!

Obama beat Hillary in the primaries because democrats didn't want another Clinton administration - THEY WANTED CHANGE!! So what has Obama done for change?? Most of his people so far are former Clinton officials.

SO LETS SEE THE CURRENT STATUS???????

Biden Senator in DC for 36 years?
Rahm Emanuel Clinton Staff and Congress for more that 20 years in DC.?
John Podesta Clinton chief of staff DC now Obama transition team lead
John Kerry Senator and Congress for 40 years in DC Secretary of State?
Madeline Albright Carter and Clinton Admin 30 years in DC?
Most of his stand up puppets behind him at his press conference DC insiders.

Robert Reich - Clinton Admin
Laura Tyson - Clinton Admin
Volker - Carter Admin
Robert Rubin - Clinton Admin
Larry Summers - Clinton Admin
etc.

AND AL GORE TOOOOO!! 40years in DC plus Clinton Admin

AND NOW WE HAVE HILLARY??

CHANGE???????? The change fell out of Obama’s pocket!!

Will anybody say "A BUNCH OF OLD WHITE GUYS!!"

Think about it, you intellectual democrats!


Posted by: jjcrocket | November 14, 2008 4:47 PM

The Drama Queen strikes again. There has never been a scene that Hillary was in that she could not steal. This is Obama's scene - the Transition. She has figured out a double-whammy to steal his energy. First, she plants a rumor that she might be chosen as a VP candidate and her supporters carried on. Second, when she was not chosen, her supporters carried on again, this time threatening Obama's campaign. Now, she floats a rumor that she might be chosen Sec'y State and her supporters carry on. When she doesn't get it, her supporters will again dominate the news, overshadowing the Transition. My advice to Obama - DON'T DO IT. She is a toxic Drama Queen and your foreign policy will be out of your control - if she is Sec'y State.

Posted by: lorax2 | November 14, 2008 4:33 PM

Mon dieu, que grande coterie des debiles!!!
Can Hillary translate that?

-----

Don't know, does she have google?

Perhaps on her iphone?

Cmon, it's State, not some blog...

Posted by: thegreatpotatospamof2003 | November 14, 2008 4:26 PM

schmetterlingtoo..

I tried to read through all of these posts before jumping in, but after your two mentally unstable posts I just had to pipe up. What's with the "obamabots" crap? I mean seriously, why put down the people who supports the president-elect who is looking to give your obvious obsession a chance to work along side him? My mind just can't wrap around your posts with any clarity...

Posted by: XanderB | November 14, 2008 4:25 PM

HILLARY DO NOT TAKE THIS JOB. I CAN'T BELIEVE THE POST IS WRITING THIS. IF SHE IS GOING TO BE UNDER OBAMA, ONLY SACRIFICE YOURSELF FOR THE PEOPLE BY PURSUING HEALTH CARE FOR ALL THE PEOPLE THAT NEED IT. YOU HAVE TWO WOMEN THAT HAVE HAD THAT POSITION ALREADY WITH FEWER CREDENTIALS THAN HILLARY. WHAT A DISGRACE TO WRITE THIS MAKING IT FEEL LIKE SHE NEEDS TO BEG. IF HE WANTS HER THERE, OFFER HER THE JOB, I HOPE SHE DOES NOT ACCEPT IT, FOR THE DIGNITY OF WOMEN.

Posted by: wmaster | November 14, 2008 4:25 PM

Mon dieu, que grande coterie des debiles!!!
Can Hillary translate that?

Posted by: VMR1 | November 14, 2008 4:18 PM

WHY Secretary of State?
Surely there is someone else in the whole USA a little more qualified for this international / "Kissinger-like" position than Hillary Clinton.

Health and Family Services with the task of instituting her prized Universal Health Plan (name the damn plan after her to assuage her and her husband's bruised egos).

But not Sec. of State. Obama, what are you thinking?? Don't blow it right out of the gate.

Posted by: davequ | November 14, 2008 4:17 PM

How about Secretary of Health and Human Services?

I've never heard a peep from the one we have now.

She can do health care from a cabinet level post there if Obama works to include her in his inner circle.

Hillary is unbelivably talented.

She's one of these people who are brilliant but work like a horse too.

We should praise her to the moon about her committment to universal health care and get her really fired up coming up with the best way to do it in the world.

We need people that are passionate about ISSUES.

We need to find out how deep the damage Bush has done goes, take out that cancer, and come up with policies that are as good as his were bad.

We need universal health care.

Without press coverage, the issue will die, and so will a lot of people we could have saved if we all just worked a little harder.

Its got to be one of our absolutely top priorities.

Nothing else can save so many American lives so cheaply.


Posted by: svreader | November 14, 2008 4:12 PM

This is something ole BIll has to be cooking up so he can get her out of country to facilitate his whoring around.

Posted by: marfen | November 14, 2008 4:09 PM

Obama sold his soul to the clinton's time to collect..!

Posted by: whiteja55801 | November 14, 2008 4:09 PM

There is no question that Hillary Clinton would do an excellent job as Secretary of State. The question is, would she accept if Barack Obama offers the post to her? That he remains skeptical of choosing one of the other candidates on his list - Kerry, Richardson, Nunn - says a lot about his creative mind, and what he wants his team to represent, and who he really thinks may make a difference in his government. I would love to see it happen.

Just a word on those who lament the fact that many on his short lists for cabinet posts are former Clinton appointees. Bill Clinton was the Democrat who was elected to two terms from 1992-2000. It was a successful administration. The people he chose for his cabinet positions and in his WH staff positions are still experienced and prominent in their fields. It is only natural that these people are considered for the Obama presidency, for their expertise as well as their knowledge of how the system works. I have confidence in Barack Obama to choose his people based on competency and intelligence and not be influenced by labels and political nit-picking, and media mischief-making.

Posted by: jbleenyc | November 14, 2008 4:04 PM

I'm all in favor of tossing goodies to Hillary, who campaigned like a trooper.

But please please please, no foreign policy posts for people who supported invading Iraq. That rules out Kerry too.

It would be a horrible signal to send to the world.

People who facilitated that invasion, like Colin Powell, rightfully belong in prison. People who voted for it perhaps can't be charged, but they should at least be kept away from foreign policy.

If Obama has the balls, let him offer her healthcare. If she has balls, she'll accept it. Healthcare costs have more than doubled since she last tried. Why should she slink away and admit that Gingrich beat her? She was right on this issue in '93, let her fight it to the finish now. THAT would show some real backbone and character.

No Iraq perpetrators in foreign policy posts, I beg you, Obama.

Posted by: bourassa1 | November 14, 2008 4:02 PM

Anti-semites please take your hate speech somewhere else.

Your comments are racist and deeply offensive.

The WP's lack of attention to this is a disgrace, as is their failure to cancel your accounts.
===============================

in other words... mention the M.E. and be prepared to be labeled an anti-Semite.

Posted by: angriestdogintheworld | November 14, 2008 4:02 PM

will probably be the short-hand of the last several presidents.... had no plan other than get elected. Atleast we will know what doomed us.

Posted by: angriestdogintheworld | November 14, 2008 3:58 PM

I know Obama owes his soul to a thousand devils who are all heading to feed at the taxpayer trough, but he owes nothing to billary. I speculate he is just playing their game with them. He'll help pay off the campaing debt in return for something from her. He is anything but stupid and she is not going to get in this administration as anything more than a silenced critic.

Posted by: djudge1 | November 14, 2008 3:56 PM

Gov. Richardson for proven foreign policy experience and getting the job done. Hillary and Obama are not insinc concerning the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, while Richardson is eactly.
--------
Maybe, maybe not.

Not everyone can handle Putin, or the mullahs, coordinating all the fuss, Clinton already made a lot of trips to Iraq, and the Middle East, observing, AFAIK, isn't invested financially in the wars, big difference.

And Clinton can handle the political scene.

Some will reject her simply because she is a woman, and that truly is their problem, deep problems in their psyche, not her concern.

But the point is moot, they will appoint who they want...

Posted by: thegreatpotatospamof2003 | November 14, 2008 3:46 PM

Anti-semites please take your hate speech somewhere else.

Your comments are racist and deeply offensive.

The WP's lack of attention to this is a disgrace, as is their failure to cancel your accounts.


Posted by: svreader | November 14, 2008 3:46 PM

Not a good idea. She is such an asset in the Senate -- a really smart person who revels in the details of policy and who has the political capital to get the health care bill passed. I'm not sure that diplomacy is her strong suit. I also can't imagine why she'd give up the best job in the United States for a political appointment that ends with this administration. I also can't imagine why Obama would want the Clintons running around the world trying to upstage him.

Posted by: fmjk | November 14, 2008 3:43 PM

Sounds like Obama wouldn't pass his own vetting process.

Posted by: Libby5 | November 14, 2008 3:42 PM

Nobody is going to be left that has health care as their issue.

Its not going to happen without a champion.

Its beginning to feel like people are backtracking on it.

Lack of proper medical care is like a 9/11 every day in America.

Please.

The poor need a voice.

Let ours be theirs.

Posted by: svreader | November 14, 2008 3:42 PM

She would be AIPAC choice, not Obama's in truth. Gov. Richardson for proven foreign policy experience and getting the job done. Hillary and Obama are not insinc concerning the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, while Richardson is eactly. And, Hillary knows no foreign languages and Richardson knows French and Spanish.

Posted by: lockmallup | November 14, 2008 3:41 PM

She has no internation negotiating experience- she has no experience in dealing with the miltary- she could not handle the budget and staffing of her own campaign.
-------
Right.

Peaked at Cheney's loony tune crew, lately, who do you think got us into this mess?

Congress?

(ROTFLMAO)


For all the talk about experience, those Ivy League gold plates created this mess.

She understands American political theory, she has a strong understanding of the history of successful American policy, "idealism plus realism" oh, heck, she can write policy, putting her one up on everybody in Washington.

The Clintons understand what American government is, how and why it succeeds, most of those with "experience" as you see it, don't.

Why?

Posted by: thegreatpotatospamof2003 | November 14, 2008 3:40 PM

Kerry is a loser and would be a disaster. Obama needs to stay away from him at all costs. Clinton is a great choice. I say that as a dem who voted for McCain. Show us the middle, President Obama, and we will rally around behind you. God speed, sir.

Posted by: thinkwithyourbrain | November 14, 2008 3:39 PM

I don't like it!!! The Clintons, Kerry, Albright and others are people whos time has passed. Wasn't Obama elected to give the liberals a new direction and new ideas, and new leadership ? Then, the first thing he does is resurrect the failed and controversal same old democratic tax and spend liberals, with a party line dedicated nepotism, and not evidently any thought to his already broken promise of bipartisanship,etc..It is too bad, all we will now get is the same old song. I don't like it, and I am now ready for the next election to change this "same old politics as usual"! Monty Ousley Weddell Dallas, TX

Posted by: jhutt123 | November 14, 2008 3:37 PM

I am not a Hilary supporter, but, it would not be in the best interest of President Elect Obama to let her name rome out there, without selecting Hilary Clinton. It could be political suicide.

Posted by: zippergyrl | November 14, 2008 3:37 PM

As a Hillary supporter, this pick would go along way towards making me feel better about an Obama Presidency. I didn't decide to pull the lever for him until the week before the election (mostly because my daughters wanted Obama instead of McCain). I was still awful tempted to write in HRC when I entered the booth. All of the Obama people should realize that people loved Hillary and were passionate about her too. Those kind of feelings were not confined to Obama in the last election. Hillary will be awesome as Secretary of State.

Posted by: hdimig | November 14, 2008 3:36 PM

Of all the smart, eager people out there, Obama can't find anyone other than her? I am a huge Obama supporter, but I agree with others that, so far, this doesn't seem like "change" but more like a stockpiling of 1990s Clintionites.

I hate that this story is even circulating because if she is not picked, or if she refuses to submit her financial records, all we'll hear about is the PUMA resurgence and how the Dem's are fracturing because of perceived slights to the Clintons, blah, blah, blah.

I wish the news actually reported the "news" and not the gossip and speculation that passes for news these days.

Posted by: SuburaNation | November 14, 2008 3:34 PM

Not SECSTATE. Give her SECDEF.
She still has 4 years left on her current Senate term. Let Gates stay in long enough to get us out of Iraq and finish off the Taliban in Afghanistan. By then, Sen. Clinton will be nearing the end of her term, a perfect time to transition into the Cabinet.

Posted by: Smoke_Jaguar4 | November 14, 2008 3:33 PM

"The biggest problem with hillary at DOS is that she is still beholden

to the Jews of New York who got her her senate seat.

We have the terrorist father of rahn emanual gragging to a jewish newspaper yesterday how his son will work for Israel, we don't need much more of that.
We're already detested aroundthe world for blind support of Israel...

and just as the rest of the world was going to embrace us again for a new administration. AND just as one of the Post's jewish columnists (very little else) was calling for a list of cabinet cabinets, all from , guess which ethnic group?"

Goebbels says what?

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | November 14, 2008 3:32 PM

She's probably do a better job than any other candidate for the position.

I'd rather see her work on health care.

----------
I think one of her strongest skills is understanding, and dealing with men like Putin, really, a unique talent, one that isn't necessarily measured with a legal degree, or a Phd from Stanford.

And Obama will need to understand what he's up against, hence any consequent "soul looking" or whatever it was Bush said about Putin.

Posted by: thegreatpotatospamof2003 | November 14, 2008 3:31 PM

Please join me in returning the focus to universal health care.

Children's lives are at stake.

The health care crisis is like a 9/11 every day.

Please. Lets work on what saves the most lives first.

Please, please, fight for universal health care coverage to be a right for all Americans.

If we're not careful, our chance to enact it will slip away again.

Posted by: svreader | November 14, 2008 3:31 PM

Obama and Clinton huddled privately at the time of Hillary's withdrawing from the race. Given the way that Hillary so graciously bowed out, it seemed that they had struck a deal. If Hillary is indeed the choice for Secretary of State, this was done months ago as a condition for Hillary's dropping her candidacy and throwing her support behind Obama....

Posted by: randysbailin | November 14, 2008 3:30 PM

I have been asking all day- what qualifies her to be Secretary of State? She has no internation negotiating experience- she has no experience in dealing with the miltary- she could not handle the budget and staffing of her own campaign. Has she even done anything significant for the State of New York? Will someone please give me specific jobs or accomplishments of this woman that makes her qualified for what is a BIG job? I haven't been able to get a Clinton supporter to answer me with a direct, specific answer- any takers?

Posted by: poppysue85 | November 14, 2008 3:29 PM

Bravo, Obama! That would be a fantastic choice. And further cement Obama as the leader of the democratic party, our country and the world.

It takes a true leader to make a bold choice such as inviting your recent rival to be a part of your administration.

Hillary would be serving at the pleasure of the president, and would do a wonderful job. She has proven herself to be a loyal ally, post-primary and I can only imagine that continuing if she was SoS. Hillary always protects her own, and Obama is her man now.

Go Hillary! Go Obama!!!

Posted by: priusdriver | November 14, 2008 3:29 PM

Titanic meet iceberg, Obama sells his soul to the Clinton's is this the change everyone voted on?
----------
Two lost wars, a broken economy, and a horrifically corrupt Washington, throwing away money as I write; we're not even close to change, now, are we?

Posted by: thegreatpotatospamof2003 | November 14, 2008 3:27 PM

Hillary would be a great secretary of state.

She's probably do a better job than any other candidate for the position.

I'd rather see her work on health care.

An American voter is more than 100,000 times more likely to die of a heart attack than a terrorist attack.

I'm a strong supporter of Obama

I worked for him and blogged for him.

But I'm very, very worried that Obama will drop the ball on health care and let universal health care "die on the vine"

Children are dying every day.

No American should die in pain in the gutter.

Universal health care saves lives.

We should make it our higher priority.

Posted by: svreader | November 14, 2008 3:27 PM

Titanic meet iceberg, Obama sells his soul to the Clinton's is this the change everyone voted on?

Posted by: whiteja55801 | November 14, 2008 3:24 PM

I think one of the better qualities Clinton would bring to the office of SOS is a calm sense of realistic diplomacy.

A country like Russia, or Iran, has many benevolent, intelligent people, unfortunately they're both run by murderous tyrants.

The neocons saw the world in infantile terms, everything reduced to a cartoon villain, or a cartoon hero, cartoon missions.

Clinton, and the others around her, can isolate those who insist on perpetrating violence, from the others. It isn't "let's bomb Iran," it's "how can we deal with Iran's leaders, as to disarm their threat to the US, and others?"

We don't bomb Iran simply because it's leaders are unstable criminal men, same for Russia, but certainly we need to learn to deal with its' aggression in a manner superior to the reactionary violence we see from Cheney, and Bush, we need to deal with its terrorism in a way that isn't necessarily violent, or fear filled.

Bush gave us Bolton, a Clinton, I think, can see the forest through the trees, more indicative of successful US foreign policy, (as opposed to the simplistic neocon view).

Posted by: thegreatpotatospamof2003 | November 14, 2008 3:17 PM

Please no John Kerry!!!!

He made me vote for George Bush.

Posted by: Treasury | November 14, 2008 3:15 PM

I definitely trust Hillary

Posted by: Obama2008 | November 14, 2008 3:15 PM

As a retired American diplomat, I am saddened to see President-elect Obama apparently seriously considering Hillary for Secretary of State. During her campaign, Hillary proved conclusively that she is not a team player. She is also far too closely identified with Israel, and cannot possibly be objective in dealing with that difficult nation. America's interests are by no means identical with Israel's and no peace plan will ever be viable until America's leaders place American interests first over Israel's. Let's hope this appointment does not come to pass.

Posted by: dsrobins | November 14, 2008 3:15 PM

Clinton, Gore, Richardson and Kerry are all highly distinguished, intellegent nd dedicated public servants. Any or all of them would make a wonderful addition to President-Elect Obama's cabinet in a number of key positions. We are blessed to have such talented possibilities being considered.

Posted by: SWadvocate | November 14, 2008 3:13 PM

Hillary would be a great Secretary of State.

She would have been an even greater President.

Posted by: Treasury | November 14, 2008 3:13 PM

vetting schmetting -- it's all about israel -- hidden behind the partisan sniping that goes on in washington is the unified stance on delegating foreign policy to likud -- rahm emanuel, whose overriding loyalty to israel his father makes clear, will be running the white house staff while hillary or kerry or some other bootlicker of likud will run state -- america second!

Posted by: herbert-de-turbot | November 14, 2008 3:08 PM


The biggest problem with hillary at DOS is that she is still beholden

to the Jews of New York who got her her senate seat.

We have the terrorist father of rahn emanual gragging to a jewish newspaper yesterday how his son will work for Israel, we don't need much more of that.
We're already detested aroundthe world for blind support of Israel...

and just as the rest of the world was going to embrace us again for a new administration. AND just as one of the Post's jewish columnists (very little else) was calling for a list of cabinet cabinets, all from , guess which ethnic group?

Posted by: whistling | November 14, 2008 3:06 PM

I see a new neo-con war wing gathering... a deal has been made. Guess we are going to nuke Iran. The 3rd term for the Dark Side of New World Disorder has commenced. We did what we could, but it seems ALL the candidates were on board for this one. One day we Americans will rise up and get what we want. Nothing left in Fort Know, military destroyed and yet we will merrily head off to open up another front.

Posted by: angriestdogintheworld | November 14, 2008 3:06 PM

Saint writes: "Hillary Clinton's name might be fun to play with, but seriously, what Countries is she capable of actually influencing? Middle East?"

Heads of States in patriarchal societies deal with female leaders of other countries all the time. They understand their participation in the global economy is on many fronts contingent on their being able to deal with leaders of both genders. Their social practices at home are discarded when it comes to their relationship with powerful western countries. All realize the US is a powerful economic and military force. Dismissing the highest American diplomat on gender grounds will do more them harm than good.


While many patriarchal societies expect a female to conform to established patriarchal roles while working or visiting their country, the expectations are discarded when it comes to female leaders.

Posted by: jandcgall1 | November 14, 2008 3:04 PM

I wish this weren't true, but I'm afraid that her name being floated now means the deal has already been made. I can't imagine how the Obama campaign would even mention her name if they were going to reject her again.

I still say Richardson - he's already dealt with the bad guys and always comes away in good shape.

Posted by: jennandgus | November 14, 2008 3:04 PM

The media tried to shove the APIAC gal down our throat as VP. Now they are at it again this time as SOS.

HELL NO.

Posted by: dogsbestfriend | November 14, 2008 3:01 PM

As a foreign observer I am certainly not entitled to judge the choice of top executives by any American president. However , it was my impression , after watching the primary campaign, that Mr. Barack Obama preferred diplomacy to miltary action , wheras Ms. Hillary Clinton explicitly stated in a televised interview that she would use nuclear weapons against Iran , a country of more than 60 million inhabitants located in the midst of the oil fields on which the US and most of the world strongly rely. So , which course would then the US foreign policy take under such circumstances ?

Posted by: elshibinihussein1 | November 14, 2008 2:59 PM

All Obama has left to do is find Bill Clinton a spot in his administration and he will have revived the Clinton Administration. Where is the change he talked about? Even at State, that might be too close to have Hillary and Bill hanging around. And, can Hillary complete Obama's Sister Teresa questionnaire?

Posted by: saelij | November 14, 2008 2:59 PM

NEOCON SCAM to sabotage Obama's Foreign Policy. IT'S NOT HAPPENING!!!


Posted by: dogsbestfriend | November 14, 2008 2:55 PM

ha ha ha ha ha! I, a lifelong Dem. couldn't stomach Obama, didn't vote for him,. pulled a Lieberman. And NOW? HELL, YOU GO OBAMA-I AM ABSOLUTELY IMPRESSED WITH WHAT I'M HEARING YOU SAY ABOUT IRAN-(NUCLEAR WEAPONS UNACCEPTABLE) AND PROTECTING ISRAEL-AND OF COURSE, CONTINUING TO KEEP TROOPS IN IRAQ FOR THE INDEFINITE FUTURE-THIS IS WHAT I WAS NOT SURE OF BEFORE THE ELECTION-NOW, I THINK A LOT OF US FEEL A LOT BETTER ABOUT OBAMA NOW-LIKE I SAID, I MIGHT EVEN SUPPORT HIM ONE OF THESE DAYS-BUT HE'S GOT TO EARN MY RESPECT BY SHOWING ME HE KNOWS HOW TO GOVERN, AND GOVERN WELL, FIRST!

BUT IT'S FOR SURE A START THAT HE HAS RAHM EMMANUEL IN THERE TO GUIDE HIM-AND HILLARY.

I DON'T SEE RICHARDSON WITH ANY REAL INFLUENCE OR BIG POSITION IN THE OBAMA ADMIN. AT ALL-AND THAT IS, AS IT SHOULD BE-BECAUSE IT IS RAHM WHO IS CALLING THE SHOTS-RAHM HAS ALWAYS BEEN LOYAL TO THE CLINTONS-AND HIS LOYALTY, NOT TO MENTION HIS INFLUENCE WITH OBAMA IS WHAT IS GOING ON HERE: RAHM IS RUNNING THE SHOW, FOLKS-AND HE IS A HUGE CLINTON SUPPORTER.

Posted by: schmetterlingtoo | November 14, 2008 2:55 PM

Would be a great pick.

Posted by: GeorgHerbet | November 14, 2008 2:52 PM

So much for change...the basis of Obama's campaign. Hiring everyone from the Clinton administration is not exactly change people! Ridiculous. Try some other experienced blood for those jobs. They do exist.

Posted by: sfrancis2 | November 14, 2008 2:51 PM

what I find most facinating about all the Rodham Clinton bully work is that none of these bloggers or editorialists will tell us why.... it's because Rodham Clinton can not be re-elected in New York. Her poll numbers are lower than Bush.

Posted by: angriestdogintheworld | November 14, 2008 2:51 PM

Terrible choice -- her campaign was marked, beginning to end, by poor management skills, constant and bitter infighting among her staff, venality, a wayward moral compass and the inabilty to marshal a huge (100 million dollar plus)war chest.

I gladly concede she's brilliant and capable, but not in the ways we need at this crucial juncture.

Posted by: 7stringbass | November 14, 2008 2:51 PM

Generally speaking ... it is of benefit for Secretaries of State to have ... you know ... foreign policy experience.

Posted by: peter2001 | November 14, 2008 2:49 PM

I guess we all were hoodwinked and we will end up with just another corrupt politico matrix centered on the Clinton doctrine.

Posted by: angriestdogintheworld | November 14, 2008 2:47 PM

Hillary is the one.

Posted by: truth1 | November 14, 2008 2:45 PM

How about Al Gore for Secy of State?
Former VP and Nobel Laureate highly respected throughout the world.


Posted by: VMR1 | November 14, 2008 2:43 PM

All this hiring is well and good but I keep thinking, when is Obama going to attend a funeral or memorial service for his grandmother? Seems like a loose end that hasn't been wrapped up in the public domain, anyway.

Posted by: ac11 | November 14, 2008 2:43 PM

Plase, NO, NO on Bill Richardson! Doesn't anybody remember that he kept poor, confused, Wen Ho Lee in solitary for NINE MONTHS -- in chains! He was NOT guilty of espionage; just
poor judgment.

Richardson, for my money, is a moral dwarf. He is not fit to hold office in the Brave New World of Obama-world.

Please, Mr. President-elect, don't give Bill Richardson a job. So he's Hispanic, so what. Plenty of decent, qualified Hispanics around who don't have on their
conscience (If Richardson HAS a conscience!) the martyrdom of Wen Ho Lee!

Posted by: aspasia2 | November 14, 2008 2:43 PM

SORRY UNINSIGHTFUL, NOT VERY PERCEPTIVE OBAMABOTS! YOU SHOW YOUR EXTREME NAIVETE AND LACK OF KNOWLEDGE ABOUT WORLD AFFAIRS, THERE IS NO BETTER CANDIDATE THAN HILLARY, IN ALL OF THIS COUNTRY TO BE SEC. OF STATE!

MY JORDANIAN HAIRDRESSER TOLD ME, "I WISH HILLARY COULD HAVE BEEN PRESIDENT, WE ALL REALLY RESPECT HER AND THINK SHE IS NICE."

MY MOROCCAN FRIEND: "WE DON'T WANT TO VOTE FOR OBAMA-HE HAS NO EXPERIENCE-WE WANTED HILLARY, SHE HAS THE EXPERIENCE!"

YOU HEAR THIS IN THE ARAB-AMERICAN COMMUNITIES ALL OVER. IT'S HILLARY THAT THE ARAB WORLD RESPECTS-YET, AT THE SAME TIME, SHE IS A STAUNCH SUPPORTER OF ISRAEL, OR ELSE SHE WOULD NOT BE THE US SENATOR FROM NY!

AND WHEN I'M OUT THERE IN INDIA, IN NEPAL, IN DUBAI-YOU SEE THE CLINTON'S PICTURE IN SHOPS AND HOTELS AND RESTAURANTS-YOU SURE AS HELL DON'T SEE BUSH'S! THEY WANT THE CLINTONS, DOES THE DEVELOPING WORLD, BECAUSE THEY KNOW THEM, AND RESPECT THEM FOR THEIR WORLDLINESS, THEIR KNOWLEDGE OF THEIR PROBLEMS-HILLARY AS LAWYER, AS NEGOTIATOR-SHE WILL BE THE ONE TO BRING IN A ME PEACE AGREEMENT-BUT THOSE OTHER ALLEGED CANDIDATES-THAT MAKES ME LAUGH-OBAMA IS REALLY BEGINNING TO GAIN MY RESPECT WITH WHAT HE IS DOING RIGHT NOW-HE APPEARS TO WANT THE BEST QUALIFIED, MOST EXPERIENCED PEOPLE TO BE IN HIS CABINET-WHO KNOWS, I MIGHT EVEN START TO RESPECT THE MAN ONE OF THESE DAYS!

Posted by: schmetterlingtoo | November 14, 2008 2:43 PM

Wouldn't HRC be happier running for Gov of NY in 2 years? Then she would be in charge, not following Barack's orders. And better for her future Prez run. In order to really get the Rebug goobers, I'm hoping for Bill Ayers for Sec of Education.

Posted by: Dan4 | November 14, 2008 2:43 PM

Oh no! Selecting Hillary as Foreign Secretary to pacify her supporters, heal wounds in the party is not just a bad move. It is the the first nail to the coffin in which HOPE will be buried.
This appointment would be a tremendous disappointment to all those looking for a progressive and balanced Middle East policy. Does anyone remember her pushing for unilaterally accepting Jerusalem being Israel's Capitol? No way to go, Mr.Barack!

Posted by: Almani | November 14, 2008 2:42 PM

Wait a second, didn't she vote for Bush's criminal war? Didn't she say that Obama is not ready for international prime time?

So, don't at least these two factors
disqualify her from being considered for the Secretary of State?

Posted by: VMR1 | November 14, 2008 2:39 PM

"Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton is now considered a top contender for the role of Secretary of State in the Obama administration"

Hey, Politico.com is way out ahead of you all on this matter. They're already speculating whom the NY governor will appoint to replace Clinton.

This is really, really, really, really stupid.

The Obama camp hasn't commented on any speculation so their non-denial means nothing and Clinton's non-denial means the same.

Posted by: ChrisBrown11 | November 14, 2008 2:39 PM

So, where's the post-partisan politics at this point? The prime choice for Sec. of State is obvious Sen. Lugar (R-In)...at least better than any of the choices here. Why not put aside politics and deliver the "change" that the country needs...NON-partisan politics?

Posted by: bacaje | November 14, 2008 2:38 PM

What a terrible idea! HRC is a very capable woman in many respects, but she is not a diplomat.... First Lady visits around the globe do not constitute foreign policy experience. In fact, her only apparent experience in one of the many tough international hot spots seems to be [not] dodging bullets in Bosnia.

If there is one Cabinet position MOST in need of "change of direction" -- and Pres-Elect Obama's OWN stamp -- it is the State Department. A return to the Clinton years and the shadow of Madeline Albright is the last thing it needs.

Posted by: crystal4 | November 14, 2008 2:36 PM

Hillary Clinton is the worst choice for sec of State Obama can ever select! she is power hungry and bill Clinton will have his hands all over the place. Those two only care about power and themselves and they play dirty. Obama has had a perfect record so far and a clean campaign, let's please keep it that way. We do not want another clinton administration, we want an Obama administration. John Kerry is the one who boosted Obama in public eyes and he is highly qualified. Colin Powel as sec of State is even better since it'll show bipartisan outreach.
If a republican is happy at the prospect of Hillary being sec of state and sees no problem confirming her appointment only proves to me that she will not have the interests of the democratic party's ideologies and interests at heart, just power hungry like all republicans ... at any cost necessary!

Posted by: genevieve2000 | November 14, 2008 2:33 PM

America needs to have a Clinton front and center in the Obama administration --- if for no other reason than to make the Republican goobers' discomfort complete.

Posted by: pali2500 | November 14, 2008 2:32 PM

Bill Richardson, a DIPLOMAT, WHAT? THAT FAT A$$ HASN'T DONE A DAMN THING EXCEPT FOR THE CLINTONS GIVING HIM A POLICY POST IN THEIR ADMIN. AS ENERGY SECRETARY, HELL, HIS OWN STATE DOESN'T EVEN LIKE HIM!

YOU ALL SHOW HOW VERY LITTLE YOU KNOW AND UNDERSTAND ABOUT HOW THE WORLD, AND INSIDE THE BELTWAY WORKS. IT DOESN'T MATTER A DARN WHAT OBAMA SAID BEFORE THE ELECTION-OBAMA NEEDS THE CLINTONS LIKE NOBODY-AND HE NEEDS HILLARY, THE ULTIMATE NEGOTIATOR, WHO HAS FRIENDS AND RESPECT ON BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE IN CONGRESS (WITNESS JOHN MCCAIN'S ADMIRATION OF HER) WHY, IF ANYONE COULD NEGOTIATE A ME PEACE AGREEMENT IT WOULD BE HER! GO HILLARY!

Posted by: schmetterlingtoo | November 14, 2008 2:32 PM

schmetterlingtoo-You condemned your own argument.

Yes, Hillary IS a LAWYER!

Bill Richardson, is a Diplomat, and an Executive.

Lawyers belong in Congress, and Judicial!

She couldn't barter $5 off a $500 Sombrero, in Matamoros, Mexico!

Posted by: SAINT---The | November 14, 2008 2:23 PM

Pure speculation. High order rumor from Anne. Why don't you just get a job at the Enquirer as you hands down have the qualifications... Unnamed source my b*tt.
Too bad WAPO doesn't require any sort of accountability for what people write in the rag!

Posted by: RetCombatVet | November 14, 2008 2:14 PM

jrob-right. That was my thought as well. Bill Clinton as ME envoy, along with Tony Blair, also the European ME envoy and a great friend, would be excellent.

Hillary as Sec. of State, someone who so far surpasses the utterly incompetent and ineffectual Condy Rice it's not even funny, Rice has left US foreign policy in a SHAMBLES. She and the President both PROMISED there would be a ME peace agreement by the end of Bush's term-I laughed my arse off at that-CONDY RICE COULDN'T NEGOTIATE HER WAY OUT OF A PAPER BAG-RICE WILL GO DOWN IN HISTORY AS ONE OF THE WORST SEC. OF STATES ON RECORD.

Hillary, a lawyer who has many times been voted one of the Top 100 Lawyers in America-a HUGE honor, when you consider how many thousands of bright and talented lawyers there are in this country-with her negotiating skills, her long record working on the Hill as a lawyer, a public servant, all of her diplomacy experience in 8 years at the White House-why there is no one, NO ONE MORE QUALIFIED-PLUS, SHE HAS TRAVELED ALL OVER, AND KNOWS THE PROBLEMS OF THE WORLD INTIMATELY-TO EVEN PUT THAT FAT A$$ RICHARDSON AND HAGEL IN THE SAME BREATH AS HILLARY IS A SCREAMING JOKE.

GET USED TO IT, OBAMABOTS! IT'S GONNA HAPPEN!

Posted by: schmetterlingtoo | November 14, 2008 2:14 PM

BIG MISTAKE.... not enough "hard working" white people on the planet to mitigate for this bullet dodger. Plus, with all her connections to Wall Street and hedge funds she will likely be arrested overseas for economic crimes against humanity. NO MORE DIVA'S AT STATE !!!!!

Posted by: angriestdogintheworld | November 14, 2008 2:10 PM

Bill Richardon or Susan Rice. The two most competent and desirable Sec. of State candidates with the least baggage.

Posted by: egenius | November 14, 2008 2:10 PM

RULES FOR MANAGING HILLARY:
#1. Keep her at arms length. Just close enough so you can keep tabs on her is close enough.

#2. Give her something to do so she's too busy to meddle in your other affairs, i.e., working on passing health care legislation, YOUR healthcare bill, not hers!

Selecting Hillary as Sec. of State has the potential to be the most disastrous decision by President Obama.

Hillary has her own agenda which means she won't be taking orders on U.S. foreign policy. The Secretary of State isn't supposed to collaborate on foreign policy, just execute foreign policy.

Also, don't think that Hillary won't use her inner circle position to attempt to influence the Obama agenda on other matters, i.e., domestic, judidicary, etc. This has the potential of ruining the Obama presidency before it gets any momentum.

I beg of you President Obama, PLEASE DON'T DO IT!

Posted by: egenius | November 14, 2008 2:07 PM

I'd rather see Noam Chomsky as Secretary of State, Dennis Kucinich as Atty. Gen. and Ralph Nader for Fed Chairman. We could use a consumer advocate instead of the same old Wall Street insiders.

Hillary may be OK. I'm worried she could be hawkish just to prove something.

Posted by: rooster54 | November 14, 2008 2:01 PM

Why dont we just make sure that the Clinton gene pool is always at the top tiers of government? Lets not give Joe the Plumber, you and me, a pot to blow up in. Christ sakes, there are others who might want to get those cushy jobs. No, not me tho, I have a bad knee. How about you?

Posted by: wpmars | November 14, 2008 2:01 PM

John Kerry is not merely a "senior" member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. He is in line to become Chairman, since Biden has left, and Dodd is staying on Banking. In short, I think Kerry will take someone else being named Secretary of State in stride, since he will be a very powerful Senator, and have the ear of the President.

I am uncomfortable with the WP going with a story based on people far away from the real decision making. This is not journalism at its best. All you have is that they met, and that the Obama people have not shot down the rumor completely. But, really, your sources leave much to be desired.

Posted by: beachmom | November 14, 2008 2:01 PM

HRC has no meaningful foreign policy experience of any kind. She's be a fine addition to the cabinet, but Secretary of State is the worst possible place for her. There doesn't seem to be any mention here of *why* she is being considered for this job (particularly with candidates like Chuck Hagel and Bill Richardson available), except to heal a rift in the Dem party. The State Department is not the right place to do that - no more than the Justice Department was an appropriate place to reward Bush's favorite right-wing nitwits.

Posted by: Sweetback | November 14, 2008 2:00 PM

There was a blog on this yesterday, and I said it about 10 times: THERE IS NO MORE QUALIFIED CANDIDATE TO BE SECRETARY OF STATE THAN HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON-ALL OVER THE WORLD, AND I MEAN, ALL OVER THE WORLD SHE IS RESPECTED AND ADMIRED-VERY VERY MUCH IN THE DEVELOPING WORLD-YOU KNOW WHY? BECAUSE SHE'S BEEN TO ALL PARTS OF THE DEVELOPING WORLD-AND AS FAR AS THE MIDDLE EAST? SHE KNOWS ALL, AND I MEAN ALL, THE PLAYERS THERE-BOTH THE ARAB WORLD AND THE ISRAELIS VALUE HER HIGHLY.

SORRY OBAMA-BOTS, I KNOW YOU DIDN'T FIGURE ON THIS, DID YOU? THIS IS WHAT IS CALLED THE POLITICS OF "CHANGE" THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION REDUX-AND IT'S FINE BY ME! BECAUSE IF YOU TRAVEL THE WORLD, YOU KNOW HOW ADMIRED THE CLINTONS ARE, PEOPLE TELL YOU THAT, AND YOU SEE THEIR PICTURE IN REMOTE AREAS OF THE WORLD, SO I SAY, BRING THEM BACK, OBAMA, AND YOU WILL DO SOME REAL GOOD IN THE WORLD, AND CAN BENEFIT ENORMOUSLY FROM THEIR KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THE WORLD!

Posted by: schmetterlingtoo | November 14, 2008 1:54 PM

That HRC is even being considered would suggest that both Sen. Kerry and Gov. Richardson are somewhat lacking in Obama's eyes.

Posted by: bigskells | November 14, 2008 1:53 PM

Ahem, I HATE to repeat Posts, but this merits it.

Hillary Clinton's name might be fun to play with, but seriously, what Countries is she capable of actually influencing? Middle East?

ANY Woman? Riiiight! :-D

Latin America? Habla espanol Senorita?

Europe? Ohhhh, I am Sure Putin is Sooooooo Scared! :-D

Folks, allow me to throw out a few Topics and names:

Cuba, Nicaragua, Bolivia(Evo Morales), Venezuela(Chavez),Ecuador, Peru(Rebel Insurgency "Shining Path" probably supported by FARC, Chile,Ecuador, and Bolivia), Chile, Colombia(FARC), Mahmoud Ahmadinejad-Busy going around Venezuela, Bolivia, Nicaragua, Cuba, and probably FARC in Venezuela!

Folks, we have allowed Our Hemisphere to become a Ticking Time Bomb!

I did not even get into the Plights of People in Honduras, El Salvidor, Guatemala, the Caribbean, and Mexico, that cause all of them to try to illegally and occasionally Legally, enter the US.

OR, Trade between the US and all of Latin America.

The Secretary of State, who DOES know the Middle East, Far East, Europe, and might have a clue about Latin America;

The "Original" Anchor Baby-Bill Richardson!

Live it, learn it, Amore IT!

Posted by: SAINT---The | November 14, 2008 1:46 PM

HRC should be SecState, and Bill should be special envoy to the middle east.

They are smart, tough and tenacious- and this world needs peace, not m.e. leaders who feel empowered to be irrational and keep the world on the edge of chaos. The Clintons are big league, and that is the big game.

That Caroline Kennedy could get that NY senate seat is an added plus.

Oh yeah, he may have nutty uncle qualities but McCain as SecDef makes sense too.

Posted by: jrob822 | November 14, 2008 1:42 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 

© 2009 The Washington Post Company