Hillary’s Hunger and Bubba’s Baggage
A reader asks:
“What, no comment on Hillary for Sec. of State?”
I’m hoping that the drama around this is just drama. Hillary news sells papers and drives web traffic. I for one do not want the Clintons back in the White House in any capacity. This is supposed to be change. Dragging Hillary (a power-hungry, pathological liar who thinks she should be President) and Bubba back into the mix is not good for anyone. Yes, she is smart as hell and has balls of steel. So what? There are plenty of other picks who don’t come with the Clintons’ baggage. Bill Clinton wouldn’t pass muster for an entry level job at Homeland Security. Politico reports:
Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) is President-elect Barack Obama’s first choice for secretary of State but his aides are becoming exasperated by the Clinton camp’s pokey response to demands for extensive information about former President Bill Clinton’s finances, according to numerous Democrats involved in the process.
“The sense among the no-drama Obama world is: This is well on its way to winning best Oscar for drama,” said one well-connected Democratic official.
Bubba has made way too much shady money lobbying for foreign interests. By the way – that whole bit about “keep your friends close but your enemies closer” only works in the movies. Remember, the last time the Clinton’s were in the White House they tried to steal the furniture. Do anyone really want them back?
Speaking of lobbying, those guys and gals on K Street are real scumbags, right? Not exactly – don’t hate the players, hate the game. Tim Carney (a Washington insider with lots of experience in these matters) wrote a great piece about lobbying right here (complete with some Clinton examples). He concludes:
Don’t get me wrong: some of my best friends are lobbyists. More importantly, lobbying, at its heart, is nothing more than free speech. In fact, the right to petition one’s government is arguably the most important protection in the First Amendment. Efforts to “reform” lobbying—like efforts to “reform” campaign finance—usually end up restricting speech while not fixing any corruption.
The only way to end these conflicts of interest and tales of corruption would be to limit the government’s control over our lives and our money—the very free-market policies that get derided as “excessive capitalism” by the big-government types. With neither party really interested in such a reform, it doesn’t look like the game will get cleaned up any time soon, but at least we’ll keep getting good stories.
About the Author: Randall H. Miller is an American college educator/blogger. He is also a former U.S. Army officer (82nd Airborne) with a M.A. in Diplomacy (focusing on International Terrorism) and a B.A. in Criminal Justice. Use the form on the right to sign up and receive notifications of new content. The words and ideas expressed here are 100% his own and not those of his employers or affiliated organizations.
dickmill | Nov 17, 2008 | Reply
This would be Barack’s first betrayal to the electorate and will be his biggest regret when he writes his memoirs.
There is simply no place for Bill Clinton in this administration.
The only good news would be for the cable channels. Thank God for the California wild fires. They provided a bridge from the presidential race to the Clintons.
Maybe some other good news — this could trump the Palin coverage.
LaPaix | Nov 17, 2008 | Reply
I am SO with you on this one! Don’t do it, Barack!!!
RHM | Nov 18, 2008 | Reply
A major centerpiece of Obama’s campaign was the Iraq war. Hillary voted for it. In addition, some of their biggest disagreements during the primaries were about foreign policy. The thought of her as SecState makes me sick to my stomach. We’ve had a Bush or Clinton in the White House for 28 years. Obama was elected because of his promises of “change.”
Here are two links from this morning. Odds of her getting the job are improving. And I’m serious, Bill Clinton would not pass a basic security clearance background check. He would not be allowed to work as a baggage inspector at TSA, but the incoming POTUS is willing to put the guy’s wife (and him) in one of the most powerful positions in government.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1108/15703.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/nov/17/hillary-clinton-secretary-of-state
Frank the Tank | Nov 18, 2008 | Reply
I think Obama is trying to keep his friends close and his enemies even closer with Hillary. That said, I am sure the Bill will have a lot more influence than people think. With the Clintons, it’s all about them.
RGVgal | Nov 18, 2008 | Reply
So much for change..This administration is starting to look a lot like the Clinton’s 3rd term. I understand that they want the most experience people and most of those would have worked in the Clinton admin, but this is getting to be a little too much and if I hear another pundit talk about a “Team of rivals” one more time, I’m going to scream.
Frank the Tank | Nov 18, 2008 | Reply
Uh oh. Another Clintonite for Obama land. Daniel Criag for Whitehouse Counsel.
RHM | Nov 18, 2008 | Reply
@ Frank,
Whew! For a second there I thought you said “Larry” Craig.
How about Sarah Palin as Secretary of Education?
Howie Mandel as Secretary of Commerce?
I’m prepared for anything at this point.
RGVgal | Nov 18, 2008 | Reply
Who is Daniel Criag? The WH counsel is going to be Greg Craig, the guy who was Clinton’s impeachment lawyer and played McCain in debate prep.
RHM | Nov 18, 2008 | Reply
Daniel Craig is the new James Bond (best so far in my opinion). I think Frank just got confused.
RGVgal | Nov 18, 2008 | Reply
Oh..Daniel Craig should be director of the CIA.
Frank the Tank | Nov 18, 2008 | Reply
@ Randy
Yes, I meant Greg Craig. I’m slipping in my old age. Did you take a look at some his clients? David Hinckley, the man who shot Reagan and he also represents a Panamanian official accused of murdering an American soldier.
Frank the Tank | Nov 18, 2008 | Reply
@Randy,
Larry Craig will be hired as a liaison to the gay community.
TO' | Nov 18, 2008 | Reply
“Bill Clinton wouldn’t pass muster for an entry level job at Homeland Security.”
Neither would Barak Obama.
RHM | Nov 18, 2008 | Reply
@TO’,
You make an excellent point. He probably wouldn’t. That got me to thinking – I’m not so sure any of our elected officials could pass muster for a security clearance. Lucky for them elected officials are given somewhat of a pass on the issue. They still go through the checks but not with the save vigor as you or I would. Strange, no?
Mark | Nov 19, 2008 | Reply
I’m not sure how much ‘change’ there will be…look at the current choices for AG and HSS, I’m curious who may be asked for SECEF, Gates has made it clear that he will not be staying on, but continues to ‘never’ say ‘never’. I’m less concerned over who will head the CIA, especially since the creation of the DNI position. Whatever the case, there are some difficult times ahead, there would have been with any POTUS though.
Mark | Nov 19, 2008 | Reply
Lincoln did the same thing, bring the opposition in close and get them invested in the process and decisions.
A. Taveras | Nov 19, 2008 | Reply
If former President Bill Clinton couldn’t pass DHS or TSA background checks it speaks more to the insanity of that bureaucracy than anything else.
David Lamb | Nov 20, 2008 | Reply
I’m gonna disagree with you, here, RHM, and I think I’m going to fall to your left, which is unusual for me. I think Ms. Clinton would be a good State Secretary and bring a lot of genuine political savvy to an already savvy organization. That being said, I don’t support the massive rehiring of President Clinton staff for Mr. Obama’s Cabinet, which seems to be the direction things are going in. The Clinton years were good ones indeed, but if Mr. Obama wants to legitimize his pleas for “change” and “new governance” he needs to show American’s that he does not mean just a “shift” from right to left of the branches of government. We won’t get 90s prosperity in 2010 with 90s solutions to 90s problems. Moreover the Clinton years were ones of a generally balanced legislature, which the government lacks now.
And BTW, yes, I’ll bet you hope this controversy “drives web traffic.”
dickmill | Nov 21, 2008 | Reply
Where’s The Friday Morning Fix?
And, can’t we drop the Hillary saga and talk about PIRATES — aarrrrgggghhhhh!
How about a discussion on why the auto company “leaders” are idiots?
RHM | Nov 21, 2008 | Reply
The Friday Afternoon Fix (new title this week) will be out later today. Technical difficulties.
And yes, we’ll be talking about pirates!
Frank the Tank | Nov 21, 2008 | Reply
@Randy
Avast ye matey!
Frank the Tank | Nov 21, 2008 | Reply
@Randy
At this rate it will be a Friday Evening Fix
RHM | Nov 21, 2008 | Reply
The Friday Evening Fix is now posted.