Forward into the past!

For those who say Senator Clinton is a neocon, I say, she is a neoliberal, and that is just as bad.
You know the old T. Bone Walker song, “they call it stormy Monday but Tuesday’s just as bad.”

Alan:

Uh…not quite.  Rupert Murdoch originally supported Hillary, and even had a fundraiser for her early on.  However, he withdrew his support and put his support behind Obama long before the primaries were over: in fact, almost all of his papers endorsed Obama over Hillary in the primaries.

Vadernoooo:

Hillary’s alleged harder-line attitude toward Iran is moot: as SoS she does not MAKE policy, she is obligated to carry out the policy of the president.  And although she will certainly have a voice in that re advice and feedback, it is ultimately Obama’s policy that will be carried out.

Joanne:

Not sure where you are getting your info.  See:

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=58699

http://christianactionforisrael.org/isreport/hillary.html

Peace.

At this point anything approaching concensus after years of vicious division is to be welcomed. Hillary Clinton is if anything over-qualified for the job. She’s will bring the same hard work and intelligence to this that she brought to being the Senator for New York.

Gee - she’s voted like a Likudnik on every single issue. Is it any wonder that Kristol is happy with this choice? It’s Israel uber alles and all that.

But Kristol needs to remember that as a senator from New York, she had to pander to the AIPAC crowd rather more than she may have to as Obama’s secretary of state.

It is not a bad pick, but what I worry about is her view on Iran. It seems not in line with Obama’s, and I agree much more with him on that than I do her. That is where I worry.

I was also hoping that she would be kept in the Senate. She’s a strong senator and the democrats need said Senators in the Senate. But I guess this should work as well.

The young orator has with one move debased himself and made a move of political expediency. The Harpie, with a slot of supporters that won’t go away, is now under his sphere of control, out of the Senate, and the party is his alone. She can be the face of Obama’s flawed foreign policy strategy, and bring Slick Willie along for some of the old connections and glad-handing he will still have. One can only hope that he keeps his habits of taking money from damn near every lowlife on the round rock or getting zipper jobs under wraps for a while.
Obama promised a bipartisan, conciliatory group of advisors and this is his big error. He should be stacking the White House with experienced academics and socialist economists, foreign affairs advisors who profess disarmament and immediate dismantling of the imperialist war machine, but the bottom line is that he is only a small increment better than the Bush fascism that we have allowed to fester in the halls of DC for eight years. This appointment, to appease a wing of his own party and consolidate control of his major opponent, shows his pragmatism far outweighs his good judgement.

Laissez le sang courir! The female is the deadlier of the species when it comes to certain spiders. I see that the country is going to take a sanguinary course with the choice of Hillary Clinton for Secretary of State. I think of Madam Albright with her “price is worth it” statement.

Anti-imperialists are going to have their work cut out for them.

elianita:

Nicely put.  However, I would expand on that.  It is not that the Democratic Party is not left-leaning; it certainly leans more left than the G.O.P., and has done so historically.

As I have said before, if this country IS going to be pulled to the left, it is not going to happen overnight: it can only happen in increments, over time.  I see Obama taking first steps in that direction, even if they SEEM imperceptible: indeed, it may be that they HAVE TO seem imperceptible for a short time so that so that it does not “scare” Average Joe and Jane America.  [N.B. People here on TD seem to forget that we on TD are generally more aware and involved than Average Joe and Jane, and while WE might be able to accept - and want - the change to take place overnight, it is unrealistic.]

The drift leftward will take time, and despite all the huggermugger here on TD, I believe both Obama’s policies and his appointments are a clever (because they seem otherwise) move in that direction.

Of course, only time will tell.  But I think we ARE seeing the beginning of a leftward drift in American politics and economics - however slight - and I, for one, will be watching with both fascination and anticipation.

Peace.

It is curious that the choice of Hillary Clinton as SoS has brought on such a sudden onslaught of criticism and disappointment. What was everyone expecting? That Obama not offer her a position in his administration at all?

But of course the reaction is violent because it is seen as conflicting with Obama’s message of “change”. This is where the real stake lies. The message of “change” has been repeated ad nauseam since January, religiously slipped into key moments of high-importance speeches, visually splashed all over the internet and in other media. It has had its effect. Now that the campaign is over, though, it is being asked of Obama to produce some sort of concrete transformation of American society.

Therin lies the difficulty. What fundamentally prevents Obama from fulfilling expectations of “change” is that the Democratic party is not in essence a left-wing party that believes in radical change. There are a whole host of subjects on which Democrats and Republicans agree, including expanding the war in Afghanistan, not proceeding with an immediate withdrawal from Iraq, and not calling into question the second amendement. Let’s not ask of the Democrats what they can’t give.

For more: http://www.ilpodesta.org/2008/11/meaning-of-change.html

Obama did not want Hillary teaming up with Ted Kennedy against him in the show down over health care coming up very early on in his administration.
His economic advisors are telling him that he can’t do it now because of the economic meltdown.  Interesting how he plays Kennedy and Clinton against each other.

Rightists would rather have her dealing with foreign affairs since she talks fast and loose about using nukes, rather than with domestic policy like health care where she could more effectively advance the marxist cause which is dear to Obama’s heart.

Come on folks give up that ol’ facade esp faced with the volumes of evidence to support the reality…Hillary is a Neo Con.
What self Repecting Real Dem would allow the Oxymoronic term ‘Reagan Democrat’ to be hung on them..In fact invite it with such glory.Dems HATED Reagan- his union Busting, his callous Deinstitutionalization, His avoidance of the AIDS epidemic,‘Star Wars’, and Esp the introduction to the Feudalistic system called ‘Trickle Down’ (just to name a Few)
Hillary consistently Voted WITH the Bush Admin. Used ‘Straight out of the Book’ Neo Con tactics during her Campaign. Must ahve even given Hagee a Hard on with ‘Obliterate Iran’. Not only attempted to paint Obama as a Muslim symapthizer, but also a dangerous ‘Angry Black Man’....She set up every attack for Mac to pick up during the General.
I am still Baffled why anyone should be concerned about LIEbermans Betrayal of the Dems, He is an ‘Independent’ and Yet not ONE word about Hillary’s ENDORSEMENT of Mac OVER Obama…’ Crossed the Threshold’???
I can See Very clearly WHO Hillary REALLY is and I voted for Bill Twice.
It’s time to give up false Pretenses…Hillary IS and has always been a Neo Con. The only thing she did not pull out was her own ‘Religious Convictions’ to support her candidacy, But when you are as arrogant as Hillary.. who needs a ‘God’ to ‘anoint’ you?
Come on She Even had the Audacity to invoke the Assasination of RFK THREE TIMES to explain why she refused to concede…..3rd times a Charm Hillary? 3 times is not a ‘mis speak’....It’s a REQUEST!
Amazing that of her ‘18 Million’ supporters She couldn’t pay off her Debt…What does that come out to…$1.25 each? She Never ‘Won’ those Votes, She Stole them- esp in MI.The ‘Clinton’ machine helped stack that deck…But couldn’t actually come up with the Real Voters.She Knew it too since she Immediately expected the Obama Supporters to Cover her Bet!
the Only ‘Ceiling with 18 million cracks’ is the Ceiling which holds Women in higher esteem then their male Counterparts. Hillary has proven to be as Unethical Immoral and Corrupt as her male Neo Con Counterparts.
Hillary didn’t just have those ‘90’s “Hillary haters” to consider, she had those who were once avid supporters and defenders she screwed when she voted to appease this Criminal Admin the second she stepped into the Senate….I HATE Hillary Now as much as I Hate Cheney ....In fact is there any picture with them together…Could it be DICK in Drag?
The Clintons and their minions in the DLC have been Poison to the Dem party as much as the ‘Religious Right’ has been to the Republican party. What purpose do they Both Serve…The Corp Agenda. Only difference is which side of the Street they operate in covertly.
Have you Realized that NO DLC’er has been able to ‘Seal the Deal’ with the Dem Base Since Billy? We can smell the Corp Whore Stench a MILE away!We were pissed about NAFTA and Now are Further infuriated by the results of Bills bowing down to WallStreet by signing Gramms various Deregulation Legislations…Corp WHORE Stench!
Not only did Billy screw US economically thoughout his Terms, He assured that a Republican would Win in ‘00 because he couldn’t keep his dick in his pants. That ‘money Shot’ cost US thousands of lives, Trillions of Dollars and about 2 centuries of Good Will and Friendships! Heckova JOB,Billyboy!

Yes, much will be read into this, including lots of incendiary comments by Hillary-bashers.  But the truth is that it still comes down to the fact that, although she will certainly have a “voice” re advice and feedback to Obama, she will NOT be making policy, and will be obligated to carry forward OBAMA’S foreign policy, NOT her own.

In fact, if some conservatives are are “applauding” the choice of Hillary, it is more likely that they believe that OBAMA’s policies will be “favorable” to conservative thinking.  Yet I doubt that is likely to be the case much of the time.

Ultimately, as I have said elsewhere, with few exceptions, Obama and Hillary agreed on most foreign policy issues throughout the primary campaign.  So she is actually uniquely positioned to carry out Obama’s foreign policy, since they already agree on a great deal.  So if comments are going to be made about Hillary re SoS, keep in mind that what you (collectively) are ACTUALLY doing is commenting on OBAMA, not Hillary.

Peace.

As a cluster bomb liberal, Hillary is acceptable to the neo-cons.  She’s about the best they could hope for.