What is Digg?10 Comments
- tcbishop12, on 11/21/2008, -1/+12This will be official soon. Good choice by Obama, politically shrewd and practically beneficial for all involved, and for the nation as a whole. Hillary is highly capable and will be a very effective Secretary of State, as long as she can keep the drama down.
- inactive, on 11/21/2008, -0/+8It's funny to see all the people worrying about the Clintons doing something to undermine Obama. How could they possibly do that? People have known the Clintons for 16 years and we've become pretty familiar with Obama during this campaign. If something goes wrong at State, who do you think is gonna get the blame?
- Ganpachi, on 11/21/2008, -1/+8Further proof that Obama is a better man than I. He is magnanimous in victory, whereas I probably would have kicked her in the box and shoved her.
- JenniferInMO, on 11/21/2008, -1/+7This is probably a good decision. I was all for Richardson, but I think HRC will do a good job.
- MediaWeasel, on 11/21/2008, -0/+5I think it's a good move despite my misgivings about the Clintons. I remember that interview he gave when he described having been reading Lincoln who had a policy of including his enemies on his team. Obama wouldn't be drawn further on that apart from saying that Lincoln was a wise man.
Keep your friends close, and your enemies closer ..
Biden has a lot of foreign policy experience and I get the feeling that he will have a great deal of input into her contribution as SOS rather than her being given carte blanche to beat her own drum.
I also see that Bill will be having his speeches read before delivery. Another tactical and shrewd move. - apastafarian, on 11/21/2008, -0/+5Initially, I was against this. I was ambivalent about Hilary till the primaries, when my opinion of here soured greatly. I would never vote for her, but placing her at State kind of makes sense. She's viewed as more of a hawk than Obama, which will appeal to the right side of the party and the republicans in general. It silences once and for all the silly misguided PUMA's. It removes her strongly backed ambitions to leap frog over more senior senators for leadership positions. The rest of the world looks back very fondly on the Clinton administration, which gives her instant respect. It will take them a while to figure out just what she is and who she is not.
- cmootoo, on 11/22/2008, -0/+3Your points are valid but I hope you are wrong.
Obama has shown that his circle of advisers and the ability to make sound judgement calls has superseded experience so far. Lets hope that carries on to the positions they will assume. I guess Bill will also be considered an informal adviser as well so that may yield some positive results.
Personally I wouldn't have chosen her but no position is permanent. We'll see how this plays out. - oldhick, on 11/21/2008, -1/+2I beg to differ. I think Obama will regret this decision for a long time. She has ZERO foreign policy experience. Obama has none either. Wouldn't the best choice be to nominate someone with some experience? I don't see any benefit for Obama or the country with this decision other than people who liked Hillary are going to be glad...
I hope I'm wrong. - jericho4119, on 11/22/2008, -0/+1Foreign policy experience is nice, to be sure, but what HRC does have is the name and the relationships that will open doors all over the world.
No leader - friend or foe - will be able to ignore an entreaty from HRC on the behalf of BHO.
Remember when the Saudis made Bush dance for them when he went over to beg them to pump more oil? When BHO makes a speech that rallies hundreds of thousands of citizens of a foreign country and HRC follows that up with a visit which is fawned over by the local media - how could any leader say no? - kemp34, on 11/21/2008, -4/+1Bad move Barack.
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is