If Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld were both drowning, and you could only save one...what type of sandwich would you like?
2. My Ladyfriend sent me this early campaign sign. What do you think?
My feelings are mixed. As you know, I supported Hillary in 2008. But her stint as Secretary of State has left her reputation somewhat soiled, and I wish she had remained a senator. I had strong disagreements with many aspects of this country's foreign policies throughout the 2008-2012 period -- disagreements about Israel, the war on terror and other matters. Like it or not, she signed her name to those policies.
I know that many of my readers like to credit Hillary with everything that went well on the foreign policy front while blaming Obama for everything that went poorly. To me, that argument reeks of special pleading and wishful thinking.
On the other hand, I will of course support her if she is the nominee in in 2016.
5 comments:
Warren lacks serious national security policy cred and name recognition outside her specialty area(s). Scholarly women ex-professors do not meet the extra toughness bar required of female national leaders (Thatcher, Golda Meier, Merkel), to assuage fears that women are not tough-minded guardians of national safety. Hillary meets that bar, partially for the policy reasons you object to her SOS performance. (It was the reason she supported the Iraq war originally.) Warren does not so far measure up.
The ticket suggested would likely ruin that chance for a first woman president, and if so, possibly postpone that eventuality for a decade or more.
XI
I like Warren. I like her stands on the financial institutions, the TBTFs and her standing up for ordinary consumers, most recently students threatened with doubling interest rates on school loans. But . . . I don't think she's ready for national office. On the other hand, if Hillary runs and were to win, Elizabeth Warren would be an excellent choice in a position to advise and set financial/economic policy, someone who isn't stitched at the hip to Wall Street.
Now that 'would' be different!
Peggysue
Joseph, Joseph, Joseph...
Your commendable misgivings about Hillary, based on her obvious facilitating of the ongoing Pentagon's-New-Map/PNAC-inspired destabilisation (via the manufactured/amplified "Arab Spring" revolts) of a whole range of Mideast nations are so well-founded!
But until the scales fall from your eyes and you finally recognise Bill & Hillary as a long-established "CIA Couple" (albeit from the Yankee wing, not the Cowboy wing) you will continue to be hampered in your trenchant analyses by your childlike faith in the comforting, DLC-inorging, myth of Clintonian "progressiveness".
I hope Kirsten Gillibrand runs...here's Gillibrand in the news lately:
http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/06/17/why-senator-gillibrand-is-right-about-military-sexual-assault/
ps- oh, and in that case I would like a submarine sandwich...with lots of cold cuts!
Post a Comment