Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

HILLARY FOR SECRETARY OF STATE - IS HE KIDDING?
Morris ^ | 11/14/2008 | dick morris

Posted on 11/14/2008 1:14:27 PM PST by jessduntno

Hopefully, it's just a rumor started by the Clintonistas, but is Barack Obama seriously considering appointing Hillary Clinton as his Secretary of State? If he pulls the trigger on that appointment, he will deserve what he gets!

Obama would do well to remember the history of Harry Truman and Jimmy Byrnes in 1944. Byrnes, known as the "assistant president" in FDR's third term, was widely thought to be Roosevelt's choice to replace Henry Wallace as his running mate on the 1944 ticket. At the last minute, FDR re-considered and decided Byrnes, a South Carolinian, was too conservative and went with Truman instead. But the Democratic Party establishment clearly was disappointed. While they wanted to get rid of the almost-Communist Wallace, they wanted Byrnes not Truman. (Just like the party establishment really wanted Hillary, not Obama, to be the presidential nominee).

So Truman named Byrnes to be his Secretary of State after he took office on Roosevelt's death in 1945. Byrnes, who thought he should have been president, proceeded to make his own foreign policy. He flew to a meeting in Europe with the allied foreign ministers and barely kept President Truman posted on the deliberations. He became a loose cannon who thought he was the president. After a year of this nonsense, Truman fired him and brought in George Marshall to take the job.

(Excerpt) Read more at disckmorris.com ...


TOPICS: Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: bho2008; dickmorris; hillary; sos
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-67 next last
To: jessduntno

—try dickmorris.com—disckmorris.com doesn’t work—


21 posted on 11/14/2008 1:28:25 PM PST by rellimpank (--don't believe anything the MSM tells you about firearms or explosives--NRA Benefactor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thesetruths

Of course, Alaska wasn’t unclaimed, but purchased.


22 posted on 11/14/2008 1:28:37 PM PST by thesetruths
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: jessduntno
The fool has already tapped Madelyn Albright for a financial conference. Hard to believe they are bringing these failed retreads back. The nightmare only gets worse.
23 posted on 11/14/2008 1:28:52 PM PST by Parley Baer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thesetruths
Seward was right about a few things, especially what later became our largest state.

They called it "Seward's Folly." Cost us $7.2 million, or two cents an acre. (Drill!)
24 posted on 11/14/2008 1:28:57 PM PST by Genoa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: thesetruths

We should thank Seward for giving us Sarah.


25 posted on 11/14/2008 1:29:41 PM PST by murron (Proud Marine Mom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: RC2

He meant that when he was through with us all we’d have left was change.


26 posted on 11/14/2008 1:29:51 PM PST by DannyTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: murron
We should thank Seward for giving us Sarah.

I'm glad she'll be either in Juneau or Washington when the Slavs come pouring over the Bering Strait to reclaim it! We'll need her!
27 posted on 11/14/2008 1:33:07 PM PST by Genoa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: jessduntno

It would be a shrewd move on her part. Good pad for the resume and the 2016 Presidential run. She will be 65.


28 posted on 11/14/2008 1:33:56 PM PST by frithguild (Can I drill your head now?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: avacado
Hillary might actually be a good pick. She can harangue and nag the enemy into submission. "We surrender! Just get this wretched harridan out of our faces!"
29 posted on 11/14/2008 1:34:03 PM PST by hinckley buzzard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: edpc
Getting rid of Obama, Biden and Pelosi? Might actually be worth it.
30 posted on 11/14/2008 1:36:25 PM PST by hinckley buzzard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: jessduntno

Well, it will keep her traveling, and generally nowhere near the White House. He won’t have to have a couple food tasters anyway.


31 posted on 11/14/2008 1:36:34 PM PST by Secret Agent Man (I'd like to tell you, but then I'd have to kill you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: frithguild

Yeah but at 65 the expiration date on those eggs will be well past their prime.


32 posted on 11/14/2008 1:38:01 PM PST by Secret Agent Man (I'd like to tell you, but then I'd have to kill you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: jessduntno

I can’t imagine Hillary accepting. Think on it. The SOS bascially has to do the president’s will. Look at Condi. Look at Powell. He obviously had differences from Bush, but couldn’t really talk about it, so it became gossip. The SOS goes over the world, being, as it were, the president’s assistant.

Why would Hillary do that? The Senate is poised to become the most powerful democrat Senate in years. Kennedy, who this election I have been led to believe is Hillary’s nemesis, is gone. She is one of the old guard now.

A Senator can say what they want, create all the havoc they want. She doesn’t have to run anything. All she has to do is talk. She can set herself up in subtle opposition to Obama if she chooses.

My guess is she won’t take it.


33 posted on 11/14/2008 1:39:10 PM PST by I still care (A Republic - if you can keep it. - Ben Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RC2

Clearly, the concept of “change” is a much tortured term.

“Change” from ANYTHING that George W. Bush may have brought about. Almost all the Executive Orders issued by Bush are going to be disavowed or countermanded, either in legislation or in a total reversal of the policy established by them.

Bush Derangement Syndrome has not ended by any means. They may even considering applying some kind of “war crimes” statute against the Bush Administration.

The appointment of Herself, still the Cold and Joyless, is just one more example of how wide and deep this “change” may be expected to encompass.

Even going backwards is “change”.


34 posted on 11/14/2008 1:39:16 PM PST by alloysteel (Molon labe! Roughly translated, "Come and take them!" referring to personal weapons.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: jessduntno
This move serves everyone's self interest.

Obama gets Clinton out of the Senate and into the Administration (under him). She (and Bill) have to tow the Obama line.

She gets international exposure and begins to campaign for the job she really wants......... Secretary-General of the U.N.

Forget SCOTUS - you don't get to hand out money from the bench.......

35 posted on 11/14/2008 1:40:40 PM PST by TexasNative2000 (Graham Harrell for Heisman!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Old Sarge
TOE-SUCKER SPEAKS!!

That is so freakin' old. Is that some Pavlovian reaction you have?

36 posted on 11/14/2008 1:45:20 PM PST by Cobra64 (www.BulletBras.net)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: hinckley buzzard
"Hillary might actually be a good pick. She can harangue and nag the enemy into submission. "We surrender! Just get this wretched harridan out of our faces!""

And if that doesn't work, she can just show them some leg!

37 posted on 11/14/2008 2:00:43 PM PST by avacado
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: jessduntno
Imagine if you will, you are Obama, Biden and Pelosi... do you REALLY want a Clinton as SoS?! Check your corn flakes every morning folks... You don't know what might be in there.
38 posted on 11/14/2008 2:01:14 PM PST by JDNorcal (Clinton SoS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: edpc
Interesting article in the WSJ yesterday about succession.
The author concludes the article with a the possibility of a DC disaster on 1/20/09. She state that the Sec.of St., in this case Rice would not be in DC.The author also states that Bush could help secure O's nominations before 1/20/09 therefore making his Sec. of State, assuming confirmation, the Pres.(Hillary Clinton). That is if there is a lethal attack on DC. The timing of the article and the Clinton announcement are strange. Probably nothing?
39 posted on 11/14/2008 2:26:26 PM PST by free from tyranny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: jessduntno

Two scenarios - seeing that Sec. of States, esp. the first ones, rarely last more than 2 years, Maybe Obama wants to appoint her to “get her out of the way.” Could she challenge him more in the senate?

Don’t know why Hillary would take it - would mean giving up her Senate seat. Then what?


40 posted on 11/14/2008 2:26:43 PM PST by PGR88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-67 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson