Posted on 05/28/2006 12:06:42 PM PDT by billorites
THE BEST THING HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON could do for humanity is not run for president. Nothing against her personally, mind you; it's just that her aspirations could get in the way of her husband's worthier ones.
In our continuing quest to find an appropriate job for our favorite ex-president — a year and a half ago we suggested he become chairman of the Democratic Party — we now offer an even better suggestion. This time, it's a post he has coveted. Not long after leaving office in 2001, Clinton reportedly told an aide that his dream job would be secretary-general of the United Nations. That's our dream too.
The United Nations is a chronic underachiever. Envisioned as the most important organization in the world, the U.N. is often reduced to nothing more than an ineffective debating society. Its New York bureaucracy is calcified, with personnel decisions often based more on patronage than merit. The interests of its 191 member-nations are so polarized that consensus on anything of importance is nearly impossible. It is an institution that produces mountains of reports on bettering the world and follows through on only a few of them. The U.N. famously deliberates in the midst of genocides, produces commitments on foreign aid that its members subsequently ignore and allows countries like Cuba to pass judgment on others' respect for human rights.
And yet, for all that, the world would be a much grimmer place if the U.N. didn't exist. Its peacekeepers are a thin blue-helmeted line between tyrants and innocent civilians around the world, and they represent the only force that can stop the bloodshed in hot spots such as Darfur. Its food, disease-prevention and other aid programs are making a significant difference in blighted areas, and its toothless mechanisms for preventing weapons proliferation...
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
Does this article discuss how they would get around the fact that the UN Charter prohibits permanent members of the Security Council from holding the position of Secretary General?
maybe then the American public would rise in sufficient numbers and disassiciate itself from the UN..
I've called for that for a long long time. I don't think the chances are very good that we ever will. I wish that weren't the way I see it.
Will Clinton have time for the UN with the new babe?
"THE BEST THING HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON could do for humanity is not run for president."
Hee. This made me laugh, even though I know that wasn't the author's intention.
Bill would likely be a step up. I don't think he's responsible for nearly as many deaths as Kofi. Maybe. And hey, Kofi doesn't have his own line of condoms, so how effective can he possibly be? God I love the LA Times.
I like it! Let's put him in charge of an institution we can cut off and has no viable authority to do anything.
Klinton would fit PERFECTLY into the Corrupt United Nations Socialists (the United Nazis). After all, under his watch, and already corrupt Democratic Party reached totally new depths in undermining and attacking America
· DNC-China Threat (15)
· DNC-Corruption (20)
· DNC-Racism (14)
· DNC-Treason (12)
· DNC-Vote Fraud (9)
Treason and corruption are absolutely NOTHING NEW to the Democrats. However their media outlets RARELY cover this.
As much as I dislike Clinton, its hard to believe he could be worse than Kofi Annan. Face it, whoever gets that post will be a weak kneed, commie simp. At least Clinton would provide us with some entertainment. Think of all the foreign tail he could shag in that post--no wonder its his dream job! Would also pi$$ Hiliary off as a bonus.
Could you imagine Bill Clinton running the UN and his wife as President. OMG would that be the most f'ed up thing I could ever imagine.
All soveriegnty would be ceded to the UN.
Where was the barf N hurl alert?
Wouldn't be surprised tha the puppet masters would slate him for that job.
We can expect even more traitorous actions, if so.
With Kofi, the UN looks like what it is--a corrupt, anti-american organization. Bill would manage to make it warm and fuzzy.
Ha....You have seen what Clinton can do. He already goes by no rules. He could really turn himself into a dictator and the UN is ripe with the posibilites of dictator of the world.
This man needs to be put in a jail cell for a long long time with his wife as well as the people behind them.
Maybe so!!
This link is from Post 51:
http://www.unsg.org/role.html
Post 51 -- In addition, informal rules often influence the selection process. The best known is that nationals of permanent members of the Security Council - China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom or the United States - cannot be considered for the post, as such would invest an unwise amount of leverage over international decisions in one government, notwithstanding the statutory independence of the office.
Less commonly known, and perhaps more questionable, is the informal requirement that candidates for UNSG must be fluent in English and French, which while the dominant languages of international relations, are only two of the UN's six official languages.
snip
And in order for this dictatorship to work, he and Hitlery both have to have the power; she being head of the most powerful country in the world and he head of the UN. It could be pulled off. I wonder sometimes if they are working for the anti-christ.
Don't think it couldn't happen. That's why neither of them ever need to be in or near power again. They need to be put in jail.
Y'all realize that "informal rules" are not actual laws.
This is something that can be 'changed in committee' or merely ignored with impunity should the leadership of the UN so desire.
Nowhere in the UN Charter itself can I find anything preventing Clinton from becoming Secy. Gen. should they so desire, and that is the only document that would approach having the force of law over this situation .
Besides; When have any inconvenient laws ever prevented the UN or the Clintons from doing what they want?
Never?
Yes but that isn't a section of the UN Charter as stated by the other poster. Any one of the Big Five have the power to veto the UN Sectretary General appointee and thus it can be expected that one of the five would veto someone from one of the other four but that isn't in concrete.
I'm looking for the section of the UN Charter that prohibits such an appointment which I can't find and no one to this date has been able to provide but the claim stays out there.
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.