The five stages of grief (Hillary as SoS).

[joshcryer]

All we have witnessed so far in DUers who despised the idea of Hillary as SoS is Denial. It has inundated hundreds of threads here, hundreds of irrational loathing and innuendo. Complete irrationality, by some of the most prolific, and great posters here, might I add. But denied they did, despite all the evidence to suggest the truth.

Now we are going to see the anger, the outrage, it'll make Paulson and Holder look like a picnick. Mostly people will complain about how Obama is continuning to make poor cabinet choices (mostly spurred by peoples self-delusion that Obama was anything but a moderate centrist capitalist; the stages of grief over that are another matter).

Then of course, Bargaining, people will talk about how Hillary's SoS position should be "dumbed down," and such. They will talk about how Obama plans to not really utilize her and that he'll find some other way to manage the same position. The arguments will become increasingly irrational, but we won't buy it.

Depression will follow after that, although many DUers are already beginning to show signs of it (if not many of the other symptoms as testified by the past few days of utter banality).

And finally, Acceptance. Obama will be seen by most DUers as one of the best Presidents in history. While he'll continue Americas Capitalist Hegmony, most rational DUers will know that he never promised otherwise. Great things will happen, the USA will become a fair player on the world scheme, Cuba will lose its embargo, alternate energy sources will be sought, and indeed produces at the end of his tenure. It will be one of the best and most promising times for the USA in a very very long time.

Of course, the stages of grief are unique to individuals, not all will go through the same stages at the same time (though mob mentality with some of the more prolific and respected posters here will certainly happen), and we can see examples of various people on DU expressing varying sentiments as expressed by the stages.

All that said, I told you so! :)

[Whisp]

1. is it really official and who was the official that made it so?

I ask in ernest.

[joshcryer]

2. You're still in denial mode.

:hi:

[Whisp]

3. where's the link, I took your post as an official announcement of some sort

or other.

nevermind.

same games

[joshcryer]

4. You will deny a link, watch:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081121/ap_on_go_pr_wh/obama_cabinet

You will say "anonymous source, not real."

You will say "Clinton people are leaking false information."

You will say "Clinton people are forcing his hand."

You will say "Hillary Clinton hasn't accepted."

[Whisp]

5. my comp can't read some pages very well...

but Aides say... doesn't really cut it for me, like you guessed.

[joshcryer]

8. The AP would not make such a concrete article if it wasn't true.

This is the AP we're talking about here, it's not Fox News, it's not MSNBC, or CNN, this is a news organization who makes sure its sources are very credible. If it's not true (which is highly unlikely, and this is about probality, not about intuition or feelings), there will be firings, investigations.

The reports have shown us the likelihood of this occuring, whether some here will believe it or not. It's the same way that thousands of posts inundated the forums about MI and FL being "seated" or "not seated." Anyone with 5th grade math skills knew the probablity of that was extremely unlikely (and many times I had to interject reason into the discussions because so many people were misled), yet the posts continued.

Similarily as to how the denial posts will continue here until the announcement is made.

[rove karl rove]

12. from the link

"...The senior adviser, speaking on condition of anonymity because the president-elect is not prepared to officially announce the nomination, said Obama believes Clinton would bring instant stature and credibility to U.S. diplomatic relations..."

does this unnamed senior adviser know for sure? Why the delay in the offical announcement then?

[BlooInBloo]

15. I have a link from an anonymous source that says Obama will hand over the Presidency to Clinton....

Don't deny it - or else you'll be in stage 1!

:rofl:

[Submariner]

7. The Hill lovers have a much higher tolerance for her dishonesty

than other DU'ers, and are just exacting their revenge for the primary scuffles. You can see it in the "up yours" tone of the threads they start.

My buddy, who lost all shoulder control and who is in pain today from a Viet Cong sniper shot, was incensed as I was of the make believe story she made up about her Tuzla sniper fire incident that never happened. It showed callous shallowness and a will to say anything, including insulting people really under fire, to get what she wants.

It will be passed off as, "But it's just politics, so it's okay to lie", and they often throw in "you're a sexist bastard". That's change we can believe in....I guess. :eyes:

To them, dishonesty is something that is okay to overlook in a top tier politician, and we wonder why our country is going into the tank.

[joshcryer]

9. Dishonesty is the hallmark of a politician.

Weasle wording is, too. But I respect them, because I understand them. I don't think that they're pure. I don't think that Obama is having his hand forced by some Clinton-esque conspiracy, for instance. I don't think the Clintons are that powerful and I certainly don't think Obama is that weak.

This is one of the strongest candidates, strongest President Elects, strongest Presidents we will ever see.

And that's something that many here are having a hard time accepting.

[Submariner]

10. And that's something that many here are having a hard time accepting

I don't at all. Born and raised in Kennedy Country, I was 16 when JFK was murdered. I feel now what we all felt then. The potential for great leadership.

But I also feel someone very experienced with less political baggage, like Bill Richardson, would perform as well, or maybe even better than Hillary, and I wouldn't have to look forward to another 8 years of the Hate Radio and Hate TV neocons constantly resurrecting garbage like Whitewater, Travelgate, files missing, remarks on physical appearance, the Clenis, and on and on.

I'm not allowed to go out and put a bullet in the skull of the entire Fox News staff and Limpballs and that ilk, so short of that, I would like to see Obama NOT be critiqued by them based on his SoS's history. The hate from the right has been exhausting since 1980, and I would like a time out from it with cabinet selections that are not wide open targets like Hillary.

Like you, I understand them, but a break from the vermin for 4 to 8 years to better enjoy an Obama presidency would be something comforting. Having less bad baggage would allow us to shove it in the faces of the right wingnuts as the way to conduct government business.

[joshcryer]

11. All Obama wants is unfettered loyalty.

As soon as he sees that one of his cabinet members is disloyal, they're gone. Simple as that. If you believe all the bad things about Hillary, take solace in that fact, that she'll be gone in no time. If you believe she's just another politician, then be happy that Obama chose someone who would challenge him as much as he wants, like all the members of his cabinet.

He doesn't want to be like Bush, surrounded by a bunch of sycophants. He wants actual hard hitting opinions that may in fact go contrary to his own. That doesn't make him weak, oh no, that makes him freaking unbelievable.

An incredible President, I'm telling you. Especially since the first rule of politics is that loyalty goes a very long way.

That's precisely the reason he chose her. A gesture so grand that there will be no human more loyal. Just wait and see.

[No Elephants]

22. What makes you think that all Obama wants is unfettered loyalty? I so hope that is not

true.

[No Elephants]

24. That may depend upon whether he made a deal with her and, if so, what the particulars are.

[Beacool]

40. Well, ironically enough, they are pretty much OK with her as SOS.

Every Republican that I've seen on Fox, including the party chairman, said that she was a good choice for SOS. Even the radio guys like Rush, Hannity, etc. are not going ape over it.

It's the left, like many on this board, who are having palpitations over the issue.

Personally, I would prefer she stay in the senate as I think that she'll be a force to reckon and she would preserve her independence and power base.

;-)

[tonycinla]

64. The real world

The Middle Easterners,the arabs,jews and persians will out maneuver Clinton and Obama combined.Hillary will be no match for Assad or Livni.Obama and Hillary will be playing town square checkers while they will be playing three dimensional chess,just as Chalabi did to the neocons.Watch!

[Vattel]

16. God, even O'Reilly didn't buy the

"How insensitive to soldiers who really have been under fire" silliness.

[LostinVA]

26. My BIL was horribly maimed in service IN BOSNIA, and he thinks it's all just silly

[No Elephants]

27. Fox was part of Operation Chaos, though.

[LostinVA]

25. hahahahhahaha Joshcryer Kubler-Ross

[Mass]

61. No, the Hillary Clinton people are saying she did not accept yes, whatever this means.

My guess is that she will accept, but contrarily to what the OP insists (through multiple threads, it is not official as of yet).

[enigmatic]

6. well done!

:D

[Skittles]

13. how about the DUer who said she should be "subservient"

:rofl:

[No Elephants]

20. Link?

[Skittles]

67. sorry, it was "obedient underling" (same thing)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=7887120#7887256

[qwlauren35]

14. Anger - here.

I will move to acceptance IF I discover that Hillary is really anti-war, anti-preemptive strikes, but projected it to look presidential.

I really, really hope it was just an image.

[phleshdef]

17. I believe it was. She had it in her head that she had to appear tougher because of being female...

I honestly believe that.

Either way, you can bet your ass the Obama administration with SOS Clinton will NOT have a Bush-like foreign policy.

[No Elephants]

29. Respectfully, the fact that you honestly believe something does not make it

true. Besides, under your theory, Hillary stated a position she does not hold for the sole purpose of deceiving Americans into voting for her. I guess being a hawk is worse than deceiving America because lying to the American public just to get elected does not kill anyone, but both are reprehensible, IMO.

[BlooInBloo]

21. The number of people who think it's a *compliment* if she turns out to be a bigger liar...

than she's already known to be is really astonishing.

[LostinVA]

28. Why do you doubt PE Obama so? Why did you even VOTE for him, then???

[davidpdx]

18. I don't think Hillary is a problem

The potential problem is Bill Clinton. Given the fact he is a former president he holds quite a bit of clout. My concern is that he'll say something during a crisis to undermine Obama. There is only one president at a time. Obama is respecting that until he is sworn in. Clinton needs to do the same once Obama is sworn in.

[Wolfies Revenge]

19. I'm with Obama

Hillary will make a fine Secretary of State.

[sufrommich]

23. I look forward to witnessing all 5 stages....

right here in this thread,it should be fun. ;)

[No Elephants]

30. Then, that's what you'll see--or think you saw. People tend to gather evidence for what they

already believe to be so, whether or not such evidence actually exists.

[Barack_America]

31. I'm not going to "grieve" any appointment Obama makes.

I'm not that emotionally attached.

But I don't think he made the wisest decision here.

[BlooInBloo]

32. It's funny because the only thing Clinton supporters really want is to say nyahnyah...

to Obama folks.

It's especially funny because Clinton serving at the pleasure of Obama SHOULD be the biggest insult in the world to Clinton supporters. Instead, they try to cast it as the world's biggest win.

Obama could name Clinton as Secretary of Janitorial Services, and Clinton supporters would crow their victory chants.

How Nietzchean.

:rofl:

[Lyric]

34. Yes, because Clinton haters are so very mature and rational

and if she DIDN'T get the job (or refused it) they would all, of course, refrain from acting exactly the way that you describe.

:eyes:

The woman and her husband can do NOTHING that is not dissected, picked over, fought over, and spun as evil in some way or another. And then, to add insult to injury, SHE is blamed for the "drama." As if she, and not the people who hate her, are the ones creating it.

[BlooInBloo]

35. Please don't obliterate me! I'm sorry! I'm so sorry!

[Jamastiene]

38. ...and that's only how it goes in the Democratic Party.

That is not even counting how the Republican Clinton haters act...not that there is much difference. They use the same talking points and have the same mentality.

[LostinVA]

48. And, the people who started all of this were Rush, Ken Starr, etal

There really WAS a Vast Rightwing Conspiracy... and so many on the Left (or who SAY they are) bought into it. I think it's pathological -- seriously.

I NEVER thought I'd see the day when DU had Hillary-murdered-Foster and "cigar" references. Good God, there have been Foster references for the last WEEK on here.

[joshcryer]

54. I never thought that progressives would actually believe the vetting bullshit.

I mean seriously. As if the Clintons are traitors and are beholden to the donators or speech listeners. It's like saying Columbia University is tratorious because they're "associated" Ahmadinejad. A statement that many (many!) right wingers believed. But most progressives would laugh at such absurdities.

Unless it happens to do with the Clintons.

[joshcryer]

55. I never thought that progressives would actually believe the vetting bullshit.

I mean seriously. As if the Clintons are traitors and are beholden to the donators or speech listeners. It's like saying Columbia University is tratorious because they're "associated" Ahmadinejad. A statement that many (many!) right wingers believed. But most progressives would laugh at such absurdities.

Unless it happens to do with the Clintons.

[sufrommich]

39. Why should Clinton serving in the Obama administration

be an insult to any Clinton supporter over the age of 12?

[joshcryer]

53. What are you talking about? If that were the case there wouldn't be hundreds of irrational threads.

People who dislike Clinton would jump for joy that she was "Secretary of Janitorial Services."

The fact is that hundreds of denial threads have come up since she was rumored to get the position. This is indisputable. Yet those of us who felt it was at least remotely plausible were bashed, cut down, and otherwise demolished for having a *reasonable* position.

Clinton serving at the whims of Obama is not an insult to me, simply because I know she's not some sort of powermonger shrill evil person as she has been portrayed here.

[rvablue]

57. I was a Clinton primary supporter and do not feel a single one of those petty emotions

You are simply projecting.

I wasn't a sore loser. I enthusiastically and wholeheartedly threw my support behind Obama quickly and easily.

I don't feel any nayhnayh at the potential naming of Hillary as SoS......I simply have trust in the decisions made by the man who I voted for for President. On top of that, I think Hillary will do a good job. But I'm not experiencing any of the third-grade sentiments that you probably felt yourself when Obama took the nomination.

And it is not an insult to me that if named, Hillary will be serving at the pleasure of the president because as a mature grown up I have a deep understanding of party politics and know that after hard fought primaries, people of like mind can join forces to do some good.

It is obvious that you are trying your hardest to have hard, bitter feelings....you need to emulate your top pick for the nomination and our next president and let that go for the better of the country.

Thank god our next POTUS is NOTHING like you..............

[Jennicut]

33. Are there any Obama primary supporters that support Hillary as SoS too, like me?

I feel so alone with the Obama people vs. Hillary people. I liked both of them, I just liked Obama as president more.

[ruggerson]

36. Yes there are a lot of them

problem is they get drowned out by the angry concern trolls who are as vicious and misguided as the PUMA's.

I don't care whether she takes State or returns to the Senate. Both she and Obama will do fine whatever happens.

(I was a Biden, then Clinton primary supporter, but am very happy in general with our P-E)

[LostinVA]

44. Quite a few -- which has really surprised me -- in a good way!

[NashVegas]

37. Forward That to Josh Marshall

I'd love to see him choke on his own poison.

[pgh_dem]

41. No grief, it's just a bad decision.

So i guess I've skipped ahead to acceptance of the situation (kinda got there due to Lieberman already). I supported President Obama from the beginning because of his position on the Iraq War, where I thought Sen Clinton was far too comfortable supporting a war based on lies.
If it hadn't been for Obama, I imagine Sen Clinton would have been our candidate, and I would have volunteered for her as I did for John Kerry...working hard but not really having my heart in it, since I would have preferred an opponent to the invasion.
I'll volunteer for the next person who will disregard my opposition to imperial conduct, and who will take my vote for granted, too.
I can't help it...I'm stuck because the GOP is simply that much worse.
Who else am I going to vote for?
Sorry to see 'continuing Americas hegemony' pleases you so much. Good luck with the Pax Americana thing.

[Beacool]

47. Well, I always wondered how Obama would have really voted if he had been in the senate in 2002.

It's much easier taking stances when one is viewing the issue from the outside. Would he have gone along with most of his fellow senators or would he have voted against it? I guess that we'll never know. When he did have the chance to vote for the Kyl-Lieberman resolution he skipped the vote altogether. He and McCain were the only two senators who didn't show up to vote.

:eyes:

[LostinVA]

49. He has stated he would have voted for IWR

[pgh_dem]

50. That's simply not true.

Invoking the oft-repeated 'let's not rehash the primaries' we can just let it stop at this:

Obama never stated he would have voted for the IWR. When asked by reporters at Kerry's nomination (Kerry having voted for IWR) a gotcha question intended to damage Kerry, Obama wisely deflected it, stating that he didn't know how he would have voted, if he had seen the evidence they had, and that all he knew was that from the evidence available to him, the case for war had not been made.

As to wondering what he would have done, it doesn't matter any more than wondering what Sen Clinton's position might have been had she not been in the US Senate.

My statement stands, I supported Barack Obama because of the statements he *did* make, and was less enthusiastic about Sen Clinton because of the statements, and votes, that she *did* make.

I can't claim to know why the candidate I supported would put his rival on the very issue that most separated them in charge of the conduct of that facet of his administration.

I don't understand why Bush was able to create a new cabinet-level position out of thin air for DHS, but that HHS couldn't be elevated to 'first-tier' status and offered to Sen Clinton. Universal Health Coverage was the part of their platforms with the least air between them (except for how to handle non-compliance/forced compliance), has been historically the area of her greatest interest and expertise from her first attempts at actual universal health care to SCHIP etc. Addressing the health care needs of the under-insured and the approaching-50million uninsured in the US was so great a part of the GE campaign that such a move would have shown that a serious job with a serious goal was being offered to a very serious, capable person.

But then, I don't understand a lot of things.

I don't understand how John McCain didn't make sure parts of Karl Rove were still being found occasionally around South Carolina after the 2000 primaries. I don't understand the odds that nobody working in Rush Limbaugh's studio had a family member or loved one suffering from Parkinson's disease, and/or that they didn't cram his microphone down his throat when he talked about Michael J. Fox acting sick to earn sympathy.

So go figure.

[Beacool]

42. That was pretty funny!!!

The left during the primaries proved to be as virulent in their Clinton hatred as the extreme right, and I would chance to say, even surpassed it.

Seeing them go bonkers over Hillary as SOS is almost worth the appointment. Alas, I would prefer that she was nowhere in his cabinet. Why take a job where you'll be serving at the pleasure of the president? In the senate she's a force to reckon with despite not having seniority. Her influence has increased, not decreased in the past months and she can flex her muscles in many domestic areas where she has been passionate about for so many years. Why trade her independence and power base to be at the beck and call of the president?

Regardless, it's her decision to make and she would work just as hard as SOS as she has done in the senate.

:D

[IndianaJones]

43. spot on. nt.

[Starry Messenger]

45. How nice for you. You got a chance to shine at what you do best!

Smooch!

[NJmaverick]

46. What an utterly classless and thoughtless post

as bad as those that taunted the Hillary people when Obama won.

[Lilith Velkor]

51. Maybe "those" will learn a lesson from this.

As for any hurt feelings they get... :nopity:

[NJmaverick]

52. bull shit, that's just a bad excuse for poor behavior

it's a shame to see how many petty little people infest DU.

I am an Obama supporter that didn't gloat, called out those that did and I think the Hillary appointment is a great idea (so I am calling out the little people who are pathetic enough to gloat over this perceived victory).

[joshcryer]

56. Who's losing here? What are you trying to say?

That because Hillary is chosen as SoS the Obama supporters "lost something"? I think my post makes it clear, that there's nothing being lost here! It's a great thing! People are merely delusional because of the hatemongering, they'll finally get over it.

[NJmaverick]

58. I think I was very clear in what I said

I would have to be pretty "delusional" not to see the less than honorable motives behind this post.

[joshcryer]

59. Yet I can name 4 posters right now who don't believe the reports.

So what can I say? I think it's a very legitimate post. :hi:

[Mass]

62. Delete. No point arguing when somebody does not know how to read.

[FloridaGrl]

60. True

:P I confess, I am now at stage 5. Can't whine forever. As I said in a previous post Obama is a bigger person than I am and that's why he's our PE.

[Forkboy]

63. Well, I guess it's only fair. After all, the Hillary supporters already went through all of this.

[ruggerson]

66. Well some did

Lots of us liked her in the primary and defended her forcefully from the idiot brigade, but moved pretty easily to support Obama without much problem. I don't ever idolize a politician, they are there to serve a purpose for us.

Well, okay I idolized George McGovern when I was eight. :)

[Swede]

65. Hey,you spelled picnic wrong!

:hi: