Obama to nominate Hillary for Secretary of State on Monday

[AJH032]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081130/ap_on_go_pr_wh/clinton_secretary_of_state



President-elect Barack Obama planned to nominate Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton as his secretary of state on Monday, transforming a once-bitter political rivalry into a high-level strategic and diplomatic partnership.

[bridgit]

1. Oh know you di'int!

:rofl:

[Bassthumb]

2. AP

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/C/CLINTON_SECRETARY_OF_STATE?SITE=KING&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

[rug]

3. GDP to institute stop-loss progran for moderators on Monday.

[mkultra]

4. Monday SOS, Next week POTUS

[Maven]

5. Oh, I'm waiting for the same four troublemakers' heads to explode.

[mkultra]

25. no doubt. KABLOWIE

it will sound like a bucket of poop hitting the wind powered generator at full speed. The will grouse about how Obama hasn't said anything yet, all the while knowing that his silence is only because its part of Hillary's strategy.

[NYC_SKP]

107. ..."Hillary's strategy"...

I love it, love it, love it, love it!!! :rofl:

[joshcryer]

51. I count 10 but yeah. ;) It'll be excellent.

[LostinVA]

105. The BEST thing -- bashing HRC will be bashing Obama

Their pathology will make them either not care or not realize it. It's already happening in many of the threads. Jesus,if I knew Obama was such a milquetoast, I never would have voted for him, or encouraged others to do so!

:rofl:

There's already a thread up by one of 'em.

[JohnnyLib2]

6. This oughta be fun.

For some. :evilgrin:

[JohnnyLib2]

7. Quick! Bring back Dinger.

:hide:

[moriah]

8. Just because it's the AP doesn't mean "deep background" stuff is accurate.

They name no sources, not even "a top transition team official".

...

I am not believing anything until I see it on Obama's website. The media did this stuff on the VP selection and they were wrong for the most part... I wanna hear it from Barack's lips.

[dailykoff]

9. "PLANNED to nominate." Past tense.

That what it says, make of it what you will. :shrug:

[Maven]

10. I know what I make of it.

Denial.

[dailykoff]

11. Denial is another name for wishful thinking.

Sweet dreams.

[Maven]

13. See you Monday.

:hi:

[dailykoff]

14. In the Senate.

:hi:

[mkultra]

31. they wouldnt let you in!

[Occam Bandage]

12. Yes. The AP is sitting on a bombshell "OBAMA REJECTS HILLARY" story, but

the Great Hillary Machine is so powerful that all the poor writers can do is encode secret hints likely to slip past their guards' watchful eyes.

[ruggerson]

24. Well, it couldn't be more obvious

Beth Fouhy - code for Fooey, meaning this is a ruse meant to send us marching down the wrong path.

[JVS]

61. Haven't you heard of journalistic understatement?

;-)

[mkultra]

26. meaning hes already done it?

surely thats what you mean.

[dailykoff]

32. Grammatically, it means he planned to in the past, but doesn't in the present.

Like I say, make of it what you will.

[mkultra]

34. and "planned" means he has made a plan.

which doesnt preclude any plans he may have forthwith to execute said plan in either a strictly planned or unplanned fashion. To be clear, he could intentionally or unintentionally execute a preplanned event thus completing his plan.


plain as day.

[dailykoff]

39. I told you what it means, but go ahead and make up a special Clinton grammar.

Why change now? :crazy:

[mkultra]

40. way to quote McCain there!

why change now? because change is what America needs. geez, come on people, this is elementary stuff. try the internet. Dr Hillary prescribes it twice a day for mental dullness.


dont forget, always imagine.. WWHD

[dailykoff]

45. Somebody forgot to baste your turkey.

Just a hunch. :hi:

[onenote]

41. "to nominate" "will name" -- make it of it what you will

HOw about we don't make anything of a grammatical slip that is inconsistent with the story. Unless we're you, of course.

[dailykoff]

42. Um, I said "Make of it what you will." It seems you want to make a big deal.

Why is that? :shrug:

[onenote]

43. Now that's funny!!!

You start a thread and then suggest those commenting on it are making a big deal of it!

Comic genius!!!

[joshcryer]

50. Typical AP wording.

But grasp at straws if you will.

[stillcool]

15. Again? or still?

enough already...frigging announce the frigging thing and be done with it. What is it with these stories every other day? I don't get it.

[scarletwoman]

16. The ransom demands keep changing?

:shrug:

[Grateful for Hope]

17. I know

It really doesn't matter who is selected, as much as when....get it over with already.

[AJH032]

18. I know, it's annoying, huh?

[Thrill]

19. Wow. I didn't think it was going to happen

[ProSense]

20. More

here

[ruggerson]

21. bbbbbut wait. The Washington Times said this wouldn't happen!

We've been MOONIED. Fuck.

[Metric System]

22. I'm sorry but I won't believe it even if Hillary and Obama appear together. How would we know that

they aren't impostors?!? I want DNA samples and a bunch of other tests before believing this.

[mkultra]

28. EXACTLY!, and drug tests

[Capt. America]

23. She's waiting for the 3:00 am phone call from Barack.

[mkultra]

29. That would be the one he makes to her when he doesnt know what to do?

[Whisp]

62. lol! nope, Obama just doesn't know what to do, he'll have to ask

Hillary the Head of State to lead him by the hand because he's such a failure at winning.

:rofl:
omg, Hillary seems to know a whole lot less that most think

[Sebastian Doyle]

27. Another article, from a right wing source, quoting the same imaginary "sources"

Still not a single human being on record to verify the story.

[mkultra]

30. another post from an imaginery person on the imaginary "Internets"

[Sebastian Doyle]

33. Perhaps, but I'm not pretending to be something I'm not.

As in.... Politico is no legitimate news organization, there are no legitimate sources for this story, and you're not even a Hillary supporter. :)

[mkultra]

35. stop with your accusations.

frankly i find them sexist!

[Sebastian Doyle]

37. And I find your name a dead giveaway.

Wonder how many others get the joke? :)

[mkultra]

38. you get a gold star

nothing to see here..move along :)

[Metric System]

46. I wonder why this kind of behavior is allowed here? Impersonating a Hillary supporter and making

over-the-top posts in an attempt to make us all look bad by association is downright despicable.

[HCE SuiGeneris]

54. It just seems so...

unseemly.

[mkultra]

98. it would seem so.

[mkultra]

97. probably the same reasonwhy bashing obama is

think about it.

[Binka]

47. Many Of Us Get The "Joke"

The little sock puppet has a way of stepping in it.

[ruggerson]

36. How will we know it's not really a cyborg appearing with Barack

And how do we know that it's the real Barack, not a cleverly Clinton-designed mutant?

can we get DNA tests?

[Number23]

44. Bleah

Bleah, bleah....

[DeepModem Mom]

48. K&R

[joshcryer]

49. Given the level of denial here, what on *Earth* are we going to do with these people when Monday...

...comes? Honestly. They're going to lose their minds, clearly. They're simply not prepared for it. It'll be as if they're completely surprised even though most of us reasonable folk knew this was happening, oh, 2 weeks ago.

[JohnnyLib2]

52. Maybe someone will trot out the "stages of grief" piece?

Come to think of it............

[Forkboy]

58. See, this is the funny part to me.

Most of the people who complain about the treatment of/by one side or the other have started threads themselves that are the very thing they claim to not like from the other side. And the funny part, or sad part I guess, is that they never see their own actions for the mirror images they are.

[joshcryer]

68. Not at all, I've attempted to remain rational the whole while.

If people percieve it as mocking, then so be it. My stages of grief thread will prove correct in the coming days. Certainly the denial phase has been going on full strength the past few weeks!

[Forkboy]

75. You're proving the point about "mirror images".

Remember the Obama supporters trotting out the five stages about you guys? You guys went through those very same phases. You're just feeding the beast, and have much the same rationalization for it that the others have for their silliness. :shrug:

[joshcryer]

77. Sure do. But I wasn't part of that drama.

You know it, too.

I announced she lost on Super Tuesday. I posted the ocassional thread, even pointed out how it was fruitless to worry about her campaign. People insisted I was wrong. Irrationality to the core.

[Forkboy]

80. I know you weren't, but you're choosing to be a part of the drama now.

Let it go. It's strangers on the internet. If you think they suck, why lower yourself to their level?

[joshcryer]

92. Ah, but I'm not a stranger. I can look back on this sort of thing and learn from it.

Where I do penetrate and get through to people I can appreciate it, where I don't, I can adapt. I don't assume that "people on the internet" are unable to see my persective, I assume that I am failing to get it across clearly enough.

[JVS]

78. Wasn't that Sniffa who so focused on the 5 stages?

[Forkboy]

81. I think sniffa posted it, but I saw it a few times.

[Forkboy]

53. I don't see why they'd be the ones upset. Obama won the presidency, not her.

Which is why I also don't get why some Hillary supporters are so gleeful about the prospect of their heads exploding. It's like when I was I in Little League and we came in third. My friend started chanting "We're number 3!". The only difference between him and those Hillary fans I speak of is that my friend wasn't being serious about his happiness at coming in someplace other than first. :shrug:

[HCE SuiGeneris]

55. You always hit the nail on the head.

Very good hammer, sir.

[joshcryer]

56. Because for the past two weeks we've had to hear utter bullshit from those people.

It's not really about "being happy for 3rd place" but rather being content the irrationality of these people is seen for what it is.

You'll see the posts.

(I was the first Hillary "supporter" to announce she would lose and was perfectly fine with it.)

[Forkboy]

57. I think there's plenty of irrationality to be seen on both sides of the equation.

[joshcryer]

65. It is not irrational to take an AP report and believe it is plausible.

It is completely irrational to trot out many conspiracy theories in place of the simpliest perspective.

[Forkboy]

70. Irrationality on one side's part doesn't mean it doesn't exist on the other side as well.

And there is plenty on both sides, as I've stated. Only those who have supported one over the other with an intense emotional investment can't see it.

[joshcryer]

73. And I never disputed that. But to pretend as if there's not one side which is more vocal...

...or rather, more common or more visible suggests to me that it is you who can't see it. Hopefully this crap will be over with soon, though, because what can the people who have hate do after this? Continue to bash someone over trivialities?

[Forkboy]

79. I'm not pretending anything. I see it..

It just doesn't matter if one side is being more vocal or not. It's ALL stupid. We can choose to be a a part of that stupidity or not. You seem to have made your choice, which in my mind kind of makes your complaints of the other side hypocritical.

I'm honestly not trying to harp on you here, but you're acting the same as those you complain about, and you have your own set of rationalizations why it's ok....just like the people who harp on Hillary and/or her supporters. :shrug:

[joshcryer]

82. Oh, by responding reasonably to irrational people I am being part of that stupidity.

I guess I believe in people too much. Certainly if I don't do it when I feel like it that's one less person trying to interject reason into the discussion.

If anything I think I provide an interesting level of discourse which, if the people I am talking to don't get it, at least someone does get.

[Forkboy]

88. How is rooting for what you're rooting for interjecting reason though?

Your responses to me have been reasonable. Your desire to see people get an imaginary pie in the face and STFU is not an example of that. You ARE choosing to be part of that stupidity by saying what you did. I suspect if you step back and think about this exchange without the defensiveness you'll see that.

[joshcryer]

90. It's unreasonable to want to see lying manipulating irrational people STFU?

Hmm, I guess the whole liberal tolerance thing really does go a long way, then.

A pie in the face would just underscore things a bit. ;)

[Forkboy]

94. It's irrational to single out one group of lying manipulating irrational people.

While taking sides with another group of the same.

For the record, I appreciate a good pie toss as much as the next guy. Here's some fave song lyrics to prove it. :)

The Pie
In a worldful of poor and an environment to protect
an alternative flan of action flies in the face
of promises not kept
it shows that the responsible irresponsibles
have faces and names which can be addressed
therefore bake and aim
and put a smile back on the face of the oppressed

The puppeteers and the powers that be
would always agree that stones are no arguments
and meanwhile they hit us with batons and bullets
and invite us to their wrecking-balls
with distorted truths and teargas
slander, lies and tanks
no thanks, we understand
and that is why
we wanna globalise the pie

Number 1 is The Walking Thrust:
walk up to the person, push the pie in the face
and before you walk away give it a slight twist
this makes the sticky part of the pie cling to the recipient

Number 2 is The Shot Put:
the one to be thrown straight
from a distance of three to five feet

Number 3 is The Ancient Roman Discus Throw
the most beautiful delivery of all:
spin half-way round, turning the pie as you whirl
and then let go, hitting the victim square in the face

Number 4 is The Catcher¹s Throw to Second Base
the hardest of all:
pull back your arm just as far as it will go
and then bring the pie in, all the way from East St Louis
and let her go!

With shots over eight feet
make sure that the pie is of the right weight
to fly in a straight line as it leaves your fingers
on the other hand, some do believe
that one must press the pie into the face directly
and that it never should be thrown
advice for beginners: don¹t try this at home...

Some people say that the pie is the limit
but a pastry at a time is an answer to their crime

[muriel_volestrangler]

85. I have been pretty neurtal all the way, and the current irrationality is all from those who deny

that all the reports in the media are that Hillary will be made SoS. It's not a question of being a supporter of Hillary, Obama, Bill (Clinton or Richardson), or Elvis Presley; some people here still think that until an official Obama spokesperson signs their name, then any amount of reporting in the media counts for no more than an anonymous "I bet she won't be!" on DU. Which is ridiculous. If there were any doubt, then some reporters would be saying so, so that they would be able to say "see? My rivals on NBC/NYT/Pudunk Fish-Wrapper are a bunch of amateurs would couldn't find a scoop in an ice ream parlor!".

But they're not. The DUers in denial are claiming, with no foundation, that the world thought the same about Hillary being the VP nominee. But they didn't. The only time the media started saying "X will be the VP nominee, a spokesman who withheld their names said" was a few days before it was announced - and then, they correctly say it would be Biden.

The reasons for this denial are up for debate. They may just be doing it to wind people up. They may have a psychological problem with Hillary Clinton getting a high-ranking post. They may think that DU is some kind of league where people have personal champions that come first, second and third. :shrug: All would be bad reasons for behaving this way.

[Forkboy]

91. I agree almost entirely.

My only minor point of contention is that while the group you speak of a big part of the problem, they're not the sole source of the irrationality that abounds on both sides on the equation. As I said elsewhere, it takes two to tango, and these are two groups that are all to happy to dance. :)

[joshcryer]

93. Agree with you completely, and that's exactly, precisely, 100% where I am coming from.

[ruggerson]

63. I think some are amused by the pathology

Clearly there are some here quite unhinged when it comes to Hillary Clinton. Most of the people who supported her (or others) in the primaries quite easily moved into Barack's column and put the primaries behind them. Not so with these inveterate keepers of the Hillary is a ho flame. They are single minded and furiously determined. It would seem they're the ones who never got over the primary, as they allude to it every day. Of course I could be wrong. Wouldn't be the first time. :)

[Forkboy]

64. Trouble is, that same pathology applies to those who are eager to see said reaction.

That pathology being Advanced Immaturity. Many of these very same people were the biggest Obama trashers during the primary. They clearly were as unhinged about Obama as some get over Hillary.

They are single minded and furiously determined.

Which side? I can't tell the difference. Seriously.

You're not wrong, but you are excluding mention of those Hillary supporters who were/are exactly the same as the Obama supporters you speak of. They don't seem like they can get over the primary either. It's takes two to tango, and the word "Hillary" is like Pavlov's Bell to both sides.

I'd so love to name names of those on both sides who make this such a drama. It wouldn't be a long list, only about 5 per side. But it's ten very vocal people who make it seem much worse than it really is. Let's face it, 90% of both Hillary supporters and Obama supporters get along just fine, despite what the Hillary/Obama self-appointed warriors want.

I just mentioned the other day that I like these Hillary/Obama threads because of the pathology of both sides involved more than the actual politics. As a wannabe sociologist I find it all highly fascinating to see such behavior in action. Where's David Attenborough when we need him? :)

[ruggerson]

66. I'm talking about post primary

the primary was very partisan and a dog fight. As it often is. Most Hillary supporters IRL transitioned immediately over to Obama. What was the 24/7 chatter here? Was it about the 85% of people who moved right over to Obama? Nope, it was about a small loud group of suspect people who barely registered a blip on the national political landscape. Here at DU, Hillary primary supporters either made an easy move to Obama or left. There has not (that I have seen anyway) been non stop trashing of OBama here, since the primaries ended. One cannot make that same claim about Hillary.

[joshcryer]

69. And let's be honest, most of the insane Hillary supporters were either banned or moved on.

They went to other websites (oh the drama on that one) and for the most part have stayed there.

[Forkboy]

71. Some on both sides think any criticism is "trashing".

And both sides go out of their way to take offense over it. There are some valid criticisms of Hillary and Obama that get called bashing automatically whether they are or not because every camp has a cadre of people who simply hate anything less than glowing praise of those they love...and it is love in some cases. The emotional investment some have put into these people is downright creepy, imo. Cult of personality is a real thing, and we on the Left aren't immune to it either.

Hillary isn't the only Dem that gets trashed here by any stretch. She does get more attention because she's in the news all the time, and because she's a huge figure in Democratic politics. If DK was as big a personality as Hillary and was in the running for SoS we'd be seeing endless threads about the "far left", ufo's and Shirley McCaine, the Department of Peace, his stand on abortion, his bankrupting Cleveland, etc etc etc.

That "small loud group" you mention deserved the attention they so desperately craved. That group had their own website where they could talk about voting for McCain and trashing Obama. Either they were idiot Dems or Repubs in disguise. In either instance I couldn't care less how they got treated here, and that they got the attention they did. Calling out people like that is one of the things DU does right. A few of those people are still here, and are often right in the thick of the Hillary threads.

Should that 85% you speak of gotten more attention than they did? Sure, but this is a very confrontational forum, and peace and harmony threads don't fly well here. I did see some attempts though, and the people we're talking about were never in any of them.

There has not (that I have seen anyway) been non stop trashing of OBama here, since the primaries ended. One cannot make that same claim about Hillary.

One, I suspect people have criticisms of Obama but are very nervous to voice them here right now for fear of banning. Let's just say that I don't think a handful of people are being quiet about Obama out of a newly found sense of decency.

Two, I've seen serious heat leveled at everyone from Dean to Kerry to Pelosi to Reid to Lieberman over the years here on DU. Hillary isn't any different from any of the others I mentioned in terms of being free from criticism, and I think this is where some of the trouble comes in because there are a few of her supporters who think she (and Bill) are simply above any criticism, and even entertaining the very concept is beyond them (and again, this applies to some Obama supporters as well).

Give it another month or so and DU will be tearing down a different Dem because the Hillary story will over one way or the other. In other words, the squeaky wheel gets the grease, and right now the Obama/Hillary drama is one of the squeakiest damn wheels to come down the pike in a long time.

And this is way too long of a post to be writing at anytime, let alone at 6 in the morning. :)

[JVS]

74. I don't know who all you're talking to in this thread because my ignore list is super. but you...

raise a good point.

"That "small loud group" you mention deserved the attention they so desperately craved. That group had their own website where they could talk about voting for McCain and trashing Obama. Either they were idiot Dems or Repubs in disguise. In either instance I couldn't care less how they got treated here, and that they got the attention they did. Calling out people like that is one of the things DU does right. A few of those people are still here, and are often right in the thick of the Hillary threads."

AMEN, AMEN, and AMEN. Those people deserved all the shitting on that they got. And what keeps things ugly here is that some people defend these people. One of the saddest things about the primary was watch people who had seemed to be fellow democrats go all fucking rabid PUMA. I've learned to accept it. People can change and even if they kicked ass long ago, they aren't the same creature after getting themselves all deranged.

As far as Obama criticism goes. I've had some and I've seen others engage in it with no big problem. The thing is that it's very hard for the board to function with open communication when there are a bunch of people waiting to say "I told you so" when one voices a criticism. I suppose it is similar for those who have criticism for Obama and didn't back him originally, but unless they've spent the last 6 months complaining about their mistreatment at the hands of "those awful obamite thugs", they probably have built up enough credibility not to get pounced on.

[Forkboy]

84. I'm speaking to ruggerson and joshcryer.

Two good people whether I agree with them all the time or not.

The defense of the PUMA people definitely hasn't helped because there really is no defense for them. Maybe they were good Dems at one point, but they chose to toss that out the window out of spite and emotional retardation.

I think the complaints from both sides are valid in some instances. There is a lot of crap posted about Hillary for instance, and I can see people wanting to defend her in such cases.

DU will not be overly kind to Obama in another few months or so, and we'll see if some of his supporters can handle the criticism with any more grace than some of the Hillary supporters have. I suspect some will have a better idea of how Hillary supporters feel lately, and will end up acting just like those Hill fans are now.

[JVS]

86. I don't mind criticism of Obama, but it's like Skinner said when we were leaving the primaries.

Don't expect criticism to be received warmly if it comes from people who have been notorious in the past for attacking Obama.

[joshcryer]

89. Hopefully he extends that to people in his cabinet.

That would shut up quite a few people quite readily and the drama would be quickly over.

[joshcryer]

87. This is what I mean by unreasonable.

The above poster is clearly attempting to pile a certain group in with all others. We know about the people who got banned and ran off on their own site.

Which is really just a testament to the fact that those of us still around *are absolutely nothing like them.*

Yet we get slandered for having at one point been minorly associated with them because we defended someone we thought was being unfairly attacked.

[joshcryer]

76. You haven't been paying attention. Criticism is fine. Making up *conspiracy theories* is not.

You can say Hillary voted for IWR and that makes her somewhat unsuitiable for the position. You can even say you dislike her because she is a shrill evil bitch.

You cannot *rationally* say Hillary forced Obama's hand through concerted news media leaks by her top tier people. You cannot *rationally* deny news reports that Obama offered her the position, linking blog postings about how the Clintons are running things behind the scenes.

Honestly I never really gave a crap about people saying they hated her and that she's a liar and all that, that's how I see all politicians. I didn't say one word when it was seen that she'd diverted campaign money and claimed to still be campaigning after she conceeded. But when people lied and made up shit and spilled innuendo to get some trivial bullshit lies across, I did and do "defend" her. I bet you don't even remember the whole FL/MI delegate drama that spawned at least 10-20 threads a day here throughout the whole primaries. I single handedly spent 2000 posts on that garbage (to my own enjoyment, of course; being right is quite damn enjoyable).

Don't try to put the few Hillary supporters who are left into a corner, yes there are a few outliers, but let's be honest, there's a lot of garbage here that needs to stop.

And hopefully you're right that it will stop.

[ruggerson]

102. I'm not talking about rational criticism

I'm talking about the people who said she would take it to the convention, even as she was preparing to make a primetime speech there in support of Obama.

The people who screamed she would never campaign for him, when she actually spent the entire fall doing nothing but going where the Obama camp needed her.

The people who see a machiavellian motive behind everything she does.

The people who to this day are pathologically denying that she will be SOS.

It's both amusing and sad at the same time.

Rational criticism is great. She, like any other pol, deserves her share and she should not be exempt from strong dissent and scrutiny.

Hysteria, utterly detached from reality, is another thing entirely.

[joshcryer]

67. It's not like it's controversial.

There are more irrational Obama supporters because there are more Obama supporters. Most of the irrational Hillary supporters were banned long ago (surely you remember that). And proportionally there were even Obama supporters banned. The end result is that there are still quite a few left here who post dozens of threads dismissing, throwing out, and overall insulting Obama's intregity.

These people need to STFU and maybe a big pie in the face will do just that.

[Forkboy]

72. But the point is, this really won't be a pie in the face to them.

It's like trash talking in sports. The losing side can say whatever they want, but all the winning side has to do is point to the scoreboard. End of story. It's just keeping the silliness going for a short moment of selfish pleasure that really isn't what you think it'll be anyways. She still lost, and every Obama supporter you want to see STFU and suffer will just take comfort in that and shrug it off. :shrug:

I'm suggesting a unilateral disarmament of those pies!!! ;)

[joshcryer]

83. Ahh, for you it's about the primaries, for me it's about denying liars and manipulators their...

...sick twisted pleasure. Yasee, I could care less about Hillary losing (really!). All I care about is pointing out the discrepencies in peoples irrational arguments.

If you don't like it and chose to believe I am "part of that stupidity" then I have no real response to you. I'd hope that people who try to be reasonable aren't automatically marked by such strawmen, because if reasonable people aren't around during unreasonable arguments all you have is a sycophanatical circle jerk! And that's the last thing we want, right?

[Forkboy]

95. No, you misunderstand my whole point in this thread.

It's not about the primaries at all. It's about people FROM the primaries choosing to engage in the same behavior even now, and whether that's where we want to set the bar for ourselves on a personal level. It's about what kind of people WE want to be. My whole exchange with you has been an attempt to get you to see that you're sinking to the level of those you're complaining about, and whether you feel that part of your soul is worth the trade off. If you do, that's fine, but I wish you'd think about it a bit away from DU. I think you're a good guy, but I also think you're letting yourself get caught up in a pissing match that should be below you. If I didn't think you were better than this I wouldn't have engaged you about it.

Sadly, I think we should end this. What I said was not a strawman, and you're too defensive right now to see my point. I do appreciate the exchange, and maybe we can pick it up again sometime in the future. Or better yet, hopefully we wont have a reason to.

[Grateful for Hope]

104. Excellent post. n/t

[QC]

99. It will be just like the exploding heads scene in Mars Attacks. n/t

[rvablue]

59. TICK.TOCK.TICK.TOCK...........

Happy Obama is the president!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Happy he's using his excellent judgment!!!!!!!

[CreekDog]

60. Good for him, for her and for us

I trust her to represent our interests and the position of the Obama administration very well and to bring the stature that comes from the foreign policy successes of the Clinton administration to the current task.

I've had big time differences with her, but I think she brings more than any other candidate to this particular job.

[Zombie2]

96. DLC

:puke:


Where's mah change?? :shrug:

[malik flavors]

100. Bob Gates is his defense secretary, and you're worried about Hillary being DLC?

[bridgit]

101. Ding! Well, you know...there's that too

:thumbsup:

[S_E_Fudd]

103. The source of the bulk of Obama's policy positions...nt

[LostinVA]

106. PE Obama is DLC -- he's just not in the DLC

btw -- do you have a macro set up to post this in every HRC being SOS thread?