March 20, 2011 - 5:27 pm
Roger is right: Hillary is President! Or at least Head of Government. She and Obama fought each other down to the wire in ’08, but it turns out the fight was unnecessary. For, as is obvious now to the entire world, he was never interested in being Head of Government — he just wanted to be Head of State. She, meanwhile, was more drawn to the governing than the pomp. If only the Constitution had allowed them to split the job down the middle, they could’ve been spared that primary drama…!
Correct diagnosis wrong treatment.
The unified executive has served us well and will continue to do so once the current bumbling buffoon leaves office.
I’m still amazed that Hillary wasn’t fired for incompetence more than a year ago. This is the first indication in over two years that she has any actual influence in the administration and you want to crown her the power behind the crown? I don’t buy into it.
Hillary was never incompetent; she was just not allowed to do her job. Obama kept taking Hillary’s responsibilities and giving them to Biden.
Hillary has always been incompetent. Even a reset button couldn’t get her back on track. (BTW, pointing out that she has been considered such a lightweight that her duties were turned over to the stupidest man ever elected to national office is not a very good defense of her capabilities.)
I think you missed his point. Obama made Hillary the SecState for carefully calculated political reasons. He did NOT choose her for her abilities. He never intended for her to have any real power.
By giving her an “important job” he mollified her supporters and got them onboard his ship.
He put her in a position where she could not work against him. He’s her boss, so she has to play the good supporter role. “Keep your friends close, and your enemies closer.”
Thus he nullified any attempt on her part to campaign for the nomination in 2012. He likely promised to have Biden step aside and make her VP somewhere during his 2nd term, thus setting her up as the presumptive Dem nominee and (in their minds) winner of the 2016 election.
In other words, he played her masterfully.
How much of a political force would Hillary be in the future after Obama held a press conference, more in sorrow than in anger, announcing that he was forced to make a change at Foggy Bottom, because there is only so much ineptitude that he can put up with. He could then read a list of her faults and errors in judgment (that would take longer than a typical State of the Union address) and mention that when he first chose her to lead the State Department, he thought he was getting a first rate person to fill the position. “Unfortunately, events have proven that my optimism about her ability was regretfully misguided. Now let me be clear, I think that Mrs. Clinton is a wonderful person and I thank her for her years of service to the country, but America’s diplomacy is so important that it must be placed in the care of somebody whose judgment and temperament are better suited to the position.”
I thought that he had most of that speech already written before her confirmation hearings were done. Yes, subjugate her as a member of the administration early in the term when criticism from a former rival would be exponentially damaging, but throw her under the bus (Obama has Olympic level ability at that event) as soon as it is politically feasible. Now that the narrative is that Hillary influenced Barrack to intervene in Libya, Obama is probably stuck with Hillary for the rest of his term. Unfortunately, that means that we are, too.
Obama is channeling the spirits of Vito and Michael Corleone: “Keep your friends close, and your enemies closer.”
We already had a Co-Presidency starring Hillary and we do not care for a repeat. Either full Prez or nothing!
I vote for “nothing”. It’s better than what we have now.