terpfan1980 terpfan1980

Hillary Clinton to accept Obama's offer of secretary of state job

▼

Hillary Clinton to accept Obama's offer of secretary of state job

from JoeUser Forums

Genius or dumbest move a President-elect could ever possibly make?!

See news here: Hillary Clinton to accept Obama's offer of secretary of state job

I saw some weekend talking heads discussing the possibility that Obama would offer Hillary Clinton the Secretary of State job and after hearing their discussion, I'm finding myself wondering if this is the move of an obvious mad-man or a stroke of genius?

On the mad-man side, well, it's Hillary friggin' Clinton.  Offering her any position within your administration is a sure sign of madness, at least from the side of about 50% of the country that can't stomach Clinton (either of them, but especially her!) and just want her to go away already.  (And of course, many of those folks still rejoice at the fact that she lost out on the big prize!)

On the genius side, well there's the thought that by offering Hillary Clinton this position Obama will in fact make her go away by sending her outside the country early and often.  She'll be involved on the foreign policy stage, but she'll be representing the administration and will likely be on a very short leash so chances that she'll embarrass the administration are relatively low.  In effect, giving her the job gets her out of the country and in most cases out of the news.

I'm not sure which one wins here.  I do admit that the thought of offering Hillary Clinton an ambassadorship to somewhere that would be far across the planet is something that I hoped Obama would consider.  I could crack a bad joke that William Jefferson Clinton would hope for an ambassadorship offer of his own -- to somewhere clear around the globe from where his wife would regularly be :p :D LOL -- is also something I hoped for.  Getting both of them out of the mainland and off the more frequent political radar would be great for the country.  Both of them had their time in the spotlight and both need to go away.  How that happens, I'm not even sure I care, just as long as it does happen.

Anyway, that's my take on things, perhaps you differ.  If so, speak up below...

11,246 views 31 replies
Reply #26 from PolMach Forums Top

Sod... One way is to first have decent traspariency on the budget and easy for someone with half a brain to read. Yes you can see the budget but most of it has clutter of garbage and is also hard to understand with all the "in between" stuff.

 

It would be intresting how much money is waisted for a specail hammer and stuff like that

Reply #27 from JoeUser Forums Top

Quoting watertown1978, reply 24
see this is why ill never along with alot of Conservatives will never cross the and huge and kiss Dems... National heathcare...look to the north and see how well it can work.

 

I know how we can lower the cost though of drugs and Healthcare. How about we put an end to everyone sueing them your all good then!!
End of watertown1978's quote

i just did, the earliest you can get a bypass surgury in canada is after a 6 months wait, the longest is several years... Here it might cost more, and only poeple who work for the privilage have it, but you get it when you NEED it.

Ashes of the Singularity II
Reply #28 from JoeUser Forums Top

also, why is it whenever i make a slam-dunk kind of argument, one that completely demolishes the other viewpoint, the perpetrators of lies just ignore it and go on a tanget bringing up another subject?

Reply #29 from PolMach Forums Top

Quoting taltamir, reply 2

Quoting watertown1978, reply 24see this is why ill never along with alot of Conservatives will never cross the and huge and kiss Dems... National heathcare...look to the north and see how well it can work.

 

I know how we can lower the cost though of drugs and Healthcare. How about we put an end to everyone sueing them your all good then!!
i just did, the earliest you can get a bypass surgury in canada is after a 6 months wait, the longest is several years... Here it might cost more, and only poeple who work for the privilage have it, but you get it when you NEED it.
End of taltamir's quote

 

Thats my point. People bitch about the cost and how they want more gov control over health care they just dont see how bad it could fail. Yeah it cost alot but making the gov have more control is not the answer. Ive read that alot of doctors are not taking new patients on that have the gov health care simply because of all the red tape involved/ or if they do they only take a small small amount.. like 2 a year.

Reply #30 from Stardock Forums Top

I was reading Snopes.com.  Here's a report on the Canadian stystem debunking much of the nay sayers' comments:  Link

BTW, I took a friend of mine who has excellent private insurance to a private hospital recently.  Our wait?  Four hours. 

Be well.

Reply #31 from JoeUser Forums Top

That snopes link basically says "it varies by district". There is a GOVERNMENT SITE that gives you canadian wait times, they were saying that in ontario for example its 13 days for angioplasty, but 297 days for knee replacement.

This in no way contradicts my finds. I found 6 months to a years in waiting lists for bypass surgury. Since they only listed ontario and another province, and they also did not talk about bypasses. but only angioplaty and knee replacements.

They are also saying things "like did not find any study showing it", thats not exactly contradicting it either... Anyways "snopes said so" isn't proof, snopes is fairly accurate, but it is not absolute, and it is run by a pair of humans last i checked, with opinions and feelings, that they sometimes don't even bother hiding. but they do tend to be pretty impartial on many things. Now if snopes had links saying "bypass surguries in canada have less of a waiting period then the united states" that would be a different thing, I do not think snopes would lie about that, but it is NOT what they are saying. And most of their other "counter claims" are pretty weak.

And after saying all those opinion peices on how wait times are not really a problem, they go and point out that the canadian government is spending 4.5 billion on a 10 year plan to create a "fund" to finance reduction of waiting times... so... it is a problem that doesn't exist, but is enough of a problem for the candian governement to try to fix... way to go snoops.