Hillary: "I take responsibility"

[Riot]

Originally Posted by joeydb

Good. Does that mean you're done?

Naw. I just want to go on record pointing out that Hillary said, long ago, that she absolutely will not continue as SOS Obama's second term (it will probably be Kerry, I'd guess).

Just want to mention it before the RWNJ fact-denying Obama Derangement Syndrome folks go crazy in a couple of months about how she was "forced out" or "quit in a huff" or "Bill is gonna get Obama" or something

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Riot

Naw. I just want to go on record pointing out that Hillary said, long ago, that she absolutely will not continue as SOS Obama's second term (it will probably be Kerry, I'd guess).

Just want to mention it before the RWNJ fact-denying Obama Derangement Syndrome folks go crazy in a couple of months about how she was "forced out" or "quit in a huff" or "Bill is gonna get Obama" or something

You realize that her chances of winning the presidency are greater if Obama loses, right? Especially now that she has justification to leave without being attached to this blossoming scandal.

Your choice of SOS for Secretary of State is quite appropriate, and, if intended, witty!

[Riot]

Originally Posted by joeydb

You realize that her chances of winning the presidency are greater if Obama loses, right? Especially now that she has justification to leave without being attached to this blossoming scandal.

Your choice of SOS for Secretary of State is quite appropriate, and, if intended, witty!

First: the RWNJ contention that this is some political thing between Hillary and Obama is simply ... ridiculous. Dear god. Does anybody ever effing get things first hand anymore, or do they just read third-hand blogs from third-rate writers?

No, I disagree with your assumption that the public alters parties automatically.

Hilary's chances of winning the Presidency are extremely good following Obama, because the economics are going to be so solid, and the GOP is going to continue into oblivion, with nobody viable (including Jeb) as a presidential candidate.

That, plus, all the people (like me) that would never have voted for Hillary in a million years in 2008, now are looking at a quite successful, proven, accomplished Secretary of State. Now every knows she could be president and handle it well. These four years have only greatly enhanced her chances across all political spectrums.

I think the GOP is done for quite some time as President, and I think they stand a good chance of losing the House, too.

You can laugh at Kerry all you want, but I don't know why you would. He would make an outstanding SOS, he's extremely knowlegable, has tons of foreign experience - he was next on the list after Hilary.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by joeydb

You realize that her chances of winning the presidency are greater if Obama loses, right? Especially now that she has justification to leave without being attached to this blossoming scandal.

Your choice of SOS for Secretary of State is quite appropriate, and, if intended, witty!

Exactly why do you think hillary would be better off if obama lost? If obama loses, he would conceivably run in 16. Then there isunseating a sitting president, which as romney is showing, isnt easy to do. Reagan, bush, clinton, bush. Last four before obama, and three of the four served 2 terms,
If obama wins, hillary would be the top demo dog four years from now.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Danzig

If obama wins, hillary would be the top demo dog four years from now.

Agreed. The Dem nomination in 2016 is hers for the asking. Obama would support her and campaign for her.

Who do the Republicans have?

Rubio?
Bush?
Christie?
Portman?
Condi?

The GOP brand is virtually destroyed right now. That's why so many Republicans are steering clear of the current incarnation of the GOP.

[Riot]

Okay, this is an example what drives me effing nuts about the lies and untruths and deliberately bad "USA journalism" that is tolerated in our political discourse nowadays (and yeah, that includes Romney's brazen lying, too)

You want objective journalism? You can't hardly get it any more in America. Try guardian.uk or aljazeera english

Wall Street Journal blasts Clinton for silence on Libya attack - that she discussed in WSJ interview

The Wall Street Journal ran an editorial attack on Secretary of State Hillary Clinton Monday night regarding her actions in relation to a bloody Sept. 11 assault on the U.S. consulate in the eastern Libyan city of Benghazi.

There's a back story.

Michael Calderone reports that the Journal waited until Monday night before it ran excerpts from its Oct. 10 interview with Clinton in which she said she accepted responsibility for security matters at the U.S. consulate. The remarks in the interview are similar to remarks she made Monday in Lima, Peru.

[hoovesupsideyourhead]

Originally Posted by Riot

Agreed. The Dem nomination in 2016 is hers for the asking. Obama would support her and campaign for her.

Who do the Republicans have?

Rubio?
Bush?
Christie?
Portman?
Condi?

The GOP brand is virtually destroyed right now. That's why so many Republicans are steering clear of the current incarnation of the GOP.

WOW..you really are crazy.

[Rudeboyelvis]

Originally Posted by hoovesupsideyourhead

WOW..you really are crazy.

Don't rile her up, Hooves....It's been a pleasant couple of days without her

[Riot]

Originally Posted by hoovesupsideyourhead

WOW..you really are crazy.

Thanks for another of your deep political analyses. Do tell your assessment of the GOP candidate strength for 2016. Maybe Santorum, Bachmann and Cain will run again Do you still think Sarah Palin worthy of being POTUS?