Has Hillary (OR BILL) Been Vetted Enough?

Well, you all know where I stand on the Hillary as Secretary of State thing. I think she would be brilliant, probably the best SoS in the history of Secretaries of States. Presumably, though, those Secretaries of State could trust (more or less) the president whom they served. Clinton? Not so much. Obama will turn on her like a rabid dog should she outshine him for even a moment, much less do a good job as SoS. And then she would be out of a job as the Good Senator from New York. Oh, you know it could happen.

But there are others who disagree with me, which is peachy keen-o by me. That's the beauty of a democracy (such as it is at this stage). I was asked highlight the excellent comments for WHY Clinton should accept the position if offered to her, which I have done here. The comments came from one of my great readers, who also has an awesome blog of her own, BlueLyon. My comments are interspersed as well. BlueLyon had this to say (and I reprint this with her permission):

I think she'd make a super SoS and Barry would be a fool not to offer it to her. Of course, if he does offer it and she declines, we'll never know.

I think her time in the Senate, if she stays there will be ruled by the archaic seniority rules and she'll never get a major chairmanship. After all, she didn't start in the Senate when she was in her 30's (ala Biden).

Any hoo, I'd like to see her get it for one reason: I'd like to see Kerry and Richardson's heads explode and their man-parts fall off when they get bested by "the girl."

Okay, I gotta admit, seeing Kerry and Richardson's "heads explode and their man-parts" falling off may well be worth it just for that. There was some back and forth with some other smart folks (including InsightAnalytical), and I finished up with, "

And BlueLyon makes some good points abt her time in the Senate...I dunno - obviously, she'll do what she thinks is best...

To which BlueLyon said:

That's just it. She'll do what she thinks best. What is best for the country that is. Her political ambitions have always been about moving her agenda forward, not moving herself forward. When I think of what force she could be on the international scene, rather than having to bide her time in the Senate and waiting around for crumbs from the Big Boys' table, I get chills.

Well, BlueLyon has a point there. I know exactly what that feels like - waiting for the crumbs that drop from the table. As a woman, as a lesbian, as a woman in ministry. One of the main reasons I left the Episcopal Church while in seminary (besides my changing theology) was the church's reaffirmation that GLB people were allowed to come to the church, but not be ordained in it. I would have had to lie to get ordained, and that was just wrong on so many levels, it was not a real choice. Anyway, that felt a whole lot like being grateful for the crumbs that were dropped from the table. So, I totally get that.

I asked my buddy if she had seen American Girl in Italy's excellent post, "So, Does She Have Foreign Policy Experience, or Not?". She had, and if you haven't, I recommend it. Naturally, she had. And she said:

...Aside from Kerry and Richardson's reaction, would be also to see the Obots' heads explode from the cognitive dissonance.

I have one friend in particular whose face I'd like to rub in it, if HRC is named SoS.

Yes, I'm leery of the way Obama operates. And really, this whole conversation we are all having is just tea leaf reading...

She does have a point. I like the idea of the exploding heads as a result of the cognitive dissonance after the way Obama treated Clinton, and gave tacit approval to his minions to act likewise. Then here he is, after labeling her a racist, inexperienced (compared to HIS foreign policy experience of living in Indonesia from ages 6 - 10, and traveling in Pakistan for 3 whole weeks!), or belittling her accomplishments (Annie Oakley anyone?), etc., etc., to considering her for a major position in his Administration. Wowie zowie - can't wait to see the machinations they go through to justify THAT one!! So, there is some poetic justice there, I have to admit.

I have to say, this whole "vetting" thing is really getting to me. Now the media is saying if she doesn't get it, it is all Bill's fault for his international work post-presidency:



As always, Greta was the most balanced in her coverage of this issue. Generally, from what I have seen, it just looks like another opportunity for people to pile onto the Clintons, to ream them anew. Like the video in LisaB's excellent article, "The Media Tells Stories THEY Want To Tell People They Don't Respect," which has these two HORRIBLE women on "Hardball," Jennifer Donohue and Michelle Bernard who are just insane in their descriptions of Clinton, and their adoration fr Obama. When CHRIS MATTHEWS comes off as looking neutral, you KNOW you are in trouble.

If only they had ever, ever cared about vetting Obama as much as they do the husband of a potential cabinet member.

All of that is to say, yes, at this point, it is tea leaf reading, though the time is ever-drawing near. I still cannot bear the concept of Hillary Clinton carrying this guy's water, but she will do what she thinks is right. Right for her, and right for the country, because unlike Obama, for Senator Clinton, those two are one in the same...