Sat, 11/15/2008 - 9:43pm — lambert
The furriners love him, he's done great work with his foundations, he knows the issues and the territory, and if Obama's worshipping at the "Team of Rivals" shrine, and wants only "the best," is there really a better candidate out there?
Plus, that way we get to have Hillary in the Senate, where we really, really need her. I don't think SecState is anything but a stepping stone to political oblivion, which is just what Obama would like.
NOTE Hat tip, Nihil obstet.
UPDATE Anglachel says No, because of Bill's ego, but Bill's already been President. He doesn't need this.
Bookmark/Search this post with:
»
- lambert's blog
- Login or register to post comments
- 1+[CSE]+#b94+
Front page
Comments
Just a technical note here
Secretary of State is 4th in line of succession should some unimaginable tragedy strike our political leadership. Bill has already served his 2 terms as POTUS. I am pretty sure that makes him constitutionally ineligible for the position.
Plus, he pals around with rich people and gets them to donate money to fight AIDS in Africa. How evil can one man be? Now, if he were palling around with rich people and getting them to donate to Barack, maybe we could work something out.
i think that only means that
if Obama appointed him, they'd take him out of the succession line--it wouldn't prevent him doing the job, i don't think.
Bill tho, is even more unbelievable than them seriously considering Hillary.
I'm good with this.
Because he'd be a great choice.
But it's always so unlikely that great choices are chosen.
Look at the WTC and Daniels Liebeskind's design. sigh.
Reporter to Mahatma Gandhi: What do you think of Western Civilization?
Gandhi to reporter: I think it would be a good idea.
That would be like Seal
inviting James Brown to come on up and join him for a set.