Secretary of State Clinton would provide the greatest opportunity for a Palestinian/Israeli solution

[grantcart]

Everything else has been tried and Senator Clinton's acceptance of the Secretary of State would elevate that position considerably.

Coupled with a paradigm changing President Obama and his ability to connect with middle east leaders an entirely new set of opportunities would be in play.

Even more significant is Senator Clinton's desire to leave a positive personal mark in history and her tremendous stamina and work ethic.

Secretary of State Clinton would make the Palestinian/Israeli solution a key objective and she would think big about it, attract regional support for it, and work tirelessly for it. I also think it will be the only reason why she would accept it - to get something big done that no one else could do.

[damonm]

1. Why would Kerry, Richardson, or Holbrooke provide LESS such opportunity?

[grantcart]

2. I think so - yes

I don't think any of them would bring the level of attention as Senator Clinton, nor do I think that they have the single mindedness of achieving an objective that she has. Think of the primaries and her determination and personal investment of time and grit.

The only one that could match her, IMHO, is the President elect. She simply will not give up.

[ProSense]

4. That's nonsense.

Kerry has served as a monitor for elections in the Palestian terriority, and has had numerous meetings with a key player in the region: the Syrian government.

[grantcart]

6. yes and your point is what?

Are you arguing that Kerry has a greater profile than Senator Clinton among world and regional leaders?

Are you arguing that Kerry is more obsessed than Senator Clinton in achieving a personal distinction in history?


If you are then that's "nonsense".


If your arguing that personal experience in the area is more important then Holbrooke would be the better candidate (who I like personally because I would like to see professional diplomats in the position on principle) but no one can match Senator Clinton in overall ability to master policy details and her tenacious desire to achieve it. Just remember how tenacious she was in the primaries.

[ProSense]

12. "Are you arguing that Kerry has a greater profile than Senator Clinton among world and regional..."

Absolutely. He was the Democratic Presidential nominee in 2004 and has served on the SFRC for 24 years.

Hint: Kerry has had infinitely more contact with current world leaders than Hillary has.

Her limited travels more than a decade ago does not make her an experienced diplomat.

[karynnj]

7. Think of the primaries??

Gee Let's compare Kerry and Clinton there. There was a real NO DRAMA win of all but 4 contests in 2004 by KERRY. Also consider that he was not the media favorite in 2003/early 2004 - Dean, Clark and Edwards were. If he would have had the party support, he would not have had to loan himself money. He ran a campaign that he could be proud of.

With Clinton, there was a plan A with no plan B. SuperTuesday was designed so the person way ahead years before with universal name recognition, the ability to get media instantly for both her and her spouse, and a fund raising team with a base developed when she raised million for a non-completive Senate race. No one else was thought to have the resources to make any of the big primary states competitive. The CW was she would get the nomination that day. Instead that was the start of hearing of the "popular" vote and that super delegates could vote en masse for a person who lost the delegate count.

Then the campaign moved to throwing the "kitchen sink" at Obama. She spoke of being shot at in Bosnia - which didn't happen. She mocked Obama because he inspired people.

Do you honestly think that horrendous nightmare of a primary campaign was better than Kerry's 2004 run for the nomination?

( As to single mindedness, I would take Kerry fighting BCCI for 5 years, with all of DC trying to stop him. Or Kerry pursuing the illegal Contra funding when he was stonewalled and harassed. His was for the world and country - hers was for her, trying to win when she already lost.)

HRC may be given the SoS, but she will never be half the person Kerry has always been.

[grantcart]

14. "win of all but 4 contests"

There is no comparison between them. Kerry got an early win in the primaries and no one else had any money to compete.


The real comparison is between Clinton's primary and Kerry's GE campaign.


Yes Clinton lost. She lost by a better organized better funded campaign. She lost against a campaign that completely changed modern campaigning, and despite the long odds she never faded but grew stronger and stronger despite the slim chance she had to win.


You are obviously a Kerry supporter but do you really think that Kerry made the same personal investment in his GE campaign that Hillary did in her unsuccessful GE campaign?

It has nothing to do with who is the better person but who is more determined at this point in their life to invest everything they have to achieve a historical result. At this point I think most people would say that Hillary Clinton has a greater hunger than any of the others named.

[ProSense]

15. "The real comparison is between Clinton's primary and Kerry's GE campaign."

Absurd!

[karynnj]

23. No the contest is not between the GE and Clinton's primary

The fact is that DEAN started out with $40 million with Kerry at far less. Kerry worked his heart out in the general election. He had a schedule that was 16 hours a day. He did this - without delving into the mud. He put his heart and soul into that campaign. The fact that Kerry did not go to the tactics you apparently admire in HRC, is a plus for win - it would have KILLED his chances. The fact was HRC started with considerable advantages in the primary campaign, she was inevitable - and she blew it. Kerry started out in a race that was a long shot. In December 2003, Bush beat generic Democrat by double digits. Bush used the government to terrorize the country, the media engaged in unprecedented character assassination. Kerry had crumbling state parties and the party "in excile" didn't back him to the degree they typically do. He had 3 excellent debates and he very nearly won.

Yes I do think Kerry wanted to win, if anything more - because in his case it was the GENERAL ELECTION - and he knew a Bush victory was as Teresa said - "Four Years of Hell".

[damonm]

10. I must respectfully disagree

Holbrooke is the man who brokered the Dayton accords that ended the Bosnian civil war (and that pot of hatred had been stewing for CENTURIES) , and has been up for the Nobel Peace Prize 7 times.
I simply don't see HRC as being so exclusively right for a Israeli/Palestinian accord. (odd - I think this is the first time you & I have disagreed on something! :wow: )

I would personally MUCH rather see her as Majority Leader in the Senate - if I'm President Obama, I want her ON POINT to get the health care legislation through Congress. The only person I'd rather have doing that is Ted Kennedy, but with the state of his own health, I'd want Hillary leading the fight.

[grantcart]

18. I like Holbrooke and would be very happy to see him appointed

I simply believe that she has an unmatched hunger that could be a great asset. As it now appears that President Elect is likely to appoint her I think it is useful to see the unusual assets she has in a positive way.

[damonm]

20. OK, we'll just agree to disagree, then.

But if PO selects her, I'll support it - he's been smarter than me every time so far...

[karynnj]

24. In the primaries, that hunger likely hurt more than helped

The first time I remember a bump in the road (very small actually) for HRC was the first Philly debate - where she spoke on the Spritzer immigration issue. She handled that debate fine - but rather than calmly tamp down the changed her opinion in 2 minutes stuff, she immediately was at Wellesley speaking of the guys ganging up on the "girl" and Bill Clinton was out using the word "swiftboating". She were FAR ahead as the inevitable winner - in fact, using an Obama phrase she could have said she spoke "inartfully" and said the issue was too complex for a yes or no - and explained how she was a yes, but or no, but on that - then explained how she would have written a law on it.

In Catch 22, Joseph Heller, in a throw away line, speaks of Major Major not having a friend because he needed one so much. (Quote may be off as I last read it probably 2 decades ago) Hunger often works that way - you want something so much - you trip yourself up.
I definitely see much of that in Bill Clinton's 2008 actions - he took gambles that failed because he finally had too much invested to risk losing.

[bunnies]

3. Now *that* would be one hell of a legacy. nt

[Sensitivity]

5. Hillary cannot overcome her extreme pro-Israel statements to become "Honest Broker"

I remember something about "obliterating" some country that threatened Israel.

[grantcart]

8. It won't be an 'honest broker' that will be the problem IMHO

It will be somebody with strong Israeli credentials that will have the power to move Israel status quo to take reasonable risks.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

9. Given her poor leadership abilities...

I think there are many people better suited for the job.

[AtomicKitten]

11. Her "obliterate Iran" comment should exclude her from consideration.

[SeaLyons]

17. Why don't you put that comment in the right perspective....

her comment was based on if Iran USED nuclear weapons, and her comment was factual. If any country used nuclear weapons against us or an ally, we WOULD obliterate them. That's what nuclear weapons do.

[AtomicKitten]

19. there is no "right perspective" for that kind of bluster

[Kalyke]

13. Actually, Wes Clark would.

He's half Jewish and is beloved by millions of Muslims as a result of his actions in Kosovo.

I think that would go further in repairing those relations than some senator who sat on a committee (and that includes Kerry).

[damonm]

21. Interesting, but I don't think he's cut out for SoS

But, for the reasons you cite, I'd not object to using him as a Special Envoy to the ME.

[Cosmic Charlie]

16. Obama will not pick the Obliterator as his Chief Negogiator

and you know this....

[AJH032]

22. You're right, of course

some people are blinded by their bias, but clearly she'd be a wise choice.