Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘White House’ Category

Secretary Clinton spoke today at the Clinton Presidential Center celebration of the 20th anniversary of Bill Clinton’s bid for the presidency. Here she is delivering her remarks at the Kumpuris Distinguished Lecture Series.

Vodpod videos no longer available.

Remarks at the Kumpuris Distinguished Lecture Series

Remarks

Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State
Washington, DC
September 30, 2011

SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you. Oh, my goodness. Oh. Dean, that story brought back so many – (laughter) – extraordinary memories of that cold December day, standing in the water in the waders, and I’ll only add a few little details. (Laughter). I didn’t think it was uncharacteristic at all when they said, “Go ahead. You take the first shot.” (Laughter and applause.) So the pressure was building. It was really lucky. And it was a banded duck, which I learned later was quite significant. We had a wonderful time because next to his wonderful wife, Kula, I adored Frank Kumpuris. I thought he was one of the finest, most extraordinary men I have ever met, before or since. And I knew that he would watch out for me a little bit, with both Dean and Dr. Jones, so we had a good time that day.

But then I got back to the governor’s mansion. And since I’d been gone, my daughter had gotten up, and she asked Bill where I was. And Bill said, “Well, she went duck hunting.” And Chelsea met me at the back door. (Laughter.) She said, “Mommy, did you kill a duck?” I said, “Yes, I did. I did. I killed a duck.” She got big tears in her eyes. She goes, “Mommy, that duck could have been some little duck’s mother.” (Laughter.) And it was shortly before Christmas, but it took a day or two before she got over that. But it is a wonderful memory that I cherish, as I do so many memories from our extraordinary times and friendships and experiences here in Arkansas.

And I want to thank Dean and the entire Kumpuris family because your generous support of this lecture series and this school has been so welcome, and we are deeply grateful. And I know, too, that Frank, who was so civic-minded and public spirited, would have loved sitting in the front row right next to you, Kula, and he’d probably have about a hundred questions for whoever was standing up on this stage.

I also want to thank Stephanie, not only for welcoming us but for everything you’ve done to make the Presidential Center such a success, Stephanie. You’ve been a real solid rock through all the years. (Applause.) I also want to thank our wonderful long-time friends Bruce Lindsey and Skip Rutherford for their leadership and the entire team here at the Foundation and the faculty, staff, and especially the students at the Clinton School.

There are so many familiar faces here in the audience, and I am grateful for each and every one of you. I want to just mention a very few. I want to mention Dale and Betty Bumpers. Betty Bumpers was such a great first lady for the state of Arkansas in every way. (Applause.) And just the other day, Betty called Bill and said, “How worried should we be that the economy and all these cuts are going to undermine immunization efforts for our children?” So she has been consistent, working on taking care of our children for long before I knew her, and ever since I had been honored to know her.

And Dale, I am so pleased to see you looking as handsome and roguish as usual. (Laughter and applause.) And if you haven’t seen the Dale Bumpers-David Pryor Show, it is quite a spectacle. And dear David and Barbara, who have been our friends and our colleagues through so many years, Fayetteville to Little Rock to Washington and back. And Jim Guy, it’s wonderful you’re here.

And Carol Tucker Foreman, welcome back to Arkansas and thank you for the great battles you have waged on behalf of our food and nutrition and our children’s health over all these years.

And Bill Bowen, who many of you know is a great business leader over the years in Arkansas, but I knew him because occasionally he would let me come teach at the First Methodist Church Bowen Sunday School Class – (laughter) – where he would quietly but effectively critique everything I was saying about the lesson of the day.

And there are so many others who served in Arkansas and served in Washington in Bill’s administrations, and it is great to see you, and I’m looking forward to having time with all of you over the next two days.

Before I begin, I want to say a few serious words about events because we had a very significant event in Yemen earlier today, when we learned of the death of Anwar al-Awlaki, a leader and chief propagandist of al-Qaida’s most active and dangerous affiliate, al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula. This is the terrorist group that tried to blow up an airplane filled with innocent people on Christmas Day in 2009, that attempted to bring down U.S. cargo planes in 2010. Awlaki took a leading role in those plots and in spreading an ideology of hate and violence. But today, like Usama bin Ladin and so many other terrorist leaders who have been killed or captured in recent years, he can no longer threaten America, our allies, or peace loving people anywhere in the world.

Today we are all safer, but we recognize that the threat remains, that al-Qaida does maintain the ability to plan and carry out attacks, and that our vigilance is required. So we will, along with our partners and allies, continue to ratchet up the pressure, continue pursuing a comprehensive strategic approach to counterterrorism, and work to deny al-Qaida and its affiliates safe haven anywhere in the world. It seems a long way from this absolutely glorious day here at the library after dedicating the bridge and the Bill Clark Wetlands, but it is what I spend a lot of my time working on and doing every day.

And it’s such a pleasure for me to be back here to have a chance to once again see old friends and talk about what’s going on in our lives, but also to remember that we are interconnected in ways large and small to people very far from where we are today.

I remember the first time I flew in to the Little Rock Airport all those years ago. Bill picked me up and drove me around Little Rock, then up through the Arkansas River Valley and the Washita Mountains to Hot Springs. And just as I had been told by Arkansas’ biggest booster, who I first laid eyes on as he was saying, “Not only that, we grow the biggest watermelons in the world,” I was very taken with this beautiful state and the hospitality and welcome that I received. Every time I come back, I get that same feeling, and the years we spent here raising our daughter and being involved in the public schools – Chelsea saw her first-grade teacher earlier today – just brings back a flood of memories. So I want to thank Little Rock and Arkansas for everything that you have done and continue to do for me and for our family.

And I’m very proud of every part of this center – the library, the foundation, and the school. And this year, the Clinton School students are completing more than 30 international public service projects in 19 countries on all 6 continents. I’m very proud of what you are doing. (Applause.)

And I also know from my extensive travels on behalf of our country how essential it is that Americans keep reaching out and that we keep opening doors and searching for better understanding. So what you are doing is absolutely essential, and it embodies what Bill and I have tried always to keep at the center of our work, that the point of public service is to produce results. As Bill said earlier today at the bridge dedication, it’s a very simple test: Are people better off when you stopped than when you started? And that’s not only true for elective office, but it’s true in the business world; it’s true in the not-for-profit world, the academic world. Are children better off, will they have a better future, and are we coming together or dividing?

So we have a deep responsibility with the Clinton School that we care very much about, and I have been looking forward to being here with you. Now, one might think, “Well, what does any of this mean for a Secretary of State?” Because I’m well aware that with what’s going on in our economy and the daily struggles that so many Arkansans and Americans are facing, it’s hard to shift focus to something happening in the country of Yemen or Afghanistan and Pakistan or China or Brazil. And there are some – and I hear their voices – who argue that the United States can no longer afford to be a global leader, that we should pull back from the world and lower our ambitions. But I am here today to tell you that nothing could be further from the truth. The fact is – (applause) – number one, we have no choice; the world is on our doorsteps whether we invite it or not. And number two, we cannot afford not to be engaging. Whether it’s opening new markets for American businesses or breaking up terrorist plots and bringing the wars of the last decade to a successful close, our work around the world holds the key to our prosperity and security right here at home.

Now, there are many examples of this, and some of them are controversial. But take, for example, the pending free trade agreement with South Korea. It is expected to create 70,000 American jobs if Congress approves it, including thousands right here in Arkansas because tariffs on most agricultural exports are phased out. That will make a real difference in people’s lives.

From the first days of the Obama Administration, we have worked to renew America’s global leadership because we want it to deliver more for the American people. And for the last decade our foreign policy has been focused on places where we faced the greatest dangers. And responding to threats will always be central to our foreign policy; but it cannot be our foreign policy. If all we do is focus on the threats and the dangers, we will miss the opportunities. And in the decade ahead we need to focus just as intensely on the places where we have the greatest opportunities as on those places where we have faced the greatest dangers.

Now, what that means for me every day is looking for ways to support the so-called Arab Awakening, the transitions sweeping across the Middle East and North Africa, they are some of the most consequential, historic changes of the last many decades, certainly since the fall of the Soviet Union.

It also means renewing America’s preeminent role in the Asia Pacific. That is, for our future, the most consequential region of the world. It means elevating the role of economics in foreign policy, the most vibrant source of our power and a vital part of driving our economic recovery right here at home.

It means working to empower women and girls around the world, a piece of unfinished business of humanity. It means changing the way we do foreign policy, so we are using 21st century tools and harnessing what I call smart power to produce results.

So we are working on all of these fronts and more. But I deeply understand why so many Americans today are worried about what lies ahead for them, for their families, and for our country. Some even wonder, looking at the landscape of problems here at home and abroad, whether America is still up to the job. Well, we have lived through times of anxiety before.

I remember when I was growing up the fear was we were falling behind the Soviets in technology and ambition. I remember my fifth-grade teacher that we needed to all study mathematics so that the Russians wouldn’t get ahead of us and that President Eisenhower himself expected us to learn math. That made a big impression on me. I tried and hoped that the President would give me some credit for effort. (Laughter.)

When I started practicing law here in Little Rock, our country faced stagflation and oil shocks. When I moved with Bill and Chelsea to Washington, as he was inaugurated President, it was outsourcing, the apparent decline of American competitiveness and a budget deficit which at the time seemed unbelievable, about, what, $350 billion. But each time we rose to whatever challenge faced us. American entrepreneurs and innovators proved the naysayers wrong. We out-worked, we out-built, and we simply out-competed every rival. When it mattered most, we put the common good first ahead of ideology, party, or personal interest.

So our people and generations of American leaders built a resilient economy, a global architecture of institutions and norms that protected not just our interests but the interests of all people who wanted a better life in a rules-based international order. That was exceptional leadership from an exceptional country. I remember when Bill and I went to East Asia when he was governor. It was the first trade mission ever to places that seemed very far away from Arkansas, like Japan and Hong Kong. The people we met in Asia didn’t see an America in trouble; they saw a beacon of opportunity and liberty, a superpower underwriting peace and security in the region, and a dynamic market driving global growth. And lucky for us, they also saw lots of Arkansas soybeans they wanted to buy.

Now, that view of America was right then and it’s right now. In the last decade, we’ve lived through terrorist attacks, two long wars, and a global financial crisis. Through it all, America remains an exceptional country. And the sources of America’s greatness are more durable than perhaps many realize. Yes, our military is by far the strongest, our economy is by far the largest in the world, but our workers are still the most productive, and our universities are the gold standard. Our core values of equality, tolerance, opportunity, are an inspiration to people everywhere.

So yes, we do have real challenges, but there’s no doubt we have the capacity to meet them. Just look here in Arkansas. Arkansas farmers are finding new markets for poultry, cotton, and rice, and those exports are supporting tens of thousands of jobs on and off the farm. Arkansas manufacturers are selling aerospace components and electronics, chemicals, and plastics to new customers all over the world. In 2000, Arkansas exported only $20 million worth of goods to China. Last year, it topped $336 million. (Applause.) And this summer, Governor Beebe delivered the keynote address at the first ever Arkansas-China Business and Economic Summit at the University of Central Arkansas.

Students across Arkansas are working to help solve problems, like in Bangladesh where they are supporting a farmer-to-farmer program that uses new technologies and new relationships to boost food production. And the State Department is doing everything we can to promote American business abroad. Foreign investment in Arkansas already directly supports more than 33,000 jobs, but I think that’s just the beginning of what is possible. So we are making it a priority for our ambassadors to help American businesses to work with governors and mayors, like Governor Beebe and Mayors Mark Stodola and Patrick Hays, to have job-creating investments back here doing what we do best: making things and exporting those.

We’re also working to bring down other countries’ internal trade barriers that deny our companies a chance to compete fairly, including abusive regulatory regimes, currency manipulation, and lax labor and environmental standards. And we are standing up for the intellectual property rights of America’s innovators – too often under attack nearly everywhere in the world. And to build up tomorrow’s trading partners and create future opportunities for exporters, we are changing the way we do international development and focusing on investment rather than aid.

So everything I know tells me that we have the talent and the ingenuity and the work ethic to come through these current difficulties. But nothing is preordained. No outcome is inevitable. Leading the world in the years ahead will take the same hard work, clear-eyed choices, and commitment to shared sacrifice and service that built our country’s greatness in the first place.

And ultimately, that responsibility doesn’t rest on the shoulders of a president or a secretary of state or a governor or a senator or a mayor. It’s really an obligation that belongs to all Americans. We have to step up. We have to improve our own efforts. We have to find both the common ground and the common good that has united us in the past.

Now, late last year, I held a town hall meeting in Pristina, Kosovo. This is a place where America made all the difference to the future of those people who survived a brutal effort at ethnic cleansing. In Pristina, if you ever go, there’s a very large statue of Bill as a way of thanking him for his leadership. And next to the statue there is a little shopping area, and somebody started something called the Hillary Store, where they sell very nice clothing but, alas, no pant suits. (Laughter.) And so I went into the store and I said, “My goodness, I’m so surprised. Why on earth do you need a Hillary Store?” And the woman whose store it was very proudly told me they didn’t want Bill to get lonely. (Laughter.)

So later at the town hall meeting, a man stood up and thanked me for everything America had done for his country. And like in so many places in the world, he and his neighbors continued to see American leadership as a linchpin to their own future success. And he asked me, “Will you help us so we could finally see the biggest and the brightest and the most beautiful parts of democracy and a new economy? Can the great American nation assist us in our struggle to restore our hope?” Just as in times past, that is what America still means to countless people around the world: opportunity, responsibility, community. And today, it is our chance and our great privilege to live up to that well-earned reputation of the past, to make the hard choices here at home and abroad that keep the promise of America alive and well. Yes, we have to keep putting people first and keep building those bridges, and don’t stop thinking about tomorrow.

Thank you all. (Applause.)

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Remarks at the Kumpuris Distinguished Lecture Series: Audience Question and Answer Segment

Remarks

Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State
Washington, DC
September 30, 2011

MODERATOR: Thank you. And now we’re going to open it up for questions. And let me assure you there’s going to be a lot of hands from the Clinton School side, so you’re going to see me call on them a lot. I just want to be very clear on that.

To start if off, let me ask the president of the student body of the Clinton School to ask the first question.

QUESTION: Thank you Dean Rutherford, Madam Secretary, it’s an honor. My name is I’m Fernando Cutz, and on behalf of all of us, thank you very much for coming. We truly do appreciate it.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you. (Applause.)

QUESTION: But to get to the fun part, my question involves the fact that since 9/11 our country has had a policy where anybody who harbors terrorists is considered a terrorist themselves. And it’s now become pretty evident that Pakistan has been harboring the Haqqani Network for a while, not just harboring them but even helping them.

So my question to you as our chief diplomat is: How do you plan on balancing the pressure that we need to put on Pakistan to stop that with the fact that we also need them as an ally in the war on terror? And thank you again.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you very much. And I think your question sums up the challenge and the policy that we have been pursuing. Our relationship with Pakistan is critical to the ongoing stability and peace of the region, as well as the fight against terrorism. And I think it is important to remind ourselves that Pakistanis have paid a much greater price in the war against terrorism and in the violence perpetrated on them over the last 10 years than, thankfully, we have. Nearly 30,000 people have been killed – civilians and military, scores of bombing attacks all over the country in places from mosques to markets to universities to police stations.

So the Pakistani people are trying to navigate through a very difficult security environment. And I like to remind myself and my colleagues of that because they have a great stake in trying to end terrorism against themselves, but they bring to their fight against terrorism deep concerns about the relationship with India, about what happens in Afghanistan after U.S. and coalition troops draw down, what happens in the greater region that could destabilize them further.

So it’s a challenging position for us to be in and to advocate. But if you, for example, looked at Admiral Mullen’s entire testimony, where he did express deep concerns about ties between the Pakistani Government and terrorist groups, including the Haqqani Network, and the absolute necessity for us to continue to work at this relationship, there were two sides to his address to the Congress.

Now, I also think it’s important to take a little historical review. If you go on YouTube, you can see Sirajuddin Haqqani with President Reagan at the White House, because during the war against the Soviets in Afghanistan, the United States Government, through the CIA, funded jihadis, funded groups like the Haqqanis to cross the border or to, within Afghanistan, be part of the fight to drive the Soviets out and bring down the Soviet Union.

So when I meet for many hours, as I do, with Pakistani officials, they rightly say, “You’re the ones who told us to cooperate with these people. You’re the one who funded them. You’re the ones who equipped them. You’re the ones who used them to bring down the Soviet Union by driving them out of Afghanistan. And we are now both in a situation that is highly complex and difficult to extricate ourselves from.” That is how they see it.

And they also have used groups in the past to support their ongoing conflict with India over Kashmir. And when I became Secretary of State, they were trying to basically appease the Pakistani Taliban who were attacking them. So they were trying to draw a distinction between the good terrorists and the bad terrorists, because we had funded the good terrorists together. And so they were dealing with this network of terrorism that had been better organized and directed because of al-Qaida, which brought a lot more funding into the border area between Afghanistan and Pakistan and much more of a sense of mission, because bin Ladin and those who worked with him had a very highly developed idea about how to inflict damage on the United States and others.

So one of our first rounds of discussions with the Pakistanis was how it was not in their interest to permit terrorists to take over territory, something they thought would appease them, which obviously did not and could not. So they began moving troops off their Indian border. They began going after the Pakistani Taliban.

So I think it’s important that we appreciate their perspective about where we both are right now. That in no way excuses the fact that they are making a serious, grievous, strategic error supporting these groups, because you think that you can keep a wild animal in the backyard and it will only go after your neighbor? We have too many stories where that doesn’t turn out like that.

So I think that we are pressing and pushing on every lever that we have in the relationship, and we have to be effective in trying to achieve our strategic goals, which is to prevent any attacks against us emanating from Pakistan, as well as to try to help stabilize Pakistan against this internal threat, and to create the best possible circumstances for Afghanistan to be able to have control over its own future. Those are all extremely difficult, and we are learning it, each piece of that, every single day.

MODERATOR: Ms. Abrams.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Hi.

MODERATOR: Wait for the mike. Wait for the microphone, ma’am.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Hi. How are you?

QUESTION: I’m fine. What I want you to do is what I’ve known you’ve always done. I’m futurist celebrating my 80th birthday here Sunday. But Time Magazine – (applause) – had a front page cover page about what’s going to happen in 2054, and I want you to help me to know systemically how do you plan to address the immorality of the world (inaudible).

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, Annie, I think it is wonderful that someone about to celebrate her 80th birthday is looking forward the way you are, as you always have, and by asking your question forcing all of us to look forward. Bill has – one of his many great observations is there are the headlines and then there are the trend lines. And it’s so easy to get caught up the headlines. That’s true if you’re in government, and it’s true if you’re a citizen trying to follow what happens. But you’ve got to keep your eye on the trend lines.

And I think that the trend lines favor United States if we do what we’re expected to do, if we keep true to our values, our faith, if we pursue our interests in a smart way, if we get over the internal political conflicts that we have too much of today. Because it really is – to quote my husband again – an example of us majoring in the minors, and we need to start looking at what’s important for us: How do we grow this economy, how do we take care of our people, how do we close the income gap, how do we take on inequality in our own nation, how do we keep perfecting our union and improving our democracy?

Because we have to remain the exemplar. When people are trying to figure out what does democracy look like in Egypt or Libya or Tunisia or Indonesia, they look at us. Now, that doesn’t mean they’re going to adopt everything we do whole cloth, because they have different histories, different cultures. But we have to be a good model of what it means in what I’ve referred to as the age of participation, where everybody wants to participate, where everybody has the means to do so through technology. How do we make sure that democracy just doesn’t collapse under all that participation and all the diversions for making decisions that are going to benefit us for years and decades to come?

So I do think that we have all the raw materials. We have all of the ability that God gave us. We have used it and risen to the challenge many times before, and we will again. But it is – as we are often reminded by the old Winston Churchill observation, Americans will eventually do the right thing after trying nearly everything else. (Laughter.) So that’s where we have to keep our focus. Because it’s not only important for our own country, it is important for the world.

I’ll give you an example of – when I first started traveling as Secretary of State and my first trip was to the Far East, to Japan and South Korea and to China and to Indonesia, and I would do public events in all of these settings, usually at universities, sometimes on popular television shows. I was asked so many times, and then in the months afterwards, “How can you work with President Obama? You two were running against each other. You were trying to beat him. He was trying to beat you. He won, and why would you be working with him and why would he ask you to?”

I said, “Well, in our country, we really think that we have to close ranks after elections are over. We have to put aside the differences. And I think the really simple answer is we both love our country and both want to serve our country.” (Applause.) And that was so hard for people to understand. Because politics is a blood sport, and truly a blood sport in some places. It’s a contact sport at the very least here. (Laughter.)

And I’ve met so many people who – fathers and mothers and sisters and brothers and sons and daughters have been killed because they were trying to participate in developing a democracy. So part of what we have to tell the world is there are certain fundamental values, and there is a morality to democracy, where we respect the other, the other’s opinion, the other’s aspirations; where we try to work together to find that common ground and that common good. And if we ever stop doing that, then we’ll be a great country. We’ll still have a great economy for very, very far into the future, as far as I can certainly imagine, but we won’t be the kind of model that the world desperately needs.

There is a democratic awakening in places that have never dreamed of democracy. And it is unfortunate that it’s happening at a historic time when our own government is facing so many serious economic challenges, because there’s no way to have a Marshall Plan for the Middle East and North Africa.

I’ll just end with this, but think about how we remarkable this was. End of World War II, hundreds of thousands of Americans killed, everybody in the country totally dislocated, millions of men off to war, women in factories. I mean, it was a full experience from every part of society. And like my father, who was in the Navy for all those years during the war – he came home; all he wanted to do was get back to his business, start a family, live his life.

And along came Harry Truman and George Marshall, and they said, “We want a future that will be good for your children, the so-called baby boomers, the post-World War II kids. Guess what, we have to rebuild our enemies, and that means we have to keep taxing you to pay for us to do that.”

So here’s my dad and all the men like him, and some of the women too, who thought, “I just want to be left alone. I just want to make my own way. And now my President and this general Secretary of State is saying, “Sorry, we have to build for the future.” And so they did. And it was in today’s dollars about $150 billion of a commitment to rebuild places like Japan and Germany and Italy and war-torn Europe.

But look what it gave us. It gave us the greatest period of prosperity and peace. And just dreaming, if we had the means today to really make a huge commitment in these places that are talking about democracy, but they don’t have labor parties, they don’t know what that really means for them to have to do, we could have a very significant impact. Because it’s not only political reform they need; it’s economic reform. And the thing about the Marshall Plan that people forget is that we basically gave money to businesses to rebuild, to hire people. We can make a huge difference in Egypt, in Tunisia, in Libya, and elsewhere.

But we are stretched here at home and we have our own priorities. But just think of the difference not only in leadership. Everybody talks about oh my goodness, we need this and that in leadership, but in citizenship. Now, it’s also why Harry Truman nearly lost the election and how he had to work really hard didn’t run for re-election, but then 10, 15 years later was viewed as the great statesman, not only American but global, that he actually was.

MODERATOR: (Inaudible) didn’t run for —

QUESTION: Madam Secretary, thank you for being here. I’m a second-year masters candidate here at the Clinton School.

I just wanted to ask you because I was honored last week to be at CGI and got to sit in on a session with Her Majesty Queen Rania from Jordan and other influential women from the Middle East. They talked about their experience women’s role. And I just wanted to know what you saw, what kind of impact you see women having with the new Middle East.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, it’s a great question. And the short answer is the jury is out. Women were at the forefront in Tahrir Square, in Tunisia. And it’s too soon to really speak about what will be the outcome of their sacrifice and their commitment. But we constantly raise how important it is that if you have a democracy, it means you respect human rights, you respect women’s rights, you respect minority rights.

I just met with the foreign minister of Egypt and he and I had a very good comprehensive discussion about that. I just did an interview on an Egyptian television show saying, “Look, Egypt has the chance to demonstrate that we have a democracy after 5,000 years of history, but you can’t do it by leaving out women. You can’t do it by marginalizing the Coptic Christians. You can’t do it by having one election one time, where one group wins and then they never want to have another vote.” So all of these are concerns that we raise constantly with our counterparts.

And the United States has tried to be supportive of groups that are working to make sure that the full meaning of democracy is not lost. Because I think for too long people thought, okay, we have an election, fine; then we’re a democracy. And we know from our long experience you need an independent, free press; you need an independent judiciary; you need protection of minority rights; you need all kinds of a framework for freedom of speech and freedom of conscience and religion, and all that goes into to really showing respect and the dignity of every individual.

So we are pushing this at every opportunity, but it’s too soon to tell. And a lot of the voices of the women that you heard at CGI are very important because they’re from the region. They’re speaking out, they’re trying to make a difference. But we all have to be really vigilant about that.

QUESTION: Hi. My name is Kate (inaudible). I’m a second year student here and I’m also a graduate assistant at the Center (inaudible) here at the school. And I’m wondering if you could speak to the role of citizen diplomacy and development diplomacy in the U.S. role (inaudible), and also if that impact is different than traditional diplomacy.

SECRETARY CLINTON: It’s a great question. And I think that – I think both citizen diplomacy and development diplomacy have been part of our diplomatic arsenal for a long time, but the benefits of each is becoming much clearer. And when I became Secretary of State, I ordered the first-ever Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review. The Defense Department does what’s called the Quadrennial Defense Review, a QDR, so we do the QDDR, to say how can we be more effective. And two areas that jumped out were citizen diplomacy and development diplomacy.

With respect to citizen diplomacy, we can actually talk about it in a disciplined way now because of what we call 21st century statecraft. Technology, social networking, connections of all kinds that people can make directly citizen-to-citizen have changed the landscape.

Back when – in June 2009 after the Iranian election, and there was a great outrage among the Iranian people and a lot of efforts in the streets to try to overturn what was clearly a fraudulent election and to have a voice in their own future, and we had a really difficult decision to make because a lot of our Iranian contacts were saying, “Don’t get too out front on this. We want this to be Iranian. We don’t want this to be American.”

But at the same time, people arranging for demonstrations and sharing information were on the internet doing that through all of the various sites. And we were told that some of the sites were going to – just as – on a regular cycle were about to be shut down because it was the time of year when they shut them down for, like, a day and took at look at them. So we intervened and said, “No, you’ve got to keep the information flowing so that the people in the streets can communicate.” And then, of course in Tahrir Square and in Tunisia, we saw that without that kind of connection to technology it would have been very difficult to put the people in the streets to be demanding their rights.

Now that’s citizen-to-citizen in a very direct way. Governments are catching on. They’re becoming much smarter about how they try to block that. So what we’re doing in the State Department and in the Obama Administration is putting a lot of money into devising ways with our experts in technology to get around a lot of the barriers and the ways that governments try to shut these down. There was that period in Egypt when the Mubarak regime shut the entire internet down, but it so damaged business and it also damaged the government that they had to get it back up again. So we’re watching all of this, and we’re very concerned about how we keep adding to what is possible for citizen-to-citizen diplomacy.

On development diplomacy, really I’m always a little bit saddened when people say, “Well, we can balance the budget if we just end foreign aid,” which, if you could do it, maybe it would be worth thinking about. But obviously, it’s not at all credible. We have a very limited amount of our budget – about 1 percent – that goes to foreign aid. Well, what do we use it for? Well, we use it for emergencies, like after the earthquake in Haiti. America was there and we were seen as really reaching out and helping. Other national disasters around the world, where we get there, we try to help organize, and I think it’s a real credit to us. We use it to deal with some of these trend line problems, like malaria and HIV/AIDS and tuberculosis because we do it for humanitarian reasons, but we also do it because in this interconnected world diseases travel.

So there’s a lot of reasons why development is good for America, but it’s also a way of interacting with countries other than military or diplomats. It’s a different approach. It’s a different way of enlisting the understanding of governments and people in other countries that they, too, can help improve the lives of those who are less fortunate. So there’s a lot that we do through those two means.

MODERATOR: (Inaudible) did you have a question? Let’s wait for the– let’s wait for the microphone here. I don’t think to identify (inaudible). (Applause.)

QUESTION: (Inaudible) many ways through your career and especially since (inaudible) I wish that you could convey to all of us here all of the work that you do empowering women all over the world. We need a good dose of that in this country here. (Laughter.) I find that too many women since I’ve moved back to Arkansas don’t feel (inaudible) but I know the work that you’ve done with women all over the world (inaudible) and to the young (inaudible) so I’m proud of (inaudible) has done. Just speak to us a little bit about that.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you so much, Betty. And I think this empowering women, giving women their full and equal rights, is the unfinished business of the 21st century. And it’s always dangerous to make sweeping generalizations, but we all do it. And if you look at the 19th century, the struggle against slavery was central. We fought a Civil War over it. The 20th century, the struggle against totalitarianism was life or death. We fought two world wars and a cold war over it.

And when you look around the world and you say what holds back countries, what diminishes economies, what makes for less stable societies and therefore more likely grounds for conflict and extremism to take root, it is the unfinished business of recognizing that women’s rights are human rights and human rights are women’s right. (Applause.) And yet women have certainly enjoyed greater opportunity, but we are not yet where we need to be.

Now, in some places, the laws are no longer in play, but there are attitudes, there are psychological barriers, there are cultural expectations. There are, as Betty said, women even in our own country who are unable to see what they are capable of as independent human beings in their own right. And so we have to continue to work with our girls and our education systems, our families, to make it clear that what’s so wonderful about our country is although it’s taken a long time, we are breaking down the barriers to equality and to opportunity.

And so we want to maintain this meritocracy that has been the hallmark of our vision of how America should work, and it needs to include women and people with disabilities and the LGBT community and minorities and everybody else who has the willingness to make a contribution and wants to be judged on his or her own merits.

Now, in much of the rest of the world, we are still battling laws and customs that are debilitating for women. Just about 10 days ago, I made a speech out in San Francisco about all the data about the economy that we now have gathered, the World Bank has gathered, gathered at the IMF, other financial research groups, which show how much more productive every economy in the world could be, including our own, if all the barriers to women’s full economic participation were eliminated.

And that’s especially important to remind ourselves of, because it’s not only the right thing to do, which, indeed it is, but it makes economic sense and it helps to build stronger societies and stronger democracies. So it’s been a particular concern of mine in my entire adult life, and I have seen a lot of progress and I’ve known a lot of very brave women and men who have joined in this struggle. We just lost one just last week, one Wangari Maathai, the first African woman to be given a Nobel Peace Prize, who got it because she understood the connection between women’s lives and environmental degradation. And so she began a green movement across Kenya and then into other areas of Africa where women were planting trees and nurturing them, and it really sent a message to the poorest girl in the poorest village that you have a role to play and it’s important.

And there are so many examples of women like that. At CGI last week, Aung San Suu Kyi from Burma was interviewed by long distance along with Archbishop Tutu, a woman who has shown amazing strength and dignity over so many years on behalf of democracy in her country. I could go down the list, whether it’s a woman or a man who is struggling for equal opportunity for their voices to be heard, it’s really in America’s interest to support that.

And I think it’s particularly in our interest to support the education of girls and women, the empowerment of girls and women, because what we know is that you have more stable societies and a better chance at avoiding conflict if women themselves are part of the entire fabric of a country.

So I’m not doing it just because I’ve always done it. I’m doing it because every year I get more convinced it’s in America’s interests and the world’s interests that we do it. (Applause.)

MODERATOR: (Inaudible.)

QUESTION: Thank you, Madam Secretary, for speaking with us today. My name is (inaudible) from the Democratic Republic of Congo, and I am a first-year Clinton School student. Madam, (inaudible) questions about talking about women in Africa, allow me to thank you for your visit in the Congo in 2009.(inaudible), where (inaudible) in my country. But mostly, thank you for visiting Goma, the most dangerous place in Africa today as a woman, despite security concern, you went on to be (inaudible). Also, thank you for speaking out against the unspeakable crimes against women and girls in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

Madam, (inaudible) people when they learn (inaudible) student, they ask me, “Have you met with President Clinton yet?” But I know why people from my country ask, “Have you met Madam Secretary Clinton?” (Laughter and applause.) Madam, since your visit in 2009 there have been some change, some (inaudible). Thank you for what you have done for us and (inaudible) to my country. (Applause.)

SECRETARY CLINTON: Let me thank you for being here, for attending the Clinton School, and for increasing your understanding and skills so that you can contribute to future of the Democratic Republic of Congo. As you said, I was very honored to go to Goma, which is in eastern Congo, in the heart of the area where conflict has claimed more lives in the last 20 years than anywhere else in the world, probably at least five million, and where violence against women and using rape as a tool of war has become commonplace.

And it always is, for me, humbling to meet women and men who every day work to try to protect the most vulnerable, who work to try to end the conflict, who work to try to change the underlying reasons why the conflict continues. Some of it is because of spillover from neighboring countries, as you know, and some of it is over the great vast wealth of the Congo, including conflict minerals. Some of it is because of the difficulty in extending governmental control over such a vast country as the DRC is.

But for whatever reason, the main victims of war today are women and children, because there are no front lines to these wars. Whether it’s in eastern Congo or the northwest provinces of Pakistan, the way war is conducted is indiscriminate violence against innocent civilians. So militias roam through eastern Congo, going village to village, killing the men, raping and maiming women and children, and we are all struggling to help try to put an end to this unspeakable, horrific history of violence.
But I’ll just end by saying that what I took away most from going to Goma was the extraordinary spirit, energy, joy that I saw in so many of the people with whom I met. Because even as hard as it was, they had a love of life that was overwhelming. And those who were working in the trenches to deal with the physical and mental wounds of the vicious attacks that so many people I met with and saw had suffered were doing it with money from their governments, from multinational organizations, from religious organizations. They were all committed to doing what they could to start hospitals to help save lives and give people a new future.

And I met one woman who herself had been brutally raped. And what happens often when this occurs is that the family doesn’t want the woman back because the shame of it, the confusion of it, is just too much. And so often they are separated from their remaining families, not taken in. And this woman found refuge in one of the hospitals that has been established in Goma, and thankfully she successfully underwent physical surgery in the most modern facilities. When I met her, she was returning to the forest every week, searching for women who were left there to die and were too ashamed to try to struggle to come forward, and she was literally picking them up, moving them into the hospital, staying with them and helping them.

Everywhere in the world there are examples of that level of courage and commitment to life that I think is not only inspiring but should remind us of how fortunate we are, even in these hard times, how fortunate we are, and how there isn’t anything that we face that we cannot overcome if we roll up our sleeves and get to work, and that there’s a big world out there with people who need us, need us individually, need us through organizations like our religious faith organizations or other groups that we’re part of, and need us as Americans through our government. Because I went on a government mission to show that the United States of America cared about the last, the least, and the lost among us, and that we were going to do all we could to have a foreign policy that reflected the golden rule that is the cornerstone of every major religion, and we were going to send a message where people were suffering, the United States, in our extraordinary public- private partnerships, would try to be there.

Thank you all very much. (Applause.)

Read Full Post »

I have long said that Bill Clinton is  a lucky guy because he got not only the smartest girl in the class, but the most beautiful and compassionate as well.  Apparently, his prom queen is also the most popular!  Not just the most popular girl, the most popular person!   Lucky Bill, because, Mr. President, she loves you.  And the nation loves her!  (They love you,  too.  You know that, right?)

This little excursion into the media has nothing to do with a Hillary run, and  a great deal to do with the work our Mme. Secretary does which we track as closely as possible here. Her poll numbers simply continue to rise like a helium balloon.  I heard recently that there is a helium shortage.  I think that could be because all of the helium is attached to the person known as Hillary Rodham Clinton. For three long years plus many of us have been chanting “Rise, Hillary, rise!”  Well ladies, and gents, Hillary has long been rising. She is now at 69% approval. If she goes much higher, she just might float right through that glass ceiling … whether she intends to or not!

*Goes to work attaching glass cutters to the top of the balloon – assisted by Washington Monument rappellers*

… Hillary Clinton Remains America’s Most Popular National Figure

Zeke Miller| Sep. 27, 2011, 12:32 PM

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s approval rating is at an all-time high — even better than when she was the nation’s First Lady — with 69 percent of Americans holding a favorable view of her, compared to 26 percent who do not.

Clinton’s popularity eclipses even First Lady Michelle Obama, who has a 65 percent favorability rating.

Top of the charts … our girl!

 

Vodpod videos no longer available.

Most_Popular_John_King, posted with vodpod

Read Full Post »

Well, this is a post I did not want to put up, but if I had not, someone surely would have called my attention to this story from HuffPo which resurrects the Hillary-Biden switch scenario – at least in part.

Peter D. Rosenstein

Political consultant

D.C. Coffee House Chatter: Hillary for VP

Posted: 9/25/11 06:22 PM ET

Chatter in the coffee houses of Washington, D.C. is about what President Obama can do to win a second term. The chatter is from Democratic supporters of the president who don’t necessarily think his team is following the right path to reelection. It is from Obama Democrats who Hillary’s supporters in 2008 said, “Drank the Kool-Aid.”

On a recent Sunday morning, a very prominent Democratic insider stated unequivocally, “Mark my words, on the podium in Charlotte, NC on the final day of the Democratic Convention, the hands held high will be that of Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton.” Everyone within earshot looked at him and asked, “Is this inside information?” He responded with a resounding NO but then stood by his prediction nonetheless.

Read more >>>>

So let me get this straight. The very same Obama supporters who yelled in our faces and called us terrible names in 2008 now want our girl to save their failing, ineffectual boy.  Is that it?  And putting her name on the ballot is supposed to bring back the votes.  Do I have that right?  They are so dedicated to a failed POTUS that rather than replace him with the competent figure on the horizon, they will take her and use her like a band aid on a festering wound.  Is there no extent they will stop at to prop him up?

He  has had more than two-and-a-half years to bring about his change.  There is no hope.   His “style” is to outsource all the hard work.   “Bring me a bill I can sign,”  and then to collapse and fold before Tea Party and GOP demands … in some cases before the demand is even made (putting the social safety nets on the table before the GOP mentioned them).

Why on earth anyone should want him to have a second term to do further damage I cannot fathom.

I can only end this one way:

Hillary 2012!  Top of the Ticket! Yes!  SHE can!

 

 

Read Full Post »

In the flurry of UNGA activity,  I have not been updating the blog with posts about the groundswell out here in America calling for Hillary Rodham Clinton to run for the top office in 2012.  There was one major  op-ed making the rounds on the internet this week, and a second, not quite as popular, but worth addressing.

Brett M. Decker, at the Washington Times,  went viral with this from Thursday.

DECKER: Hillary Clinton’s last chance

Obama is vulnerable to a 2012 primary challenge

By Brett M. Decker

The Washington Times

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton speaks during a joint news conference with Czech Foreign Minister Karel Schwarzberg (not shown) at the State Department in Washington on Thursday, June 2, 2011. (AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana)
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton speaks during a joint news conference with Czech Foreign Minister Karel Schwarzberg (not shown) at the State Department in Washington on Thursday, June 2, 2011. (AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana)

The debate in Orlando Thursday night put the spotlight on Republican contenders for president. However, there is another primary race developing behind the scenes that promises to be even more interesting: a rematch between Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton for the Democratic nomination. Mrs. Clinton would be the stronger candidate in 2012 and is much more likely to keep the White House in Democratic hands.

President Obama is damaged goods. Polling data released by Gallup last week show a shocking 88 percent of Americans believe the country is heading in the wrong direction. Flip that number around and it means a tiny 12 percent are happy with the way things are going under the Obama administration. That’s outside the margin of error but definitely within the margin of stupidity. Numbers so low forewarn of almost certain doom for an incumbent.

Read more >>>>

Mark Whittington’s contribution at Yahoo requires a few disclaimers, however.  For one thing,  given the current situation,  he sets his parameters a bit too narrowly.  This effort is not about saving the Democrats.  I do not know any Hillary supporters who give a fig about what happens to the Democratic Party after what they engineered in 2008.  It is about saving the country and scaffolding the middle class that was built by and on Democratic Party principles and legislation.

Can Hillary Clinton Save the Democrats?

Mark Whittington Mark Whittington, Yahoo! Contributor Network

COMMENTARY | Politico reports an unfolding story of the rise of Clinton nostalgia among Democrats. This is coupled with the continuing death spiral of President Barack Obama’s approval numbers, even among his liberal base.

Read more >>>>

My main gripe about Whittington’s piece comes at the end.

In any event, Clinton has not demonstrated even the slightest desire to run for president. Her tenure as Secretary of State has proven frustrating. The mauling she got at the hands of Obama in 2008 seems to have scared her off of any future attempts of electoral politics. So if the Democrats expect for someone to save them from what’s surely coming, they will have to look elsewhere.

1. No one – and I mean NO ONE – is expecting the Secretary of State to mount a challenge against the president in whose administration she currently serves.  That is absurd political suicide.

2. The word “scared” does not belong in any sentence with “Hillary Clinton” or any pronoun referring to her in the text.  If there is a fearless, courageous member of this administration, it is Hillary Clinton.  Nothing scares her!   We fear for her when she travels to dangerous places or makes bold statements that  could incite actions harmful to her person,  but Hillary fears no one and nothing … except the dismantling of the social structures that have made this country great.  That, I think,  might strike some fear in her – enough to consider running if the trainee-in-chief decides to call it a term.

What are we ordinary Americans saying?  We Hillary supporters?  I want to end tonight, not with a post from the media, but with an eloquent comment from a Facebook friend who supports an HRC run.  My friend Allyn speaks for so many of us.

We just have to keep reminding people, make sure that people stay focused on what is really important…not the jeremiads from the Oval Office, not the stupid gotcha debates on FOX news, not the polls, not Michelle Obama’s wardrobe or Sarah Palin’s reality TV shows. The stakes are too high, and what Barack Obama, Rick Perry, and Sarah Palin are banking on is that people continue to slumber like the president, and accept things as they are…The problem is that we haven’t four more years to waste playing games. The moment is made for Hillary, even more than in 2008….everything she prophesied in that campaign has come true, and the very definition of leadership is to be able to anticipate what is coming and prepare your people for it. The futures of millions truly hang in the balance …. it really is quite possibly the most consequential election of our lifetime, and the only person suited for the moment, the only person able to rise to this challenge and put the country on a different path is Hillary Clinton. We just have to keep reminding people, because forgetting carries a serious, irredeemable price.

He is correct. She is the only one equipped for this task.

Read Full Post »

There are two of special note today.  This one by Steve Chapman in the Chicago Trib is notable because of its source.  Criticism like this coming out of the president’s home state and the nerve center of his reelection campaign (not for the first time) should be cause for pause.

Why Obama should withdraw

By Steve ChapmanSeptember 18, 2011

… Obama might do his party a big favor. In hard times, voters have a powerful urge to punish incumbents. He could slake this thirst by stepping aside and taking the blame. Then someone less reviled could replace him at the top of the ticket.

The ideal candidate would be a figure of stature and ability who can’t be blamed for the economy. That person should not be a member of Congress, since it has an even lower approval rating than the president’s.

It would also help to be conspicuously associated with prosperity. Given Obama’s reputation for being too quick to compromise, a reputation for toughness would be an asset.

As it happens, there is someone at hand who fits this description: Hillary Clinton.

Read more >>>>

This one is notable also because of its source,   President Clinton himself chiming in.  So the Clinton stance on this is “that’s just Dick Cheney trying to make trouble.” Very good!  But we all know that this began well before Cheney opened his mouth.  The record is right here on these pages.  HuffPo reports it thus.

Bill Clinton: Dick Cheney ‘Sowing Discord’ With Suggestion That Hillary Run Against Obama In 2012

“Well, you know, I’m very proud of her, so I’m always gratified whenever anyone says anything nice about her. And I very much agree that she’s done a good job,” Clinton told Bob Schieffer on CBS’s “Face the Nation.”

“But I also have a high regard for Vice President Cheney’s political skills, and I think one of those great skills is sowing discord among the opposition. So I think he’s right that she’s done a heck of a job. But she is a member of this administration, and committed to doing it. And I think he, by saying something nice about her in the way that he did, knew that it might cause a little trouble,” Clinton continued.

“I don’t want to help him succeed in his political strategy. But I admire that he’s still out there hitting the ball.”

Read more >>>>

He walked that tightrope like a Flying Wallenda!  I am glad this question did not come up until after Cheney spoke to it.  He provided a position from which to address it.  I admire that Bill Clinton admires Cheney still hitting the ball.

This is cute.  Just for the heck of it!

 

Read Full Post »

All of the scuttlebutt this week emanated from  a Bloomberg  poll.  There were more articles about that poll than you could shake a stick at, as my mom used to say.  I never understood what that expression really meant except that it indicated great volume.  Rather than deal in redundancy, I will link to this article from the NY Post which contains a link to the poll itself.   The bottom line is really just the same old story,  but it deepens each time we see the polls.  Hillary Clinton is wildly popular.  Obama becomes more unpopular by the day, buyer’s remorse grows among those who voted for him, and some would prefer Hillary to replace him on the Dem ticket in 2012.  What is different this week?  Their numbers are further apart, and the percentage of people who think she would have done a better job is a little better than a third of those polled.   No surprise to anyone here.  So just for the record, here is the Post article.

Hillary Clinton enjoys higher marks than President Obama: poll

POST WIRE SERVICES

Last Updated: 6:27 PM, September 16, 2011

Nearly two-thirds of Americans hold a favorable view of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton — an indication that voters have buyers remorse when it comes to electing Barack Obama president, according to a new poll.

The survey, conducted for Bloomberg News, found that most people believe the country would be better off if she had become president in 2008.

At the same time, Obama’s job approval rating stands at a paltry 45 percent, the lowest of his presidency, the poll found.

Clinton is “more likable” to women — with a staggering 68 percent holding a favorable view, compared to 59 percent of men, according to the poll.

A new poll reveals most voters think Hillary Clinton would have been a better president than Barack Obama.

AP
A new poll reveals most voters think Hillary Clinton would have been a better president than Barack Obama.

All age groups hold favorable views of the former first lady — although those 65 years and older are even more in love with her with 68 percent holding a favorable view, the poll found.

Well, it is hard not to be in love with someone who works so hard and so cheerfully and does such a terrific job!  She is so easy on the eyes, as well.

For those who  would like to see her accede to the Oval Office sooner rather than later,  the dependably pro-Hillary Colleen O’Connor offers a route for 2012.

Colleen O’Connor: How Hillary Clinton Becomes President

The former presidential candidate’s fate is the commander-in-chief job.


I know. I know.Hillary Clinton said the chances of her challenging President Barack Obama “are below zero,” according to CNN.

She also said she won’t “run for the presidency.”

That doesn’t mean she won’t become president! And I am not talking about 2016.

Watch the special election for New York’s 9th District (Rep. Anthony Weiner’s old seat). That outcome could be a bigger upset than Scott Brown winning Ted Kennedy’s Massachusetts Senate seat.

Read more >>>>

Despite Maria Cardona’s response to Don Lemon on CNN this morning, when asked about a challenge to Obama,  more Democrats appear to want that this week than last, or perhaps just want him to step aside.  I do not think Maria can be speaking for the whole party when she says, “Capital N capital NO underscore exclamation point!”   Some challenger could come out of the woodwork.  It is a big party,  and the current candidate has not proven that he is up to the job.

Read Full Post »

OK OK OK!!!!  I tried.  I resisted as best I could, but, at the end of the day (literally) I must post this because, as all that has gone before here on these pages, it is part of Hillary Clinton’s history.  Yes, Darth Vader himself thinks she would have been a better POTUS than The One.  Obama should never have allowed that epithet to root. One is not a lucky number in presidential terms – if you know what I mean.

Here’s the beautiful, smart, organized, talented, and very personable HRC.

And here is what Dick Cheney said about her. Yes – at Breitbart no less!

Cheney praises Hillary Clinton over Obama

Sep 4 04:21 PM US/Eastern

Former vice president Dick Cheney Sunday praised Hillary Clintonas one of the more competent members of President Barack Obama’s administration, saying it would be “interesting to speculate” on how she would perform as president.

Cheney was asked in an interview with Fox News Sunday whether the Democrats would have been better off with Clinton than Obama as their candidate in 2012.

SNIP

“I have a sense that she’s one of the more competent members of the current administration and it would be interesting to speculate about how she might perform were she to be president,” he said.

Read more >>>>

“Were she to be.”  That subjunctive is  tantalizing!  Not hard to look at either. Not that that should matter at all, but just sayin’.  She has it all!

Woo-Hoo!  And here is the Youtube!

Read Full Post »

“Out of sight,  out of mind,” they say, but that is not the case when it comes to Secretary of State, and star of this blog, Hillary Rodham Clinton.  Except for a brief resurfacing on Thursday to attend the Libya Contact Group conference in Paris,  the SOS has been enjoying some well-earned off time, her first vacation since an attempt at a Bermuda trip in August, 2009 was cut short by Hurricane Bill.

Perhaps the more appropriate expression is “absence makes the heart grow fonder,”  if we are to use the articles making the rounds at Hillary Facebook groups today as a gauge.  Here is what we have in the way of a daily Hillary Run affirmation.

This one is not new, but involves a poll, and qualifies for a mention here.

* Top Question : Will Hillary Clinton run for President in 2012?

by True~Male Posted August 31, 2011
Will Hillary Clinton challenge Barack Obama for the Democratic presidential nomination?

 

New Hampshire rings in with this one.

Hillary in 2012!

Andy Bourassa, Ashland

September 4, 2011

It’s time for my fellow Democrats to face up to the fact that President Obama is a dud.
He hasn’t kept his campaign promises: He didn’t end the war – he escalated it. He didn’t close Guantanamo. He has continued to let the wealthy get away without paying their fair share. He has put Medicare and Social Security on the chopping block.

Read more >>>>

 

Read Full Post »

One of these,  the CSM one, was contributed by Bea in a thread last night and is from yesterday. The FOX News one is from August 30, but popped into my Facebook groups only today.  That’s how hard it is to keep up with these “Hillary Run” articles!   They are like mosquitoes out there – swarming after the storm!  They proliferate so abundantly,  and I cannot say that I mind.  Madame Secretary,  you must hear this!

One thing we all know is that when HRC decided to run in 2007 she knew she was looking at working hard through 2016.  She decided that she was up to it.  Had she won the nomination and been elected, she would be running for a second term right now.  Had she been POTUS these years, she would have been working as hard at that job as she has been as SOS.  So I do not buy the “she’s so tired” meme.    She would have been tired anyway, and she would have been running.  She has plenty left in her,  and she has plenty  to contribute – much more,  I would argue,  than anyone now on the pre-GE slates.  So I say, Hillary, we are not only still here, we are organized!  You really do not need to lift a pretty little finger.  We will carry you in!

Here is the CSM article.

If Obama looks as if he’ll lose in 2012, what about Hillary Clinton?

Approval ratings for Obama are at a historic low. Unemployment is not budging. Clinton would have to step down as secretary of State. Would it be unseemly to campaign against a president, in whose cabinet she once served? Just ask Jon Huntsman Jr.

By John Hughes/ September 2, 2011

This is a pretty dismal time for President Obama.

He campaigned on a platform to change Washington, but as he himself admitted in an interview with CNN’s Wolf Blitzer, the atmosphere there is worse since he became president.

His popularity is at an all-time low. It is no surprise that many Republicans want to give him the heave-ho in 2012. He is not exactly wowing independents, and even some Democrats, especially African-Americans, are grumbling.

Read more >>>>

 

Here is the one from FOX News.

Hillary On the Horizon as Obama Challenger?

By

Published August 30, 2011

| FoxNews.com

What do Lyndon B. Johnson and Barack H. Obama have in common? And where might Hillary Rodham Clinton fit into this puzzle?

Madame Secretary, we would like to be able to call you Madame President.  You are the only hope this country has to retain its position of leadership in the world. We have gotten used to being the leader. We think American ingenuity and entrepreneurship cannot be beaten. We need a POTUS who believes that too! And that POTUS is YOU!

Read Full Post »

As far as we know,  Mme Secretary returned from the Paris Libya Contact Group last night to a long holiday weekend – a rest earned many times over.    She continues to dominate the interwebs,  her absence notwithstanding.

Obama fading, Hillary rising, primary challenge looming?

September 2nd, 2011, 3:35 pm · 2 Comments · posted by Mark Landsbaum

The president’s hit a new low in job performance and a new high in disapproval ratings, as jobs continue not to be created at a blinding clip. Zero in the last month, according to the government, which ought to know. (Ha. I couldn’t resist that.)

Anyway, does this bode ill for Barack Obama, whose EPA policies have now crossed the ideological line when it comes to stimulating opposition (unions are now complaining as well as industrial CEOs).

James Taranto’s Best of the Web column today offers a suggestion from one of his readers. We pass it on, simply because it’s so intriguing.

Read more >>>>

Other counties  heard from.  These do not mention HRC or any candidate specifically,

Memo to Dems: Dump Obama before it’s too late

Published: 11:17 AM 09/02/2011 | Updated: 6:16 PM 09/02/2011

This summer has cemented it: Barack Obama is a lame duck. His administration is a failure. Democrats know it. And they only have months to act.

Their president has lost the support of Wall Street donors. He has driven high-powered Democrats to go public with humiliating criticism. One in four Democrats have told CNN they want a different nominee.

Then this.

Consumer advocate Ralph Nader, whose third-party presidential candidacy some Democrats credited with handing the 2000 election to George W. Bush, has a new model for challenging President Obama from the left in 2012.

Nader proposes to assemble a large group of Democratic candidates to take Obama to task on a variety of issues.

So-ooo!  I  ask  who is best?  Best for the country?  What is best for our country?

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »

%d bloggers like this: