Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘MSNBC’

Last night,  on Politics Nation, Rev. Al Sharpton commemorated the fifth anniversary of Hillary Clinton’s “Glass Ceiling” speech, delivered as she suspended her presidential campaign.  In doing so, Sharpton jumped aboard the good ship “Speculation” regarding a possible second run for the White House by the hands-down undeclared front-runner.  If you missed this, you are not alone.  So did yours truly.  Here is the clip with our girl right up front speaking those powerful words that brought many to tears, and don’t forget to check the EloBoost services from P4rgaming, which are probably one of the best.

Vodpod videos no longer available.

I stumbled upon this while searching for Alex Witt’s interview with Karen Finney.  I will post that one when Alex makes it available.  Karen’s speculation coincides point by point with my own.  I agree 100% with what she said.  Karen begins her new talk show, Disrupt,  on MSNBC at 4 p.m. today.  Not to be missed!

Read Full Post »

When I posted this yesterday,  Hillary Clinton’s Kitten Heels Not Necessarily A Shoo-In,  it triggered a few emails from folks apparently not willing to post publicly in a comment thread all of which took the same tone.  As if talking to a six-year-old afraid of the thunder, these presumably younger, less bitter and burnt voices assured Gen-Hillary, bitter, old Boomer me that no-no-no-no-no!  If she runs in 2016, Hillary will not experience the same nasty treatment she received in 2008, not at all!  Not with those high approval ratings!  Bill’s wife will not be treated as appendage of his now that she has blazed her own path (as if she had not already done that in the Senate before her presidential campaign).  It will be kinder, gentler campaign coverage.  Yeah, right.  And as if on cue, this.  I will let the video speak for itself.

“Rebecca, author of “big girls don’t cry.” she is the Hillary fan I like to bring to balance out the Hillary hate that will emerge from me if i am not careful.” – Melissa Harris Perry, MSNBC, 02-03-2013

Vodpod videos no longer available.

Noooooooo, of course they won’t trash Hillary again.  Of course not.

***********************************************************************

At the time I originally posted this, I did not know about this article.  I have no idea how this flew below my radar in 2008.

Hillary’s Scarlett O’Hara Act

 

Why some of us aren’t falling for it.

| Posted: February 8, 2008

Here is Jezebel’s excellent and concise rebuttal.

Princeton Professor: Hillary Clinton Is A Racist Scarlett O’Hara

Jessica G.

 

Read Full Post »

This is an example of why I prefer primary sources when I post here about Secretary Clinton.  Senator Corker was on MSNBC this morning and suggested that if Mme. Secretary can testify on Benghazi on January 22, perhaps as early as that afternoon the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, under the direction of the future chair, Robert Menendez (congratulations, Bob),  will confirm current chair, John Kerry as Secretary of State.  Here is how Politico picked it up and reported it.

01-07-12-Y-02a

Hillary Clinton to testify on Benghazi on Jan. 22

By BOBBY CERVANTES | 1/8/13 2:41 PM EST

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will likely testify Jan. 22 before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on the deadly U.S. Consulate attack in Benghazi, the panel’s top Republican said Tuesday.

Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) said on MSNBC that he has spoken with Clinton’s chief of staff and said she seems “anxious” to testify on the Hill, following weeks of hospital visits after a concussion.

“I think they feel she’s going to be healthy enough to come in that day,” he said. “If that were to occur, and again this is Sen. [Robert] Menendez’s decision, we could move very quickly, maybe even that afternoon, to Sen. [John] Kerry’s [nomination] hearings.

By this afternoon it was viral that this date was “set.”  Whoa, Nellie!  It was not until after 4:30 this afternoon that that daily press briefing notification went out, but it was another hour or so before the transcript was actually posted.  What Victoria Nuland said is at odds with what Politico reported.

QUESTION: And any updates (inaudible) on the issue about when the Secretary could testify on Benghazi and when the confirmation hearing for Senator Kerry could be held?

MS. NULAND: We’re still working with the Hill on all of those things, but I think we talked in some detail yesterday about the expected timing. They’re not coming back to work – the committees are not – until after the inaugural.

QUESTION: What is the Department’s preferred sequence in those hearings? That the confirmation hearing should precede the Benghazi hearing, or vice versa?

MS. NULAND: I don’t think we’re going to negotiate that here with you all. We’re working on it with the Hill to make sure that it’s appropriate for their needs and for ours. But as I said, the goal on our side is that we would have the Secretary able to testify, as she’s promised to do while she’s still sitting Secretary, but also have the confirmation hearing as quickly as appropriate after they come back in.

QUESTION: And just for the record, why is it important to the Secretary that her testimony on this matter should unfold while she is sitting Secretary?

MS. NULAND: Well, I think that’s appropriate. That’s what the Hill seems to want, and that allows her to complete her obligations as Secretary while she’s Secretary. Makes sense.

QUESTION: Then this would have to be done rather quickly. In theory, you wouldn’t want to have a confirmed Secretary, next Secretary waiting around until this happens, right?

MS. NULAND: I think we are hopeful that we can work this all through very smoothly with the committees.

So in fact, as late as this afternoon,  nothing has been set – demonstrating why this blog, when it loses the primary source at the State Department will not be resorting to secondary sources unless confirmation can be made.  It is going to be a hard slog, folks.

I am not saying that the January 22 date will not end up being the date of the testimony.  I am only saying that it is irresponsible reporting to say that date is “set.”

All we really know is that Secretary Clinton has ordered all of the ARB recommendations to be implemented, that she is committed to cooperating with the committees, and that she intends to testify as sitting SOS.

Read Full Post »

In the continual tornadic swirl surrounding Hillary Clinton which is borne of clashing fronts of information and misinformation,  you really need to be careful, Dorothy.  The storms could stir up a nest of bayou vipers.  Or a goddess might rise from the furious clouds and throw lightning at you.

While those of us here were worried sick about our Hillary this week,  FOX News*  continued, in fact worsened, their outrageous attacks on our girl saying she would go to any length, including developing a life-threatening blood clot, to avoid testifying about the attack on the consulate in Benghazi.

Since we were all preoccupied with her condition,  I left those attacks on the sidelines earlier this week.  We just wanted her safe and healthy, so my attitude (and probably yours) was “Screw them!”   We simply wanted not to lose her!  God, I was worried!  Now that her condition has improved and she is looking forward to returning to work (an understatement according to Victoria Nuland who said today, “…she is raring to go… “), we can take a step back to the atrocious remarks that echoed all over FOX News about the genesis of Mme. Secretary’s health crisis.

The malicious and cold-hearted comments did not sit well with those who know our Hillary.  James Carville rose like a cottonmouth from the bayou, as Politico reports.

James Carville: Hillary Clinton haters ‘inhumane’

By KEVIN CIRILLI | 1/4/13 5:57 PM EST

James Carville slammed the “inhumane, idiotic” critics who questioned the legitimacy of Hillary Clinton’s recent head injury and said it was “duly noted” inside Clinton-land.

“What kind of human being is going to think like that with everything going on with concussions, head injuries? The fact the woman was dehydrated from the fact that she’d been overseas so much — I just don’t know, and some of these people I know and I get along with,” Carville said Friday in a CNN interview.

Read more >>>>

With Lawrence O’Donnell on The Last Word,  the goddess, Karen Finney,  let loose with a torrent of well-aimed lightning bolts to insta-burn to a crisp each and every opprobrious sound bite, and she was glorious!

Vodpod videos no longer available.

Wasn’t she magnificent?

Having realized that by polishing my second floor furniture (a rare occurrence) two days earlier,  I may well have caused Sandy to blow through that area, breaking windows and walls, and that by moving the shovels we used to scoop the plaster up back to their rightful place in the cellar I probably caused last week’s snow dump, I think I just might be a witch and  Hillary attackers should beware of me too (as soon as I can fine-tune my powers not to backfire on me).  You just don’t want Hillary’s people (especially Hillary’s women) mad at you.  Anything can happen.

Cross-posted at the Department of Homegirl Security.

*Exception: Greta van Susteren

Read Full Post »

MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell reported tonight that Secretary Clinton’s doctors have ordered no travel for her until mid-January earliest.  Glad her doctors are being so firm with her and hope she is resting and mending.

Now I know readers out there are Hillary-hungry, so here is a news flash.  You can see her in a portion of an NBC special tomorrow evening.  She will be appearing with Chelsea in a recently recorded interview – as gorgeous and as proud of her daughter as can be.  (It appears to me that this was recorded the same day as the Barbara Walters interview – you’ll see why.)  So tune in or set your DVR!

NBC Celebrates The Holiday Season With ‘A White House Christmas: First Families Remember,’ On Thursday, December 20

NEW YORK CITY — December 5, 2012 – NBC celebrates the holidays with unprecedented access to the most famous home in America in “A White House Christmas: First Families Remember,” on Thursday, December 20 (8-9 p.m. ET).

Hosted by multiple Emmy Award winner Meredith Vieira, the special takes a look at Christmases past and present with 10 presidential families over the last 50 years, featuring interviews with First Lady Michelle Obama and former First Ladies Laura Bush, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Barbara Bush and Rosalynn Carter. Several First Children also share their holiday memories, including Barbara Bush, Jenna Bush Hager, Chelsea Clinton, Dorothy Bush Koch, Michael Reagan, Amy Carter, Susan Ford Bales, Tricia Nixon Cox, Julie Nixon Eisenhower, Lynda Johnson Robb and Luci Baines Johnson.

Read more >>>>

Mme. Secretary, we have our eyes on you. You are in our thoughts and prayers. Be well.

Read Full Post »

Secretary Clinton was interviewed in several segments this afternoon on Andrea’s show. This is one of them.

Vodpod videos no longer available.

Interview With Andrea Mitchell of NBC News

Interview

Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State
Istanbul Congress Center
Istanbul, Turkey
April 1, 2012

QUESTION: Madam Secretary, you have said that there will be serious consequences if Assad does not stop killing his people, but this is the moment of truth. The time for excuses is over. But short of military intervention, what is going to stop this man?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, Andrea, I see it as a progression that is too slow and it’s very painful to watch the terrible killing continue by the Assad regime. But out of this meeting today, we have agreed on not only more sanctions, but a means of enforcing them. We now have a sanctions committee. That was quite an accomplishment because this group consists of a lot of countries that are really the mainstays of the Syrian economy. We have more humanitarian aid going in. We have an accountability project underway to catalog all of the atrocities that have been done. And we are increasing the various forms of assistance for the Syrian opposition.

In addition, we are supporting Kofi Annan’s process, but we wanted to have a timeline because we don’t want to give Assad the excuse of being able to negotiate with no end.

QUESTION: Isn’t he playing Kofi Annan for time? He says he’s accepting the ceasefire, and more killings take place.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, we are worried about that, but we know Kofi Annan will be reporting to the Security Council tomorrow. I want to hear firsthand from him. But we do want to support him by making it clear that he does have a timeline that has to be respected.

QUESTION: What about Saudi Arabia and the others who are calling for lethal aid – for weapons to the rebels – and also now creating a multimillion dollar fund which, we are told by conference participants, will be an inducement; they will give the money to the rebel soldiers and that will be an inducement to try to get more defections from Assad’s army. Is that going to work?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I think it’s a significant step by a number of nations that are trying to support the opposition in one of the numerous ways that we are all helping. We’re looking at technical assistance, communications assistance. I met with a group of the Syrian National Council opposition, including a young woman who just got out of Homs and told us in wrenching terms what it was like being under bombardment by the Assad regime. And she made it clear communications is a huge problem. The United States has a lot of expertise in that.

QUESTION: You’re providing gear now?

SECRETARY CLINTON: We are going to be working to provide that, and we know that that will be able to get into Syria, which will permit better communications inside Syria and between Syria and supporters outside.

QUESTION: Madam Secretary, Iran. You seem very skeptical that they are serious about diplomacy. As these talks are going to resume in two weeks, do you really think that they are serious, or are they also playing for time and secretly working on their suspected weapons program while these negotiations then drag on?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, that’s what we’re going to find out. We did welcome their outreach to return to the P5+1 negotiations.

QUESTION: The group of Western allies?

SECRETARY CLINTON: That’s right, the group of – the five permanent members of the Security Council, including the European Union and Germany, but also including China and Russia. And in this arena, China and Russia have been quite productive. They too are quite concerned about Iran continuing a nuclear program and acquiring nuclear weapons. I think President Obama’s policy is absolutely clear. It’s prevention, not containment. We’re going to do everything we can. But we want to pursue a diplomatic resolution. I think that’s the sensible approach to take.

QUESTION: Many women during this period and – or campaign feel that their basic rights are under attack. Women really feel besieged on all sides. They call me, they write to me, you see it yourself. And I was at the Women in the World Conference when you said this: “They want to control how we act. They even want to control the decisions we make about our own health and our own bodies. Yes, it is hard to believe that even here at home, we have to stand up for women’s rights and we have to reject efforts to marginalize any one of us because America has to set an example for the entire world.”

SECRETARY CLINTON: Right.

QUESTION: What is happening in this political campaign?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I see it now from the perspective of having traveled so extensively, and we know that where women are marginalized, where they’re demeaned, where their rights are denied, there is the likelihood you will have less democracy, more poverty, greater extremism. The United States is the model. There’s been no place better to be a woman than in 21st century America. So we cannot allow any voices to be given credibility that would undermine the advances that women have made in our country. And I wanted to point out that it’s not only about American women, which of course is our first and foremost concern, but it’s about the example we set, the message we send to women around the world.

QUESTION: When Meryl Streep introduced you at that same conference, she said of you, “It is not a simple job to be a role model; it’s an enormous burden. But that’s what we ask of her.” Are you willing to take that on?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I don’t think of myself that way, but I know that I am considered that in the eyes of many people, and it’s a great honor. It is a burden.

QUESTION: The most popular woman in the world for 10 years in a row.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, that – it is a great honor, but it also carries with it a lot of responsibility, which I take very seriously. I feel such a great privilege representing my country, and in the role of Secretary of State, dealing with all of the front burner issues like the two we just talked about, Syria and Iran, but also continuing to advocate for the long-term changes like the fulfillment of women’s rights as unfinished business in this century, which is good for America and good for the world.

QUESTION: There is a lot of unfinished business. You deserve a rest after this journey’s over.

SECRETARY CLINTON: (Laughter.)

QUESTION: Everyone knows that, and a lot of thanks, but there will come a time and there is a growing expectation that you will run for president and complete the goals that you have for men and women?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, Andrea, that is —

QUESTION: Why not?

SECRETARY CLINTON: It’s very flattering, but I’m not at all planning to do that. I have no desire or intention. I want to do the best job I can as the Secretary of State for this President. I want to then take some time to get reconnected to the stuff that makes life worth living – family, friends, the sort of activities that I enjoy. And I’ll do some writing and some speaking and I’m sure I’ll be continuing to advocate on these issues.

QUESTION: And then? Rush Limbaugh, in this campaign, did he go beyond anything that we have previously experienced in the way he attacked a civilian, a young woman who had just spoken up?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I try very hard to stay out of the politics, so let me put the campaign and the implications to one side. That is for others to comment on.

QUESTION: As a woman’s leader?

SECRETARY CLINTON: But as a woman and as someone who can vaguely remember being a young woman —

QUESTION: And as a mother.

SECRETARY CLINTON: — and as a mother of a young woman of that age and generation, I thought the response was very encouraging – the response from the public, the response in particular from women cutting across all kinds of categories, the response from advertisers. So I’ll let that speak for itself. We as a nation have every right – and in fact, I welcome it – to engage in the kind of debate and dialogue that is at the root of who we are as Americans. But let’s not turn it into personal attacks and insults. We’re beyond that. We’re better than that. And people in the public eye have a particular responsibility to avoid it.

QUESTION: Chelsea was on a panel with Sandra Fluke at the 92nd Street Y and she said, “Rush Limbaugh attacked you when you were 30. He attacked me when I was 13.”

SECRETARY CLINTON: (Laughter.) I read that she said that. Well, I think we need to call people out when they go over the line. They’re entitled to their opinion, but no one is entitled to engage in that kind of verbal assault. Let’s keep it on the issues. If you disagree on the issues, let’s have a vigorous debate – hopefully evidence-based. I would like that to be part of the debate. But that’s fair game. But whether it comes from the right, the left, up, down, wherever it comes from, let’s all ask for a return to civility and the kind of debate that really enables citizens to make better decisions.

STAFF: Andrea, last question.

QUESTION: Madame, Secretary —

STAFF: Sorry.

SECRETARY CLINTON: (Laughter.) You broke her chain of concentration.

QUESTION: Yeah, I just wanted to thank you very much for the interview.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you.

QUESTION: Thank you for being with us today.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Always good to see you, Andrea. You are an inspiration, believe me.

QUESTION: Hardly, but thank you for saying that.

Read Full Post »

The sound that comes out of me is something between a sigh and a gasp. Warning:  There  is nothing objective about the post below.  It is entirely personal.

Some of you will remember this post from March 31 of this year: CNN Video: Bernard-Henri Lévy Validates Hillary Clinton on Libya.   In short order after I posted it,  came the email notification that BHL was now following me on Twitter. (Yes, that one was a gasp.)  At that time, I was camping out in my hammock at CNN almost exclusively, and Eliot Spitzer,  who frequently had BHL as a guest,  still had his show there.  Since he lost his show, I have made a slow but steady migration to MSNBC where I have seen Spitzer once at least, and where,  during the day, and increasingly in prime time we get to see the brilliant, beautiful Karen Finney on various panels. I keep encouraging the prime time folks to bring her on and tweet thank you tweets when they (Rachel, Ed, and, more often, Lawrence) have her.  The truth is that I wish they would give her one of the two hours they devote to Chris Matthews.

So, when I turned on morning TV today, it was tuned to MSNBC and “Morning Joe,” not hosted by Joe this morning (so he is off the hook perhaps) but rather by Willie Geist.  Imagine my  shock, and awe to see this!  (This is where the sigh/gasp occurred.)

Vodpod videos no longer available.

About BHL, posted with vodpod

I am flabbergasted!  They do not know who he is!  They bring on as a guest the guy who wrote the article about him in New York Magazine!   Heavens-to-Betsy!  They could have gotten the man himself!  He gladly would have hopped the pond at his own expense to make the appearance.

Of course this further argues for Karen to have her own show since she would never have done anything that stupid.  (I mean she would never do anything stupid at all!)  First of all, she knows who BHL is – I don’t have to ask her.  I know she knows.  Second, if she did not know how to contact him (he probably follows her on twitter and Facebook too), she would know how to find out.  Third, she would never have used a secondary source when she could have the primary live.

At the end of “Morning Joe” they always ask the question: “What did we learn today?”  The guest co-host this morning, former PA Governor Ed Rendell,  did not say that he found out who BHL is, because, like Spitzer, he probably knows the man personally.  Neither did Geist make this admission, but the fact that BHL was not a guest today betrays that ignorance.  Pitiful!

In conclusion: While it may ruffle some feathers,  (I see you there fuming,  MW,  but we did the right thing and avoided a massacre),  BHL rightly places the historical credit for the NATO action in Libya on Sarkozy and HRC.  As the year ends, I do not want to see the credit for the Libyan action shifted to Obama.    Upon declaring the No-Fly-Zone he began his address with the words. “I didn’t want to do this” while a tiny, determined HRC stood right beside him.

No, that will not fly with me or anyone who knows the facts about February and March 2011.   This issue of New York Magazine will stand as the accurate record.  I am thankful that Wallace-Wells did the research and wrote the article which I plan to acquire and preserve, but I wish MSNBC were a little smarter.

**RANT OVER**

Read Full Post »

Vodpod videos no longer available.

Interview With Savannah Guthrie of NBC’s Today Show

Interview

Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State
Washington, DC
October 12, 2011

 


QUESTION: Madam Secretary, thank you so much for doing this.

SECRETARY CLINTON: It is a pleasure, Savannah, and welcome to the State Department.

QUESTION: Thank you. Let’s talk about the news of the day, this plot by some members of the Quds Force to take out the Saudi ambassador at a restaurant here in Washington. I guess the question today is: How high does this go? Do we know that the top levels of the Iranian Government were aware of this plot?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, first let me add my word of congratulations to our law enforcement and intelligence professionals, who once again have proven their extraordinary professionalism and disrupting this plot, which was a major accomplishment.

We think that this was conceived and directed from Tehran. We know that it goes to a certain level within the Quds Force, which is part of the Revolutionary Guard, which is the military wing of the Iranian Government. And we know that this was in the making and there was a lot of communication between the defendants and others in Tehran.

So we’re going to let the evidence unfold, but the important point to make is that this just is in violation of international norms. It is a state-sponsored act of terror, and the world needs to speak out strongly against it.

QUESTION: It’s very brazen, as you mentioned, which suggests the Iranians didn’t particularly fear retaliation by the U.S.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I think it’s a little hard to tell what was really going on, why this was given a seal of approval, why there was a go-ahead from Tehran, whether within their military and their government the kinds of the debates and divisions that we are now watching unfold – because it’s difficult to know who is actually making the decisions. Was this for political purposes? Was this just a crazy idea that got out of hand?

QUESTION: Do you think the ayatollah ordered it?

SECRETARY CLINTON: We don’t know. We don’t know and I’m not going to speculate. But I am going to say that the Iranian Government has to take responsibility, because it was clearly done by, directed by, elements within the Iranian Government.

QUESTION: On Pakistan, the President, you, have repeatedly said the way to win in Afghanistan is to root out terrorism in Pakistan. To the extent that diplomatic efforts have failed to do so, is it time to consider military action against the terrorists in Pakistan? Is that being considered?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, Savannah, we have a very complex and challenging relationship with Pakistan, but we have interests that are very much in line with America’s national security and Pakistani security. So we have a lot of cooperation that I think does deserve to be given some attention. We do a lot of work with the Pakistanis against terrorists. Of course, we acted unilaterally to take out bin Ladin. We will always act in America’s interest.

But what we want to see is more cooperation from the Pakistanis themselves. And we’ve seen some, but not enough.

QUESTION: To the extent cooperation has failed and diplomacy has failed, at what point does the U.S. say we are going to take unilateral action in Pakistan?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, we don’t want to open up another military conflict, and we certainly don’t want to wage a war on top of the ones we are currently involved in and beginning to wrap up. But we do expect the Pakistanis – and this has been delivered at the highest levels and we have set forth specific requests about what we would like to see them do – and we get some cooperation, but not enough. And that’s going to be continuing as a topic of intense negotiations between us.

QUESTION: On Afghanistan, we just had the anniversary, ten years of this war, ten years since you voted to authorize military force there. If you had known ten years ago that we would still be in it, that we’d have the fragile gains we have, would you have cast the same vote?

SECRETARY CLINTON: I would have, because the plot against the United States emanated from Afghanistan. The Taliban gave safe haven to al Qaida in Afghanistan. We had to retaliate. And in doing so, we brought much of the rest of the world – NATO and other countries – with us, because it was viewed as a threat to international security.

Now, in hindsight, there are decisions that I wish had been made or had been made earlier or with more commitment. I think President Obama made the right decision when he came into the White House to add to troops to essentially reverse the momentum of the Taliban, and we have done that.

And it’s easy to underestimate what has been accomplished. Life is a lot better for many Afghans, particularly for women, for young people. Infant mortality is down, economic activity is up, and lots of different kinds of criteria to demonstrate progress has been made.

And if you look at the last two and a half years under this Administration’s policy, certainly the Taliban is on the ropes. They are always going to keep fighting. Well, we’re going to keep fighting and killing them because they pose a threat to us and a threat to Afghanistan. But they’re also willing to begin some kind of process that is Afghan-led and Afghan-managed which we’re going to support.

QUESTION: The U.S. obviously continues to have deep struggles economically. I wondered if that makes your job harder. Do world leaders smell weakness in this country? Do they see an America that’s in decline?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, if they do, they’re badly mistaken, because our country is not only the leader of the world, but we are expected to be by countless nations around the globe. And yes, we have challenges here at home, but these are challenges that we can meet. I’m very confident and optimistic about what America is capable of. I’ve lived through in my life a lot of ups and downs in our country, but you can never count America out and you should never bet against America.

So we do have to get our own house in order – our economic house, our political house – but at the same time we cannot abdicate leadership around the world because when we do it does come back to bite us. So I’m very much in the frame of explaining to Americans who are struggling, who have lost a job or have been foreclosed on, all the terrible things that are happening right here in our own country, why while we fix what’s wrong here domestically we cannot give up on American leadership around the world.

QUESTION: Let’s talk about your tenure as Secretary of State. I was thinking about something that, actually, Ambassador Holbrook said to me a while back. He said it’s a big job but not a good job. (Laughter.) Is being Secretary of State a big job or a good job?

SECRETARY CLINTON: I think it’s both. I know what Dick Holbrook meant, because he was such a foremost American diplomat. It’s an impossible job, because in the world we live in, it is 24/7, there is no respite. Where we used to be able to in the Cold War kind of manage relations between the United States and the Soviet Union, or when we looked at the challenges that we faced in the 20th century from start to finish, a fight against totalitarianism, there were relatively few power players. Now it’s a much more diverse set of actors on the international scene.

So I would like to say okay, I think I’ll just concentrate on the Middle East, on our relations with China, on the reset with Russia. Okay, well then what about everybody else and everything that they’re doing, and the importance of other countries, other regions, to our future? For example, Latin America is one of the most important regions to America’s future. We have more trade with our friends in Latin America than anywhere else in the world. We have democratic values in common with the vast majority of countries. So we can’t afford to say okay, well fine, we’re not going to be engaged in and working on these issues. We have to be open to being a part of making the world better everywhere. And that is a big challenge.

QUESTION: What’s the quality that you have that you didn’t know you would need as Secretary of State?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I have traveled more than 600,000 miles, and you would think in the 21st century where we have instantaneous communication, where I can have a videoconference halfway around the world, that you wouldn’t be expected to travel as much. But in fact, I think people want you to show up even more. America has to show up, and I very proudly represent our country when I show up. So being on that airplane, making those visits, having those negotiations and discussions, is a very demanding part of the job, but necessary.

QUESTION: Why are you good at this job?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I hope I’m good at it. I think I understand not just the headlines – what are the crises of the moment. You asked about the Iranian plot. Obviously, that’s taken up a lot of my time, the time of my top staff. But it’s not just the headlines. It’s the trend lines. Where is the world going economically? How do we inject economic issues into diplomacy? How do we use 21st century technology so that we’re able to communicate not just with governments but with farmers in Africa, with women seeking their rights in Asia? How do we continue working on big issues like nonproliferation, even though it may not be in the headlines?

So I try to keep a kind of dual track going at all times. What are the immediate, urgent, even emergency issues that I have to deal with, but I don’t want to forget what’s going to matter to you and my daughter next year, five years, ten years? What’s going to happen to, for example, water and food? We’re having shortages; we’re having challenges for both. Climate change, despite the deniers, is real and is affecting how people interact with each other.

So I think it’s, for me, a real honor but it’s also a real challenge and one that I take to my heart because I feel so strongly that America has to lead and America’s leadership is absolutely indispensable.

QUESTION: You obviously know the policy inside and out, and you love the policy. What gets old about the job?

SECRETARY CLINTON: I have to say, Savannah, just getting on and off the airplanes. I mean, that’s challenging and very tiring. But other than that, nothing gets old because no two days are the same. My inbox is filled with all kinds of reports from everywhere in the world. And maybe one day I’m thinking about what’s going to happen in the Arctic as the ice retreats and you can have greater navigation. How do we prevent spills of oil if we start drilling in the Arctic? And then I might be thinking about what do we do in Sub-Saharan Africa to try to increase how we help people with AIDS, TB, and malaria? It’s never the same, literally from hour to hour, which is why the job is so exciting for me.

QUESTION: You mentioned technology. I have to wonder, do you – how many people have your personal email address? Do you use your BlackBerry a lot? Do you like technology?

SECRETARY CLINTON: I do.

QUESTION: Are you good at it?

SECRETARY CLINTON: I’m okay. For someone of my generation, I’m okay. But no, I have a lot of security restraints on what I can and can’t do. But I do try to stay in touch as much as possible, and electronically is by far the easiest way to do that.

QUESTION: Are you a BlackBerry addict?

SECRETARY CLINTON: I’m an aficionado. I’m not sure about the addict part.

QUESTION: You mentioned all the travel. Not every Secretary has traveled like that. Why do you keep that pace? I mean, is someone pushing you to take all those trips?

SECRETARY CLINTON: No, it’s because I think it’s important. When I first became Secretary of State, one of the reports that I took very seriously was this idea in Asia that because we’d been so focused on Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan – understandably so because we had our young men and women at risk in those places – I heard that people in Asia thought we were kind of giving up on being a Pacific power. So I immediately went there, and I’ve gone back and back and back, because I think it’s important not just to go once and kind of wave and have the meetings and not return, but to build those relationships and to look for ways that we can not just have the United States present, but in a position to help manage some of the upcoming problems that we know are just over the horizon.

And that’s true everywhere in the world. So, nobody is saying, “Okay, you need to go here and you need to go there.” I’m thinking through where can I have impact; where do I need to be; does America have to have a role in this, or can we hand it off to others? And that’s a constant evaluation I’m engaged in.

QUESTION: What is the Hillary doctrine? Do you have a grand sweeping strategy or vision that you could articulate in a sentence?

SECRETARY CLINTON: I believe strongly in the United States of America. I believe in our values. I believe our values represent the greatest accomplishment in political history and the history of the world, and those values are not just American values. So I believe the United States has both an opportunity and obligation to make clear around the world that democracy and freedom, free market economies that are open, and meritocracies, providing support for people’s human rights and those fundamental badges of liberty that we know enhance your God-given potential, that’s who we are as a people.

And so through our diplomacy and our development work, are we protecting America’s security? Yes. We are full partners with our military in doing that. Are we promoting our interests and our values? Absolutely. Because it’s not only that we’re the strongest military, we are the strongest economy, but are also the strongest value statement about what human beings can achieve if we are organized appropriately.

QUESTION: You only have a certain amount of time left in this position. What’s the one thing you want to be able to point to and have people be able to say, “Hillary Clinton left it better than she found it”?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Despite very difficult circumstances when President Obama and I started our jobs, we have reasserted American leadership. We are clearly going to lead. And we are going to lead, despite budget difficulties. We are going to lead, despite other countries coming to the forefront and having an opportunity themselves to achieve a better future for their people. We are going to lead because America is destined to lead. And that was not always so, and I think even today some people are saying, “Well, you’re on your economic back heels. Your political system is not functioning.” So America’s values are enduring, and our durability as a nation that people look to, admire, and wish to exemplify is, for me, just permanent. But we need to continue working on it because leadership is not bestowed. It has to be earned, and it has to be earned by every generation and by every political administration in our country.

QUESTION: You mentioned President Obama. So many people are curious about your relationship. You went from arch political rivals to now allies in this Administration. You have to be honest, though; it was certainly awkward at first, wasn’t it?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, Savannah, of course, because we had had a hard-fought election. And I wanted to beat him, and he ended up beating me and then was elected president. But one of the points that I make as I travel around the world – and it’s always takes people by surprise, because where countries are transitioning to democracy – put aside the ones that don’t have democracy, they’re autocracies or somebody or some group, small group of people, decide who’s going to lead.

But in countries that are either striving for democracy or on the brink of achieving it, when I say, look, I ran against President Obama. He ran against me. He beat me. He asked me to serve our country and him in his Administration. Why? Because we both love our country. So I said yes. Because at the end of the day, we have to be bigger than politics, personal politics or partisan politics.

QUESTION: Are you —

SECRETARY CLINTON: People really gasp at that when I tell them anywhere in the world. They kind of think, “Gee, could our leaders do that?” So it’s been an incredible experience.

QUESTION: Do you think you’re in the inner circle?

SECRETARY CLINTON: I think on the issues that I work on in the national security arena, absolutely.

QUESTION: Does he ever ask you for political advice?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Oh, every so often, but I keep that to myself.

QUESTION: Are you – as a woman, I know this matters a lot to you. I’m sure you’ve heard the persistent – not really rumors, but I’m sure you’ve heard the criticism that it’s a little bit of an old boy’s club over there at the White House. You ever see that?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I’m in such a different position being in the cabinet and having a one-on-one relationship with the President on these important issues. So I think that everywhere – in Washington, in America, and around the world – can do better when it comes to empowering women. And so I think that that certainly is the President’s view with his wife and his two daughters; he’s very committed to that.

QUESTION: If you Google yourself today – you ever Google yourself?

SECRETARY CLINTON: I don’t. I’m a little worried about that. (Laughter.)

QUESTION: Yeah. If you Googled yourself today, you would find suggestions that perhaps you would be Vice President, that you could – there would be a switcheroo, and that you might possibly be the Vice President and Biden would come over here as Secretary of State. Is there any chance you would be Vice President in a second term?

SECRETARY CLINTON: No. There is not.

QUESTION: Is it in the realm of possibility?

SECRETARY CLINTON: I do not think it’s even in the realm of possibility and in large measure because I think Vice President Biden has done an amazingly good job. He has taken on the burden of selling the economic plan, of traveling the country, of answering people’s questions.

QUESTION: Has anyone ever raised this possibility to you?

SECRETARY CLINTON: No, no. I just – I think it’s maybe a subject for speculation on Google, but it’s not a serious issue in the Administration.

QUESTION: Will you run for President in 2016?

SECRETARY CLINTON: No, no. Savannah, I’m very privileged to have had the opportunities to serve my country. And I am really old-fashioned; I feel like I’ve made my contribution, I’ve done the best I can, but now I want to try some other things. I want to get back to writing and maybe some teaching, working on women and girls around the world.

QUESTION: But Secretary Clinton, politics is in your blood. People will not believe that you are closing the door and locking it on running for office ever again.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, they’ll have to just watch and wait. Because I really think it’s time for me to move on beyond high-level political and public service. I’ve been at the highest reaches of American politics and now global politics for 20 years, and I have made my contribution. I’m very grateful I’ve had a chance to serve, but I think it’s time for others to step up.

QUESTION: Are you definitely going to leave after the first term?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Yes. I have made it clear that, of course, I’ll wait until the President has a nominee who’s confirmed, because I assume and believe the President will be reelected, and the work that we are doing will continue. And that gives me a great deal of comfort, because I think we are on the right track and that there are a lot of important issues that we are pushing forward on. But then I will leave.

QUESTION: Back to the President thing for a minute. What if Democrats came to you in 2016 and said, “You are the highest-profile Democrat. You are the only person who can help us get the White House,” perhaps win the White House back at that point. Would you not, as a patriot, say, “Okay, I’ll do it for my country”? (Laughter.)

SECRETARY CLINTON: I would say I will back whoever our nominee is and I will do so strongly. And we have a lot of people waiting in the wings who I think will be terrific Democratic standard bearers.

QUESTION: One title I know you seek to have one of these days is grandmother.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Yes. You figured that out. (Laughter.)

QUESTION: But I notice that Chelsea has been doing more events. We saw her a couple of weeks ago doing an event with you. She definitely has the Clinton touch. Do you think she has the Clinton bug for politics?

SECRETARY CLINTON: I don’t know. I don’t have any reason to believe that. I think she does have the public service bug. That seems to be in our DNA. I think she wants to help make a difference and she wants to use the experiences and opportunities she’s been given during the course of her life to figure out what her own contribution will be.

QUESTION: And what do you think life will be like when, after twenty years in politics, it will be you and the former President at home, sitting around?

SECRETARY CLINTON: I can’t wait. I can’t wait. I mean, obviously, we’re going to be very active. We have foundation work and Bill’s incredible invention of the Clinton Global Initiative, and I’m going to be looking at ways that I can continue to promote what I care a lot about, particularly the rights and opportunities for women and girls around the world, and other related matters. But it is something that I’m really looking forward to enjoying.
When I get to go home on the weekends, which is not often enough, it’s just great to be doing as little as possible, taking long walks, just taking a deep breath. And I think after this twenty years that will be very welcome.

QUESTION: What do you think of this vegan diet he’s got going?

SECRETARY CLINTON: It works for him. And he – I have to say, Savannah, he has rarely gotten so much reaction since he left the White House as when he talked about it because he basically said, “Look, I mean, some people are more vulnerable to heart problems than other people,” and so he reversed his diet, but he felt like he needed to go even further, and he thinks it’s working for him.

QUESTION: Last thing, because I’m getting the look over here. (Laughter.) There’s been a lot of rumblings lately, particularly among Democrats, as the President’s fortunes politically have fallen, that it should have been Hillary and that she would have done a better job. And I guess that’s got to feel good. It can’t feel bad.

SECRETARY CLINTON: You know what? It feels irrelevant to me because a decision was made. I think the President has done an excellent job under the most difficult circumstances. I don’t think he gets the credit he deserves for making a lot of the tough decisions that he had to make that he inherited when he came into office.

QUESTION: You don’t feel vindicated by all that talk that Hillary would have done a better job?

SECRETARY CLINTON: No. Because I mean everybody comes into any office with their strengths and their weaknesses, with their areas of expertise and what they have to learn. Everybody does. Everybody comes to that. And I think the President will be reelected because I think when he’s actually running against somebody, the American people will say, “Well, wait a minute, we’re going through hard times, but his solutions, his analysis of the problem makes a lot more sense, and we’re going to give him a second term to finish the job.”

QUESTION: Well, Dick Cheney thought you would do a good job. (Laughter.) Bill Maher said, “She knows how to deal with difficult men.” (Laughter.)

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well —

QUESTION: Do you feel vindicated?

SECRETARY CLINTON: No, no. Look, I feel – maybe because I have been at this and do have twenty years of work behind me, I feel like this is all predictable; that we’re living in times that are hard to navigate; the politics and polices are difficult – if they were easy, everybody would be in agreement – and that we need leadership that’s willing to make hard decisions and willing to confront the American political system with the choices. And I think the President has done that.

QUESTION: And your political popularity is at its zenith. This is, I think, you’re ninth year running as Gallup’s most admired woman. You’re the most popular member of this Administration. But I’m sure you can remember back to a time when that always – wasn’t always the case. How do you explain that change?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, Savannah, that’s why I think having a longer sort of historical view helps me a lot. Because I never get as inflated as the praise or the positive numbers and feelings would lead me, and I never get as deflated as the criticism might suggest, because your fortunes in public life go up and down. That is just the nature of the beast.

QUESTION: But you haven’t changed?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I don’t think I have changed. But I think that people have maybe gotten to know me better. They’ve seen me in more settings. They’ve watched me closely. And for that I’m grateful, because I really try to get up every day and just figure out what’s the best way I can serve my country. And I go back to this idea of look, it’s – it maybe is old-fashioned, but I want to encourage young people who are watching you to think about ways of serving and to raise your voices. I am fully in favor of people being deep into the political debate. And now with the internet, there are so many ways we’ve got to do it.

But at the end of the debate, decisions have to be made, and sometimes compromise is required. So whether you’re on the right or the left, you cannot believe you have the only truth. That’s not the way a democracy works. That’s not the way our country has succeeded. You have to listen to each other, and yes, you have to find compromise. And those of us who are particularly blessed and fortunate, we do have to think of ways to give back to this extraordinary country that has helped us become who we are.

So these are real rock-bottom values that I was raised with by my small businessman father and my dear mother, and I want to keep trying to convey to not only our American audience but the worldwide audience why I believe so deeply in the American enterprise. And I’m going to do that for as long as I have a chance to in whatever setting I am in.

QUESTION: Thank you so much.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you so much.

QUESTION: It was wonderful to talk to you.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Wonderful to talk to you. Thank you.

 

Read Full Post »

Vodpod videos no longer available.

MTP, posted with vodpod

Interview With David Gregory of NBC Meet the Press

Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State
Lisbon, Portugal
November 21, 2010

QUESTION: Secretary Clinton, welcome back to the program.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you very much, David.

QUESTION: I want to talk about this showdown between the President and Senate Republicans over the START Treaty. The President, in his comments to reporters, made it very clear he thinks politics is being played here, saying to reporters, “Nobody’s going to score any political points to 2012.”

Is that the President’s belief here about what’s standing in the way? And in your view, is this really a litmus test of whether there can be bipartisanship in Washington after the election?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I think the President believes strongly, and I agree with him, that this treaty is in the national security interests of the United States. And it’s not only Americans who believe that. I’m very impressed by the number of leaders at the NATO-Lisbon summit who voluntarily told their own press or American press – they were chasing down reporters to say this is so much in the interests of Europe and others.

So the President sees this very clearly, but I don’t think he considers this a political issue. It’s a question of whether we have the time and whether we can make the case, in the limited time that the lame duck provides, to satisfy the concerns of two-thirds of the Senate. I think we can. I think that everyone has operated in good faith. We have looked hard at this. When it came out of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, it came out with an overwhelming bipartisan vote, 14-4.

I think that the questions are being – that are being asked by Republicans deserve thoughtful answers, and everyone in the Administration stands ready, from Bob Gates to Jim Clapper, the head of – the Director of National Intelligence, because we all see it in the same way. And we’re in the tradition of both Republican and Democratic presidents, going back to Ronald Reagan, who famously said, “Trust, but verify.”

We have no verification without a treaty about what’s going on in Russia’s nuclear program. So I think whether you’re already convinced or can be convinced, I think we want to get our inspectors back on the ground, and the only way to do that is by ratifying this treaty.

QUESTION: Is there an issue, though, of America prestige? The President was dealt a setback on fair trade when he was in Seoul. There was a feeling when it comes to whether it’s trade or economic policy, that America can’t always get what it wants. Is this going to potentially be a problem with the President not being able to get what he wants on the world stage because of Republicans?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, first of all, I think that the President didn’t agree to a trade deal in Seoul because he didn’t feel like it was enough in America’s interests. That’s what a president is supposed to do. Obviously, he’s still working to get one finalized that is. And in respect to START, which concerns not just trade but life or death, because we’re talking about thousands of nuclear warheads that are still pointed at the United States.

The President believes that it does go beyond politics. You can argue about a trade deal, but what the tradition has been in the Senate going back to the 1980s with President Reagan, is that once people have had a chance to carefully consider these arms control treaties, they have been passed overwhelmingly. We’ve seen it with the Reagan and the Bush Administrations, the Clinton Administration. Now, of course, we are in the Obama Administration. And in this one area, this goes beyond politics. This should be nonpartisan, not just bipartisan.

QUESTION: Secretary Clinton, let me get to a few other areas, including the war in Afghanistan. Listening to the President, listening and following the events that have happened at the NATO summit, I wonder whether the Washington clock for the war has change, that Americans should expect that by next July there’s a token number of U.S. forces that are withdrawn, and that really the war doesn’t end for America until 2014.

SECRETARY CLINTON: No, David, I think that we’ve been very clear about this, that the transition to Afghan security lead begins next year in 2011. It is conditions-based. So where it can happen, at what pace it can happen, how many troops can be substituted for, that is what General Petraeus and the military leaders are going to be working on to recommend to the President and the leaders of other countries.

QUESTION: Well, let me get it on a key point, that is it possible then, even in 2014 when you envision and you hope that a transition is complete, might the United States have a long-term presence there, say, in the form of permanent air bases to maintain a presence in the country?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, we’re intent upon reaching the goal of transition to Afghan security in 2014. But both the United States and NATO ISAF partners have said that, of course, we’d be willing to continue to help train and equip the Afghan military, what we do with countries around the world. There could be other missions that other countries would take on in terms of civilian aid and supporting the government. So the security lead, the fight, if you will, does transition to the Afghans. Support for that fight will continue to be provided by not just the United States but others.

QUESTION: What about permanent bases?

SECRETARY CLINTON: There’s been no decision whatsoever about any of that.

QUESTION: But is that possible? Is that something that the U.S. is considering?

SECRETARY CLINTON: There’s no consideration. It’s just not on the table at this point.

QUESTION: Let me ask you about – as Secretary of State, you don’t have to deal with airport security, but so many Americans do, especially coming up in this Thanksgiving week.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Right.

QUESTION: There’s obviously a security threat out there, a terror threat, which is why you have this advanced technology and why you have these rather invasive pat-downs that we’re seeing throughout airports around the country. Is this excessive, or is this the right response to the kind of threat environment that Americans face?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, the people responsible for our security, such as Secretary Napolitano, obviously believe that this is necessary, and I’m not going to comment or certainly second-guess their considered opinions. At the same time, I think everyone, including our security experts, are looking for ways to diminish the impact on the traveling public. I mean, obviously, the vast, vast majority of people getting on these planes are law-abiding citizens who are just trying to get from one place to another. But let’s not kid ourselves: The terrorists are adaptable; they start doing whatever they can to try to cause harm; and when you have people who are willing to die in order to kill Americans and others, you’ve got folks putting explosives in their underwear. Who would have thought that?

So striking the right balance is what this is about, and I am absolutely confident that our security experts are going to keep trying to get it better and less intrusive and more precise. But at the same time, we want people to travel safely.

QUESTION: And to follow up on terrorism, the Ahmed Ghailani case that was concluded this week with a conviction has raised new questions about whether it’s wise to put these terror suspects in civilian courts. As Secretary of State, why is it important to the rest of the world that these hardened terror suspects go in U.S. civilian courts to be tried?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I think it’s important, first and foremost, to Americans, which is my highest priority. What is best for the United States and for our own citizens? The civilian courts, known as Article III courts under the Constitution, have a good track record of convicting terrorists. And in fact, if you look at the comparison between terrorists who are now serving time in our maximum security prisons compared to what military commissions have been able to do, there’s no comparison. We get convictions, we send people away in our civilian courts at a much more regularized and predictable way than yet we’ve been able to figure out how in the military commissions.

Secondly, I think there’s a misconception in our own country about what’s admissible in terms of evidence in a civilian court versus a military commission. They don’t have the same rules, but the rules are close enough in terms of what can or can’t be admitted into evidence. So there’s a very strong argument that what the judge in the Ghailani case said could not be admitted would not have been admissible in a military commission.

QUESTION: Well, right. And that is a very narrow issue. But the real issue is there’s a lot of uncertainty in the criminal justice system, as you well know as a lawyer, in a civilian case. But my question is: Are we committed with these terror suspects that if they are acquitted in civilian courts they should be released?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, no, and don’t forget we’re not going —

QUESTION: Well, then why hold up the American system as the right route if you’re not going to release them? That’s what the American system says you have to do.

SECRETARY CLINTON: But, David, first of all, our system is the best system in the world. We all know that. It is good enough and strong enough to either convict and sentence the guilty, or even execute where appropriate, and where you can’t convince an American jury, which is certainly obsessed with terrorism, maybe there’s a question about the strength of the case.

And I think what we are trying to do is get the best result consistent with our laws and constitution. And under our laws, military commissions are legal for certain cases, but it should be the primary decision to use our civilian courts whenever and wherever possible. So I think that this has become a kind of strange argument. On the one hand, people say we want to convict these people. The civilian courts have a better record of actually convicting and imprisoning than we do yet have in the military commission. But we also don’t want to have security problems or publicity problems for particularly dangerous leading terrorists, so we should look at the military commission. So I think that this is a difficult issue, but I really hope that everyone can look at it carefully and consider all of the facts concerning this.

QUESTION: Secretary Clinton, before I let you go, I have to ask you this just as a political observer. What do you make of what happened on election day? And all this talk about Sarah Palin – when I interviewed you a while back, you said you’d be willing to sit down and have coffee with her. She may be someone who is in a position to try to equal what you accomplished in the political arena. What advice might you give her and what do you make of what’s happened politically?

SECRETARY CLINTON: You know, David, the best thing about being of Secretary of State is representing the United States around the world, but the second best thing is I’m out of politics. So with all due respect, I am not going to comment on the political scene right now other than to say that I’m focused on making the case to 67-plus senators in the Senate to pass the START treaty because that, to me, is the most important task facing the Senate and it goes way beyond politics.

QUESTION: And here I thought I’d lulled you into a moment of candor. (Laughter.) Secretary Clinton, thank you very much, as always.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you, David.

Read Full Post »

The text of this interview was posted on this blog two days ago.  You can access it here.

Vodpod videos no longer available.

Vodpod videos no longer available.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts

%d bloggers like this: