Quote:
I am a Clinton fan, and in some ways I think he showed some good leadership in foreign policy toward the end of his tenure. However, I think Clinton mostly ignored foreign policy at the beginning of his tenure and it was certainly not his strong suit, in my opinion. I think there would be better choices.

The partisan persecution of Clinton by the right was a depressing national disgrace. While I could have remained positive about Clinton regardless of his centrist tendencies, I really *was* turned off by his disingenous, evasive responses to the Monica affair (he should have just said "Tough! None of your business!" or "Hey, a blow job! Big deal!"), I was maddened by Bill+Hillary's arrogant bungling of the chance of the century with respect to health care and I can not forgive (here's where we get to the can't forgive part) the pardon of Mark Rich.

My ersatz nomination of Bill for SoS is based on purely pragmatic grounds. A lot of the world really likes him. He could do us some good. I'm sadly trying to think of *anything* that will make our post 11/2 situation less sh*tty than I expect it to be.

Quote:
If (shudder), "W" pulls it off, who do you think is likely to replace Colin Powell? That is the scariest thought of his re-election, in my opinion. If another of the Rumsfeld-Cheney-Wolfowitz, et. al neo-conservatives takes Powell's place (as will most certainly happen), things will go from bad to much, much worse.


I don't share this specific dread. In my opinion, Powell has been a non-factor since his disgrace at the UN. I guess that we as a country may have derived some benefit from some other countries' perception that Powell, a "reasonable" man, has some sway in the Bush White House -- that they were dealing with someone reasobnable -- but I think that is an illusion.

Colin Powell, I never thought I would hear myself say it, but you....are...the....*ultimate* Uncle Tom.
_________________________
Jim


'Tis the exceptional fellow who lies awake at night thinking of his successes.