0
Sheesh! ... now Here is an interesting Pol thing for today!
:
http://www.csmonitor...retary-of-State
in the same week of her new book tour for Hard choices, the new memoir since her old mem
was before SecState-
the press guy asks the question, >' Did Hillary Clinton accomplish anything as secretary of State? That question is .. '
' By Wednesday other State Department officials had made Psaki aware of a number of things. She came to the daily briefing with a new answer, pointing out that the 2010 QDDR under Secretary Clinton had placed a greater emphasis on trade promotion, more fully integrated the concerns of women into the State policy framework, and established three new bureaus within the department, including a Bureau for Counterterrorism.
“I just wanted to highlight that as a follow-up,” she said.
Psaki and Mr. Lee than became involved in a discussion as to whether this sort of thing was real progress or the shuffling of deck chairs.
More broadly, right-leaning writers have responded to this back-and-forth by asking whether the lack of more concrete diplomatic results for Clinton to point to might damage a Hillary 2016 presidential bid. Clinton’s State Department memoir “Hard Choices” is due on shelves in a few weeks. What will it have to say?
“Will voters care if Clinton reorganized the Under Secretary for Economic Growth, Energy and the Environment?” writes the conservative Washington Examiner’s Byron York. “Or will they be looking for something much, much bigger?”
At the right-leaning blog Power Line, Scott Johnson brings up then-President Eisenhower’s deflation of his VP Richard Nixon. Asked what major idea of Nixon’s that he’d adopted as president, Ike paused, then said, “If you give me a week, I might think of one.”
'
again,PS- the new Hil book, on tour, oh hell let's go make a bestseller :
http://www.newyorker...rd-choices.html
>' We are now at the place, though, where things get a bit trickier for the former senator and First Lady. On Friday, with the announcement that her upcoming memoir will be titled “Hard Choices,” she took a step in her move from undeclared candidate to somebody once again fully in the public eye. In making that transition, she faces a number of challenges that are distinct but ultimately come down to the same thing. When the electorate is convinced that the political system is broken, and wants change, how does one market an insider who has been on the national stage for more than twenty years, and who wants to advertise experience and sound judgment as her primary qualities?
In many ways, this is the same test that Hillary Clinton faced, and ultimately flunked, in 2008. Fortunately for her, there is no Barack Obama on the horizon this time. There is, though, an Elizabeth Warren, and that is the first question for Clinton: how to head off a possible run from Warren, supported by the left wing of the Democratic Party.
As the Washington Post’s Chris Cillizza and others have pointed out recently, the possibility of Warren entering the race is one that should give the Clintonites fits. ...
'
' choosing the same week Warren’s book was published to release some details about “Hard Choices,” including its title and cover photo, which shows the author looking very formidable. In any case, the announcement about the upcoming book insured that Clinton, rather than Warren, was the primary topic of discussion when the panelists on the Sunday-morning talk shows had their obligatory discussion about 2016. (As it happened, it came on top of the news that her daughter, Chelsea Clinton, is expecting a baby, though the timing of that, at least, was surely coincidental.
'<
