Hillary Clinton to head to Munich security conference


Jan 28, 2012, 11:48 GMT

Washington – US Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton will attend the 48th annual Munich Security Conference February 3-5, the State Department said Friday.

She will join US Defence Secretary Leon Panetta in the US delegation.

The event will draw leaders from around the world to discuss ‘common security challenges.’ Clinton will also hold bilateral meetings with a number of her international counterparts, said US State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland in a briefing on Friday.

After the conference, Clinton will meet senior Bulgarian officials in that country’s capital Sofia, on February 5th.

Among the issues on the agenda are the war in Afghanistan, political transition in the Middle East and energy security.

Article source: http://www.monstersandcritics.com/news/usa/news/article_1687892.php/Hillary-Clinton-to-head-to-Munich-security-conference

Hillary Clinton to visit Europe next week

By The Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) – Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton will make a short trip to Europe next week, making her sixth visit to Germany and first to Bulgaria as America’s top diplomat.

The State Department said on Friday that Clinton will go to Munich on February 3 to participate in the annual Munich Security Conference and meet with various other foreign ministers and senior officials who are attending.

She will then travel to Sofia the next day for discussions with Bulgarian leaders on their role in Afghanistan and lessons their democratic transition could provide to the Arab world. Clinton will return to Washington on February 5.

Copyright 2012 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Article source: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/46167218

Hillary Rodham Clinton dodging political ‘high wire’

By Pablo Martinez Monsivais, AP

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton hosts the inaugural meeting of the International Council on Women’s Business Leadership at the State Department in Washington.

Article source: http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/story/2012-01-27/hillary-clinton-politics/52813320/1

Tension on the Tarmac

WHAT is it with Barack Obama’s penchant for getting in tangles with blond politicians on airport tarmacs?

Usually, tarmacs are for joyous welcomes or teary goodbyes. But No Drama Obama saves his rare tempests for the runway.

In the last primary season, the tension in the relationship between Hillary Clinton, who had expected to glide to the nomination, and the upstart younger senator from Illinois came to a head one day in December 2007 as both were preparing to board their planes in Washington to go to an Iowa debate.

Hillary had sent word that she wanted to talk to Obama. Standing in front of her plane, she apologized to him for the comments of her co-chairman in New Hampshire, Billy Shaheen, who had warned that Republicans would pounce on Obama’s confessions of cocaine and marijuana use.

But given the opening, Obama dived in, telling Clinton that she should intervene to stop the pattern of insinuations and attacks by her supporters, including one by a volunteer in Iowa who had forwarded an e-mail claiming Obama was a Muslim.

That’s when Hillary got upset and began gesticulating, giving Obama a piece of her mind about what she saw as unfair attacks on his side. Obama gently put his hand on her arm “to chill her out,” as an aide later told me.

But Hillary did not like it, feeling she was being held in place and patronized, even “manhandled,” as her aide put it to a reporter.

On Wednesday, Obama had another bristly tarmac moment with Gov. Jan Brewer of Arizona, who met Air Force One when the president landed in Phoenix. The toxic dominatrix of illegal immigration, the woman who turned every Latino in her state into a suspect, was flustered and gesticulating at the president as he put his hand on her arm to chill her out. Brewer complained afterward that she had felt “unnerved” and “a little bit threatened” by Obama and that he had walked away while she was in midsentence.

Brewer told Monica Crowley, subbing for Sean Hannity on Fox News, that she had given the president a letter inviting him to join her at the border to discuss enforcement. She said he shot back that her account of a 2010 Oval Office meeting on the topic, published in her book, “Scorpions for Breakfast: My Fight Against Special Interests, Liberal Media and Cynical Politicos to Secure America’s Border,” was distorted.

“He was patronizing,” Brewer wrote about the president in her book, adding: “He’s treating me like the cop he had over for a beer after he bad-mouthed the Cambridge police.” (The president’s recent performances are boosting sales of Brewer’s book and Al Green’s “Let’s Stay Together.”)

With typical Fox balance, Crowley told Governor Brewer that she admired her for “getting in the president’s grill,” adding, “You go, girl.”

The president can be thin-skinned, but the governor can be fat-headed. The Constitution is more threatened by Brewer’s racial profiling than the governor was by the president’s fact-checking. Brewer’s grasp of facts is tenuous, after all: she told The Arizona Republic in 2010 that her father died fighting the Nazis in Germany, when he died a decade after the end of the war, which he spent working at an ammunition factory in Nevada.

Both of Obama’s tarmac tiffs worked in his favor. After his encounter with Hillary, he told advisers that it was the first time he knew he could beat her because he saw fear in her eyes.

After his brouhaha with Brewer, dubbed “the dust-up in the desert,” he became a hero to the Hispanics he had gone West to court. They loved seeing their Cruella de Vil get dressed down.

Everything is breaking Barry’s way, as Mitt and Newt rip into each other in vicious ads and debates like alligators going after house pets.

Romney was tutored in Florida by Brett O’Donnell, a new debate coach. Too bad he can’t find a conviction coach.

O’Donnell manned up Mittens and taught him how to pummel Newt in “moments of strength,” as the Republican strategist Alex Castellanos calls them. The funny thing is that the reason Gingrich soared in South Carolina, before faltering here, was that Republicans are so afraid of debates with the president that they are obsessed with sending forth their toughest adversary for him.

They seem to have forgotten that, while Obama has had dazzling moments of strength in executing Osama and in swashbuckling derring-do against Somali pirates — if not in dealing with Congress — he was no Abe Lincoln in debates. He did not like debating, and Michelle urged him to be more visceral. He often faded onstage because he stubbornly refused to accept debates as alpha combat rather than beta seminars. He disdained anything he saw as superficial politics, from sound bites to macho put-downs.

If Obama continues to resist the gladiatorial subtext, while Romney embraces it, the debates could be more evenly matched than the Republicans dare to dream.

Article source: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/29/opinion/sunday/dowd-tension-on-the-tarmac.html

Why Obama Mentioned His Beaten Foe Hillary Clinton in the SOTU: A Theory

I wanted to address the Hilary Clinton reference. It is, I believe, the first reference he’s made to Sec. Clinton as a former foe since taking office. I was surprised by it, as were you, and I thought a bit about it.

I took three things away from it.

One is that this year, there will be a Republican battle for the nomination, but none on the Democratic side. Obviously, that’s good for the incumbent, but it gives voters with short memory no basis for comparison between the Democratic candidate and the Republican contenders. That reference brought that battle back to mind and reminded us how much more intelligent and focused both Democratic candidates seemed compared to the current combatants. I was an ardent Obama supporter four years ago, and developed a deep dislike for both Clintons during the race, which is quite remarkable to me now considering that I had been a big fan of Bill’s previously and am mightily impressed by Hillary now. But in retrospect, that campaign, and particularly the positive way that it was waged by the eventual winner stands in such stark contrast to what we are seeing today, I think it was worth a reference in the speech.

Second is the Team of Rivals meme that seemed so important at the time but has somewhat faded from memory. He bonded with Lincoln during the speech and he now references his SOS as a former rival. In case people want to cast his “working as a team” references as rhetoric, he can point to a former and sometimes bitter rival who is now an essential member of his team. That’s the way politics is supposed to work. Strong people slug it out, then shake hands and work together. That doesn’t seem to happen any more across party lines and by referencing the arc of his relationship with Sec. Clinton, he his showing that it is them who refuse to play well together, not him.

And finally, and perhaps I’m reaching here, the President has an eye toward the future… 2016. We know that he is a forward thinking and strategic guy. Let’s assume he wins re-election. I don’t think anybody sees Joe Biden, who will by then be 74 as a future President. The Democrats have four years to find and develop a rising star. Who is on the horizon now? I would have to say that on November 7 Hillary would be the odds-on favorite to be the next nominee. She’ll likely step down after this term and that will give her four years to catch up on her rest, make another fortune on the private side, burnish her reputation further with Bill’s Foundation, and raise a war chest for the election.

She would seem nearly unbeatable. Even now she is one of the few Democrats who seems unassailable. Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachmann are able to reference her admirably and get applause. They see it as a dig at the President, but he has the last laugh. After they mixed it up, he chose her for the biggest job she’s ever had. And he did her the greatest favor imaginable. Rather than spending the last four years in the morass of the Senate, she has been out getting things done in a place where Republicans can’t obstruct her.

So why reference her as a former rival? To remind the world that Hillary is her own person, her own brand. In four years, if the Obama administration is viewed as a success, she will be seen as one of its brightest stars. If the administration has mixed reviews or is starting to wear out it’s welcome, she can still run as her own woman.

I think referencing her that way was a brilliant touch.

Article source: http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/01/why-obama-mentioned-his-beaten-foe-hillary-clinton-in-the-sotu-a-theory/252169/

Tired of publicity, says Hillary Clinton

Clinton, who in the past ran in senatorial and presidential elections, said this time she finds it “a little odd to be totally out of an election season.”

The Democratic Party politician also said she did not even watch any of the Republican presidential hopefuls’ debates this year.

She stated earlier that she would not serve in President Barack Obama’s second term, if he is re-elected, and wants to focus on projects dealing with women and children rights protection.

Article source: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/us/Tired-of-publicity-says-Hillary-Clinton/articleshow/11646643.cms

Why Obama Mentioned His Beaten Foe Hillary Clinton in the SOTU: A Theory

I wanted to address the Hilary Clinton reference. It is, I believe, the first reference he’s made to Sec. Clinton as a former foe since taking office. I was surprised by it, as were you, and I thought a bit about it.

I took three things away from it.

One is that this year, there will be a Republican battle for the nomination, but none on the Democratic side. Obviously, that’s good for the incumbent, but it gives voters with short memory no basis for comparison between the Democratic candidate and the Republican contenders. That reference brought that battle back to mind and reminded us how much more intelligent and focused both Democratic candidates seemed compared to the current combatants. I was an ardent Obama supporter four years ago, and developed a deep dislike for both Clintons during the race, which is quite remarkable to me now considering that I had been a big fan of Bill’s previously and am mightily impressed by Hillary now. But in retrospect, that campaign, and particularly the positive way that it was waged by the eventual winner stands in such stark contrast to what we are seeing today, I think it was worth a reference in the speech.

Second is the Team of Rivals meme that seemed so important at the time but has somewhat faded from memory. He bonded with Lincoln during the speech and he now references his SOS as a former rival. In case people want to cast his “working as a team” references as rhetoric, he can point to a former and sometimes bitter rival who is now an essential member of his team. That’s the way politics is supposed to work. Strong people slug it out, then shake hands and work together. That doesn’t seem to happen any more across party lines and by referencing the arc of his relationship with Sec. Clinton, he his showing that it is them who refuse to play well together, not him.

And finally, and perhaps I’m reaching here, the President has an eye toward the future… 2016. We know that he is a forward thinking and strategic guy. Let’s assume he wins re-election. I don’t think anybody sees Joe Biden, who will by then be 74 as a future President. The Democrats have four years to find and develop a rising star. Who is on the horizon now? I would have to say that on November 7 Hillary would be the odds-on favorite to be the next nominee. She’ll likely step down after this term and that will give her four years to catch up on her rest, make another fortune on the private side, burnish her reputation further with Bill’s Foundation, and raise a war chest for the election.

She would seem nearly unbeatable. Even now she is one of the few Democrats who seems unassailable. Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachmann are able to reference her admirably and get applause. They see it as a dig at the President, but he has the last laugh. After they mixed it up, he chose her for the biggest job she’s ever had. And he did her the greatest favor imaginable. Rather than spending the last four years in the morass of the Senate, she has been out getting things done in a place where Republicans can’t obstruct her.

So why reference her as a former rival? To remind the world that Hillary is her own person, her own brand. In four years, if the Obama administration is viewed as a success, she will be seen as one of its brightest stars. If the administration has mixed reviews or is starting to wear out it’s welcome, she can still run as her own woman.

I think referencing her that way was a brilliant touch.

Article source: http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/01/why-obama-mentioned-his-beaten-foe-hillary-clinton-in-the-sotu-a-theory/252169/

Hillary Clinton Wants To Throw In The Towel

At a town hall meeting yesterday, Hillary Clinton was asked what it would take for her to consider a vice presidential post, if Obama offered.

Clinton said that she would continue to serve as Secretary of State until the president decides to replace her, but she would not seek to run in another election:

“After 20 years – it will be 20 years – of being on the high wire of American politics and all of the challenges that come with that it will be probably a good idea to just find out how tired I am.”

Watch her full answer below.

Article source: http://www.businessinsider.com/hillary-clinton-quit-politics-2012-1

Obama Talks to Diane Sawyer on Self-Doubt, Second-Guessing, Dole Has Daggers …

Obama interviewed by Diane Sawyer -

Second Guesses Himself all the Timehttp://abcn.ws/ygAsjt

Patriots or Giants?http://abcn.ws/yCPXBd

What Really Happened on Tarmac with Brewerhttp://abcn.ws/wVrxak

SEALs Rescue Made Him Think of His Own Daughtershttp://abcn.ws/zmhxv5

The Rest:

Romney Failed to Disclose Income from Swiss Accounthttp://abcn.ws/Amd19n

Earth to Newt: A Reality Check on the Moon, Mars – from ABC’s Gina Sunseri in Houston – http://abcn.ws/AjVq6X

Hillary Clinton “Tired,” Refers to “High Wire of American Politics – Ready to Throw in the Towel? http://abcn.ws/w77XeO

Pentagon: Fewer Soldiers, More Drones Will Save Moneyhttp://abcn.ws/xVPymz

Wedding Bells for Barney Frank and Longtime Partner Jim Readyhttp://abcn.ws/y5Wj7g

TOP LINE: The Florida Question – Florida has a reputation as a kind of a wacky place where anything can happen in politics. Maybe that’s why we find ourselves, several days from the primary, talking about lunar colonies and Swiss bank accounts. More on Florida on TOP LINE -  http://abcn.ws/xYywcE

Mitt Mobilizes – We’re either witnessing a masterful political hit or the tale of an unbeatable survivor. Romney’s army has mobilized against Newt Gingrich – Witness:

Bob Dole Has Daggers Out – It’s not often that one person who served with another in public live issues a take-down of this magnitude. Dole, who was Senate Majority Leader when Newt was Speaker, says he’s an “empty bucket,” has too many ideas, cost Republicans seats in the House and maybe cost Dole the presidency in 1996. If you want to know how desperate the Republican establishment wants to derail Newt, all you have to do is read this – http://abcn.ws/zfiE4L

Or this…

Infiltration: Romney Surrogates at Gingrich Events – Newt’s events have become a sort of rolling spin room with Mitt’s minions – from Connie Mack to Jason Chaafetz – dogging the former speaker on the trail -

A Crowd for Newt – If Newt Gingrich is going to make this happen he’s going to have to hear the rumble of the crowd – if they want him – he’s going to have to bring his hand to his ear to hear it like Hulk Hogan and then rip off his proverbial yellow shirt. There will be a crowd at the CNN debate, by the way. And they’ll be participating. http://abcn.ws/zZtGsD

Finger Waving, Tough-Talking Govs – More on the Brewer / Obama relationship, from immigration lawsuits to federal funding – http://abcn.ws/w4uDxv

Obama’s touting his energy agenda in Las Vegashttp://abcn.ws/ABwC1w

…but still says he’s not “campaigning” – http://abcn.ws/xay2Xc

Gingrich’s criticism of Washington buying in favor with Tea Partiers in Floridahttp://abcn.ws/zBVv84

Romney isn’t worried about crowd size, just messagehttp://abcn.ws/wN0CiT

GOP Battle for Latino Vote Heats Up As Florida Primary Nears  – http://abcn.ws/Alm9pt

Rick Santorum’s Still Out There and Says He’s Sticking Aroundhttp://abcn.ws/wj78vJ

The Debt Ceiling Ready to Rise Againhttp://abcn.ws/w9rJKF

Unexpected Fact of the Day – 10th President John Tyler’s Grandchildren Still Alive – http://abcn.ws/z7RaSm

Pre-POTUS Ride – It’s not pimped out like a presidential limousine, but for just $1 million dollars you can own the Chrysler 300 President Obama drove while he was a State Senator – http://abcn.ws/x9nd4z

Article source: http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/01/obama-talks-to-diane-sawyer-on-self-doubt-second-guessing-dole-has-daggers-out-mitts-army-mobilizes/

PM gets congratulatory call from Hillary Clinton

Other Stories

Sandals, Beaches dive into expanded PADI partnership

  0 comments

 

Celine at last!

  0 comments

 

‘Downright lies!’

  0 comments

 

JFJ pleads for children’s homes

  0 comments

 

Scientists PM recovering say more deadly quakes could hit Haiti

  0 comments

 

Ian Fleming Airport marks first anniversary with fly-in of 8 jets

  0 comments

 

Stolen goats brought to court

  0 comments

 

All about the environment

  0 comments

 

Former TT PM recovering

  0 comments

 

Face up

  0 comments

 

This Day in History – January 28

  0 comments

 

US cybersecurity efforts trigger privacy concerns

  0 comments

 

Magnitude 5.4 quake rocks northern Italy

  0 comments

 

Suicide bomber kills 32 at Iraq funeral procession

  0 comments

 

Multi-sectoral approach needed to tackle obesity, says doctor

  2 comments

 

Man’s body left in abandoned house for days

  9 comments

 

NOT TRUE! – Shaw slams Phillips for IMF comments

  28 comments

 

Gov’t open to options in talks with IMF, says finance minister

  13 comments

 

PM gets congratulatory call from Hillary Clinton

  0 comments

 

Cops gathering more evidence against German in child porn case

  0 comments

 

Article source: http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/news/PM-gets-congratulatory-call-from-Hillary-Clinton_10653920

Hillary Clinton to Meet Bulgarian President, PM in Sofia

During her official visit to Bulgaria, US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, will meet with Prime Minister, Boyko Borisov, and President, Rosen Plevneliev.

Ministers of the cabinet will also be present during the talks.

The visit is scheduled for February 5 and comes on the invitation of Bulgaria’s Foreign Minister Nikolay Mladenov back in October 2010 during his visit to the US when the Bulgarian government’s anti-corruption measures were discussed.

Main topics on the agenda of the talks are expected to include bilateral partnership, the situation in the Middle East, in Southeastern Europe, and Bulgaria’s contribution to the mission in Afghanistan.

Hillary Clinton has already been to Bulgaria in her capacity of First Lady, when husband Bill Clinton was US President. The visit to Sofia took place in October 1998, when she participated in the conference “Women of the 21st century.”

Article source: http://www.novinite.com/view_news.php?id=136154

Hillary Clinton weighs retirement from politics



Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton (; born October 26, 1947) is the 67th United States Secretary of State, serving in the administration of President Barack Obama. She was a United States Senator for New York from 2001 to 2009. As the wife of the 42nd President of the United States, Bill Clinton, she was the First Lady of the United States from 1993 to 2001. In the 2008 election, Clinton was a leading candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination.

A native of Illinois, Hillary Rodham first attracted national attention in 1969 for her remarks as the first student commencement speaker at Wellesley College. She embarked on a career in law after graduating from Yale Law School in 1973. Following a stint as a Congressional legal counsel, she moved to Arkansas in 1974 and married Bill Clinton in 1975. Rodham cofounded the Arkansas Advocates for Children and Families in 1977 and became the first female chair of the Legal Services Corporation in 1978. Named the first female partner at Rose Law Firm in 1979, she was twice listed as one of the 100 most influential lawyers in America. First Lady of Arkansas from 1979 to 1981 and 1983 to 1992 with husband Bill as Governor, she successfully led a task force to reform Arkansas’s education system. She sat on the board of directors of Wal-Mart and several other corporations.

In 1994 as First Lady of the United States, her major initiative, the Clinton health care plan, failed to gain approval from the U.S. Congress. However, in 1997 and 1999, Clinton played a role in advocating the creation of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program, the Adoption and Safe Families Act, and the Foster Care Independence Act. Her years as First Lady drew a polarized response from the American public. The only First Lady to have been subpoenaed, she testified before a federal grand jury in 1996 due to the Whitewater controversy, but was never charged with wrongdoing in this or several other investigations during her husband’s administration. The state of her marriage was the subject of considerable speculation following the Lewinsky scandal in 1998.

After moving to the state of New York, Clinton was elected as a U.S. Senator in 2000. That election marked the first time an American First Lady had run for public office; Clinton was also the first female senator to represent the state. In the Senate, she initially supported the Bush administration on some foreign policy issues, including a vote for the Iraq War Resolution. She subsequently opposed the administration on its conduct of the war in Iraq and on most domestic issues. Senator Clinton was reelected by a wide margin in 2006. In the 2008 presidential nomination race, Hillary Clinton won more primaries and delegates than any other female candidate in American history, but narrowly lost to Illinois Senator Barack Obama.

As Secretary of State, Clinton became the first former First Lady to serve in a president’s cabinet. She has put into place institutional changes seeking to maximize departmental effectiveness and promote the empowerment of women worldwide, and has set records for most-traveled secretary for time in office. She has been at the forefront of the U.S. response to the 2011 Middle East protests, including advocating for the military intervention in Libya.

Early life and education

Early life

Hillary Diane Rodham was born at Edgewater Hospital in Chicago, Illinois. She was raised in a United Methodist family, first in Chicago and then, from the age of three, in suburban Park Ridge, Illinois. Her father, Hugh Ellsworth Rodham, was the son of Welsh and English immigrants; he managed a successful small business in the textile industry. Her mother, Dorothy Emma Howell, is a homemaker of English, Scottish, French, French Canadian, and Welsh descent. She has two younger brothers, Hugh and Tony.

As a child, Hillary Rodham was a teacher’s favorite at her public schools in Park Ridge. She participated in swimming, baseball, and other sports. She also earned numerous awards as a Brownie and Girl Scout. She attended Maine East High School, where she participated in student council, the school newspaper, and was selected for National Honor Society. For her senior year, she was redistricted to Maine South High School, where she was a National Merit Finalist and graduated in the top five percent of her class of 1965. Her mother wanted her to have an independent, professional career, and her father, otherwise a traditionalist, held the modern notion that his daughter’s abilities and opportunities should not be limited by gender.

Raised in a politically conservative household, at age thirteen Rodham helped canvass South Side Chicago following the very close 1960 U.S. presidential election, where she found evidence of electoral fraud against Republican candidate Richard Nixon. She then volunteered to campaign for Republican candidate Barry Goldwater in the U.S. presidential election of 1964. Rodham’s early political development was shaped most by her high school history teacher (like her father, a fervent anticommunist), who introduced her to Goldwater’s classic The Conscience of a Conservative, and by her Methodist youth minister (like her mother, concerned with issues of social justice), with whom she saw and met civil rights leader Martin Luther King, Jr., in Chicago in 1962.

College

In 1965, Rodham enrolled at Wellesley College, where she majored in political science. During her freshman year, she served as president of the Wellesley Young Republicans; with this Rockefeller Republican-oriented group, she supported the elections of John Lindsay and Edward Brooke. She later stepped down from this position, as her views changed regarding the American Civil Rights Movement and the Vietnam War. In a letter to her youth minister at this time, she described herself as “a mind conservative and a heart liberal.” In contrast to the 1960s current that advocated radical actions against the political system, she sought to work for change within it. In her junior year, Rodham became a supporter of the antiwar presidential nomination campaign of Democrat Eugene McCarthy. Following the assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr., Rodham organized a two-day student strike and worked with Wellesley’s black students to recruit more black students and faculty. In early 1968, she was elected president of the Wellesley College Government Association and served through early 1969; she was instrumental in keeping Wellesley from being embroiled in the student disruptions common to other colleges. A number of her fellow students thought she might some day become the first woman President of the United States. So she could better understand her changing political views, Professor Alan Schechter assigned Rodham to intern at the House Republican Conference, and she attended the “Wellesley in Washington” summer program. Rodham was invited by moderate New York Republican Representative Charles Goodell to help Governor Nelson Rockefeller’s late-entry campaign for the Republican nomination. Rodham attended the 1968 Republican National Convention in Miami. However, she was upset by how Richard Nixon’s campaign portrayed Rockefeller and by what she perceived as the convention’s “veiled” racist messages, and left the Republican Party for good.

Returning to Wellesley for her final year, Rodham wrote her senior thesis about the tactics of radical community organizer Saul Alinsky under Professor Schechter (years later while she was First Lady, access to the thesis was restricted at the request of the White House and it became the subject of some speculation). In 1969, she graduated with a Bachelor of Arts, with departmental honors in political science. Following pressure from some fellow students, she became the first student in Wellesley College history to deliver its commencement address. Her speech received a standing ovation lasting seven minutes. She was featured in an article published in Life magazine, due to the response to a part of her speech that criticized Senator Edward Brooke, who had spoken before her at the commencement. She also appeared on Irv Kupcinet‘s nationally syndicated television talk show as well as in Illinois and New England newspapers. That summer, she worked her way across Alaska, washing dishes in Mount McKinley National Park and sliming salmon in a fish processing cannery in Valdez (which fired her and shut down overnight when she complained about unhealthy conditions).

Law school

Rodham then entered Yale Law School, where she served on the editorial board of the Yale Review of Law and Social Action. During her second year, she worked at the Yale Child Study Center, learning about new research on early childhood brain development and working as a research assistant on the seminal work, Beyond the Best Interests of the Child (1973). She also took on cases of child abuse at Yale-New Haven Hospital and volunteered at New Haven Legal Services to provide free legal advice for the poor. In the summer of 1970, she was awarded a grant to work at Marian Wright Edelman‘s Washington Research Project, where she was assigned to Senator Walter Mondale‘s Subcommittee on Migratory Labor. There she researched migrant workers‘ problems in housing, sanitation, health and education. Edelman later became a significant mentor. She was recruited by political advisor Anne Wexler to work on the 1970 campaign of Connecticut U.S. Senate candidate Joseph Duffey, with Rodham later crediting Wexler with providing her first job in politics.

In the late spring of 1971, she began dating Bill Clinton, also a law student at Yale. That summer, she interned at the Oakland, California, law firm of Treuhaft, Walker and Burnstein. The firm was well-known for its support of constitutional rights, civil liberties, and radical causes (two of its four partners were current or former Communist Party members); Rodham worked on child custody and other cases. Clinton canceled his original summer plans, in order to live with her in California; the couple continued living together in New Haven when they returned to law school. The following summer, Rodham and Clinton campaigned in Texas for unsuccessful 1972 Democratic presidential candidate George McGovern. She received a Juris Doctor degree from Yale in 1973, having stayed on an extra year to be with Clinton. Clinton first proposed marriage to her following graduation, but she declined. She began a year of postgraduate study on children and medicine at the Yale Child Study Center. Her first scholarly article, “Children Under the Law”, was published in the Harvard Educational Review in late 1973. Discussing the new children’s rights movement, it stated that “child citizens” were “powerless individuals” and argued that children should not be considered equally incompetent from birth to attaining legal age, but that instead courts should presume competence except when there is evidence otherwise, on a case-by-case basis. The article became frequently cited in the field.

Marriage and family, law career and First Lady of Arkansas

From the East Coast to Arkansas

During her postgraduate study, Rodham served as staff attorney for Edelman’s newly founded Children’s Defense Fund in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and as a consultant to the Carnegie Council on Children. During 1974, she was a member of the impeachment inquiry staff in Washington, D.C., advising the House Committee on the Judiciary during the Watergate scandal. Under the guidance of Chief Counsel John Doar and senior member Bernard Nussbaum, Rodham helped research procedures of impeachment and the historical grounds and standards for impeachment. The committee’s work culminated in the resignation of President Richard Nixon in August 1974.

By then, Rodham was viewed as someone with a bright political future; Democratic political organizer and consultant Betsey Wright had moved from Texas to Washington the previous year to help guide her career; Wright thought Rodham had the potential to become a future senator or president. Meanwhile, Clinton had repeatedly asked her to marry him, and she continued to demur. However, after failing the District of Columbia bar exam and passing the Arkansas exam, Rodham came to a key decision. As she later wrote, “I chose to follow my heart instead of my head”. She thus followed Bill Clinton to Arkansas, rather than staying in Washington where career prospects were brighter. Clinton was then teaching law and running for a seat in the U.S. House of Representatives in his home state. In August 1974, she moved to Fayetteville, Arkansas, and became one of only two female faculty members in the School of Law at the University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, where Bill Clinton also was. She gave classes in criminal law, where she was considered a rigorous teacher and tough grader, and was the first director of the school’s legal aid clinic. She still harbored doubts about marriage, concerned that her separate identity would be lost and that her accomplishments would be viewed in the light of someone else’s.

Early Arkansas years


Hillary Rodham and Bill Clinton bought a house in Fayetteville in the summer of 1975, and Hillary finally agreed to marry. Their wedding took place on October 11, 1975, in a Methodist ceremony in their living room. She announced she was keeping the name Hillary Rodham, to keep their professional lives separate and avoid apparent conflicts of interest and because “it showed that I was still me,” although her decision upset their mothers. Bill Clinton had lost the congressional race in 1974, but in November 1976 was elected Arkansas Attorney General, and so the couple moved to the state capital of Little Rock. There, in February 1977, Rodham joined the venerable Rose Law Firm, a bastion of Arkansan political and economic influence. She specialized in patent infringement and intellectual property law while also working pro bono in child advocacy; she rarely performed litigation work in court.

Rodham maintained her interest in children’s law and family policy, publishing the scholarly articles “Children’s Policies: Abandonment and Neglect” in 1977 and “Children’s Rights: A Legal Perspective” in 1979. The latter continued her argument that children’s legal competence depended upon their age and other circumstances and that in serious medical rights cases, judicial intervention was sometimes warranted. An American Bar Association chair later said, “Her articles were important, not because they were radically new but because they helped formulate something that had been inchoate.” Historian Garry Wills would later describe her as “one of the more important scholar-activists of the last two decades”, while conservatives said her theories would usurp traditional parental authority, allow children to file frivolous lawsuits against their parents, and argued that her work was legal “crit” theory run amok.

In 1977, Rodham cofounded the Arkansas Advocates for Children and Families, a state-level alliance with the Children’s Defense Fund. Later that year, President Jimmy Carter (for whom Rodham had been the 1976 campaign director of field operations in Indiana) appointed her to the board of directors of the Legal Services Corporation, and she served in that capacity from 1978 until the end of 1981. From mid-1978 to mid-1980, she served as the chair of that board, the first woman to do so. During her time as chair, funding for the Corporation was expanded from $90 million to $300 million; subsequently she successfully fought President Ronald Reagan‘s attempts to reduce the funding and change the nature of the organization.

Following her husband’s November 1978 election as Governor of Arkansas, Rodham became First Lady of Arkansas in January 1979, her title for twelve years (1979–1981, 1983–1992). Clinton appointed her chair of the Rural Health Advisory Committee the same year, where she successfully secured federal funds to expand medical facilities in Arkansas’s poorest areas without affecting doctors’ fees.

In 1979, Rodham became the first woman to be made a full partner of Rose Law Firm. From 1978 until they entered the White House, she had a higher salary than her husband. During 1978 and 1979, while looking to supplement their income, Rodham made a spectacular profit from trading cattle futures contracts; an initial $1,000 investment generated nearly $100,000 when she stopped trading after ten months. The couple also began their ill-fated investment in the Whitewater Development Corporation real estate venture with Jim and Susan McDougal at this time.

On February 27, 1980, Rodham gave birth to a daughter, Chelsea, her only child. In November 1980, Bill Clinton was defeated in his bid for reelection.

Later Arkansas years


Bill Clinton returned to the governor’s office two years later by winning the election of 1982. During her husband’s campaign, Rodham began to use the name Hillary Clinton, or sometimes “Mrs. Bill Clinton”, to assuage the concerns of Arkansas voters; she also took a leave of absence from Rose Law to campaign for him full-time. As First Lady of Arkansas, Hillary Clinton was named chair of the Arkansas Educational Standards Committee in 1983, where she sought to reform the state’s court-sanctioned public education system. In one of the Clinton governorship’s most important initiatives, she fought a prolonged but ultimately successful battle against the Arkansas Education Association, to establish mandatory teacher testing and state standards for curriculum and classroom size. In 1985, she also introduced Arkansas’s Home Instruction Program for Preschool Youth, a program that helps parents work with their children in preschool preparedness and literacy. She was named Arkansas Woman of the Year in 1983 and Arkansas Mother of the Year in 1984.

Clinton continued to practice law with the Rose Law Firm while she was First Lady of Arkansas. She earned less than the other partners, as she billed fewer hours, but still made more than $200,000 in her final year there. She seldom did trial work, but the firm considered her a “rainmaker” because she brought in clients, partly thanks to the prestige she lent the firm and to her corporate board connections. She was also very influential in the appointment of state judges. Bill Clinton’s Republican opponent in his 1986 gubernatorial reelection campaign accused the Clintons of conflict of interest, because Rose Law did state business; the Clintons deflected the charge by saying that state fees were walled off by the firm before her profits were calculated.

From 1982 to 1988, Clinton was on board of directors, sometimes as chair, of the New World Foundation, which funded a variety of New Left interest groups. From 1987 to 1991, she chaired the American Bar Association’s Commission on Women in the Profession, which addressed gender bias in the law profession and induced the association to adopt measures to combat it. She was twice named by the National Law Journal as one of the 100 most influential lawyers in America: in 1988 and in 1991. When Bill Clinton thought about not running again for governor in 1990, Hillary considered running, but private polls were unfavorable and, in the end, he ran and was reelected for the final time.

Clinton served on the boards of the Arkansas Children’s Hospital Legal Services (1988–1992) and the Children’s Defense Fund (as chair, 1986–1992). In addition to her positions with nonprofit organizations, she also held positions on the corporate board of directors of TCBY (1985–1992), Wal-Mart Stores (1986–1992) and Lafarge (1990–1992). TCBY and Wal-Mart were Arkansas-based companies that were also clients of Rose Law. Clinton was the first female member on Wal-Mart’s board, added following pressure on chairman Sam Walton to name a woman to the board. Once there, she pushed successfully for Wal-Mart to adopt more environmentally friendly practices, was largely unsuccessful in a campaign for more women to be added to the company’s management, and was silent about the company’s famously anti-labor union practices.

Bill Clinton presidential campaign of 1992


Hillary Clinton received sustained national attention for the first time when her husband became a candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination of 1992. Before the New Hampshire primary, tabloid publications printed claims that Bill Clinton had had an extramarital affair with Arkansas lounge singer Gennifer Flowers. In response, the Clintons appeared together on 60 Minutes, where Bill Clinton denied the affair but acknowledged “causing pain in my marriage.” This joint appearance was credited with rescuing his campaign. During the campaign, Hillary Clinton made culturally disparaging remarks about Tammy Wynette and her outlook on marriage, and about women staying home and baking cookies and having teas, that were ill-considered by her own admission. Bill Clinton said that in electing him, the nation would “get two for the price of one”, referring to the prominent role his wife would assume. Beginning with Daniel Wattenberg‘s August 1992 The American Spectator article “The Lady Macbeth of Little Rock”, Hillary Clinton’s own past ideological and ethical record came under conservative attack. At least twenty other articles in major publications also drew comparisons between her and Lady Macbeth.

First Lady of the United States

Role as First Lady

When Bill Clinton took office as president in January 1993, Hillary Rodham Clinton became the First Lady of the United States, and announced that she would be using that form of her name. She was the first First Lady to hold a postgraduate degree and to have her own professional career up to the time of entering the White House. She was also the first to have an office in the West Wing of the White House in addition to the usual First Lady offices in the East Wing. She was part of the innermost circle vetting appointments to the new administration, and her choices filled at least eleven top-level positions and dozens more lower-level ones. She is regarded as the most openly empowered presidential wife in American history, save for Eleanor Roosevelt.


Some critics called it inappropriate for the First Lady to play a central role in matters of public policy. Supporters pointed out that Clinton’s role in policy was no different from that of other White House advisors and that voters were well aware that she would play an active role in her husband’s presidency. Bill Clinton’s campaign promise of “two for the price of one” led opponents to refer derisively to the Clintons as “co-presidents”, or sometimes the Arkansas label “Billary”. The pressures of conflicting ideas about the role of a First Lady were enough to send Clinton into “imaginary discussions” with the also-politically-active Eleanor Roosevelt. from the time she came to Washington, she also found refuge in a prayer group of The Fellowship that featured many wives of conservative Washington figures. Triggered in part by the death of her father in April 1993, she publicly sought to find a synthesis of Methodist teachings, liberal religious political philosophy, and Tikkun editor Michael Lerner‘s “politics of meaning” to overcome what she saw as America’s “sleeping sickness of the soul” and that would lead to a willingness “to remold society by redefining what it means to be a human being in the twentieth century, moving into a new millennium.” Other segments of the public focused on her appearance, which had evolved over time from inattention to fashion during her days in Arkansas, to a popular site in the early days of the World Wide Web devoted to showing her many different, and frequently analyzed, hairstyles as First Lady, to an appearance on the cover of Vogue magazine in 1998.

Health care and other policy initiatives

[[File:HillaryGallup1992-1996.PNG|thumb|300px|right|Hillary Rodham Clinton's Gallup Poll favorable and unfavorable ratings, 1992–1996


]]
In January 1993, Bill Clinton appointed Hillary Clinton to head the Task Force on National Health Care Reform, hoping to replicate the success she had in leading the effort for Arkansas education reform. She privately urged that passage of health care reform be given higher priority than the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) (which she was also unenthusiastic about the merits of). The recommendation of the task force became known as the Clinton health care plan, a comprehensive proposal that would require employers to provide health coverage to their employees through individual health maintenance organizations. Its opponents quickly derided the plan as “Hillarycare”; some protesters against it became vitriolic, and during a July 1994 bus tour to rally support for the plan, she was forced to wear a bulletproof vest at times.

The plan did not receive enough support for a floor vote in either the House or the Senate, although Democrats controlled both chambers, and the proposal was abandoned in September 1994. Clinton later acknowledged in her book, Living History, that her political inexperience partly contributed to the defeat, but mentioned that many other factors were also responsible. The First Lady’s approval ratings, which had generally been in the high-50s percent range during her first year, fell to 44 percent in April 1994 and 35 percent by September 1994. Republicans made the Clinton health care plan a major campaign issue of the 1994 midterm elections, which saw a net Republican gain of fifty-three seats in the House election and seven in the Senate election, winning control of both; many analysts and pollsters found the plan to be a major factor in the Democrats’ defeat, especially among independent voters. The White House subsequently sought to downplay Hillary Clinton’s role in shaping policy. Opponents of universal health care would continue to use “Hillarycare” as a pejorative label for similar plans by others.


Along with Senators Ted Kennedy and Orrin Hatch, she was a force behind the passage of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program in 1997, a federal effort that provided state support for children whose parents could not provide them with health coverage, and conducted outreach efforts on behalf of enrolling children in the program once it became law. She promoted nationwide immunization against childhood illnesses and encouraged older women to seek a mammogram to detect breast cancer, with coverage provided by Medicare. She successfully sought to increase research funding for prostate cancer and childhood asthma at the National Institutes of Health. The First Lady worked to investigate reports of an illness that affected veterans of the Gulf War, which became known as the Gulf War syndrome.
Together with Attorney General Janet Reno, Clinton helped create the Office on Violence Against Women at the Department of Justice.
In 1997, she initiated and shepherded the Adoption and Safe Families Act, which she regarded as her greatest accomplishment as First Lady. In 1999, she was instrumental in the passage of the Foster Care Independence Act, which doubled federal monies for teenagers aging out of foster care.
As First Lady, Clinton hosted numerous White House conferences, including ones on Child Care (1997), on Early Childhood Development and Learning (1997), and on Children and Adolescents (2000). She also hosted the first-ever White House Conference on Teenagers (2000) and the first-ever White House Conference on Philanthropy (1999).

Clinton traveled to 79 countries during this time, breaking the mark for most-traveled First Lady held by Pat Nixon. She did not hold a security clearance or attend National Security Council meetings, but played a soft power role in U.S. diplomacy. A March 1995 five-nation trip to South Asia, on behest of the U.S. State Department and without her husband, sought to improve relations with India and Pakistan. Clinton was troubled by the plight of women she encountered, but found a warm response from the people of the countries she visited and a gained better relationship with the American press corps. The trip was a transformative experience for her and presaged her eventual career in diplomacy. In a September 1995 speech before the Fourth World Conference on Women in Beijing, Clinton argued very forcefully against practices that abused women around the world and in the People’s Republic of China itself, declaring “that it is no longer acceptable to discuss women’s rights as separate from human rights”. Delegates from over 180 countries heard her say: “If there is one message that echoes forth from this conference, let it be that human rights are women’s rights and women’s rights are human rights, once and for all.” In doing so, she resisted both internal administration and Chinese pressure to soften her remarks. She was one of the most prominent international figures during the late 1990s to speak out against the treatment of Afghan women by the Islamist fundamentalist Taliban. She helped create Vital Voices, an international initiative sponsored by the United States to promote the participation of women in the political processes of their countries. It and Clinton’s own visits encouraged women to make themselves heard in the Northern Ireland peace process.

Whitewater and other investigations

The Whitewater controversy was the focus of media attention from the publication of a New York Times report during the 1992 presidential campaign, and throughout her time as First Lady. The Clintons had lost their late-1970s investment in the Whitewater Development Corporation; at the same time, their partners in that investment, Jim and Susan McDougal, operated Madison Guaranty, a savings and loan institution that retained the legal services of Rose Law Firm and may have been improperly subsidizing Whitewater losses. Madison Guaranty later failed, and Clinton’s work at Rose was scrutinized for a possible conflict of interest in representing the bank before state regulators that her husband had appointed; she claimed she had done minimal work for the bank. Independent counsels Robert Fiske and Kenneth Starr subpoenaed Clinton’s legal billing records; she said she did not know where they were. The records were found in the First Lady’s White House book room after a two-year search, and delivered to investigators in early 1996. The delayed appearance of the records sparked intense interest and another investigation about how they surfaced and where they had been; Clinton’s staff attributed the problem to continual changes in White House storage areas since the move from the Arkansas Governor’s Mansion. After the discovery of the records, on January 26, 1996, Clinton made history by becoming the first First Lady to be subpoenaed to testify before a Federal grand jury. After several Independent Counsels had investigated, a final report was issued in 2000 that stated there was insufficient evidence that either Clinton had engaged in criminal wrongdoing.

Other investigations took place during Hillary Clinton’s time as First Lady. Scrutiny of the May 1993 firings of the White House Travel Office employees, an affair that became known as “Travelgate“, began with charges that the White House had used audited financial irregularities in the Travel Office operation as an excuse to replace the staff with friends from Arkansas. The 1996 discovery of a two-year-old White House memo caused the investigation to focus more on whether Hillary Clinton had orchestrated the firings and whether the statements she made to investigators about her role in the firings were true. The 2000 final Independent Counsel report concluded she was involved in the firings and that she had made “factually false” statements, but that there was insufficient evidence that she knew the statements were false, or knew that her actions would lead to firings, to prosecute her. Following deputy White House counsel Vince Foster‘s July 1993 suicide, allegations were made that Hillary Clinton had ordered the removal of potentially damaging files (related to Whitewater or other matters) from Foster’s office on the night of his death. Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr investigated this, and by 1999, Starr was reported to be holding the investigation open, despite his staff having told him there was no case to be made. When Starr’s successor Robert Ray issued his final Whitewater reports in 2000, no claims were made against Hillary Clinton regarding this.

In March 1994 newspaper reports revealed her spectacular profits from cattle futures trading in 1978–1979; allegations were made in the press of conflict of interest and disguised bribery, and several individuals analyzed her trading records, but no formal investigation was made and she was never charged with any wrongdoing. An outgrowth of the Travelgate investigation was the June 1996 discovery of improper White House access to hundreds of FBI background reports on former Republican White House employees, an affair that some called “Filegate“. Accusations were made that Hillary Clinton had requested these files and that she had recommended hiring an unqualified individual to head the White House Security Office. The 2000 final Independent Counsel report found no substantial or credible evidence that Hillary Clinton had any role or showed any misconduct in the matter.

Lewinsky scandal

[[File:HillaryGallup1997-2000.PNG|thumb|330px|right|Hillary Rodham Clinton's Gallup Poll favorable and unfavorable ratings, 1997–2000


]]
In 1998, the Clintons’ relationship became the subject of much speculation when investigations revealed that the President had had extramarital sexual activities with White House intern Monica Lewinsky. Events surrounding the Lewinsky scandal eventually led to the impeachment of Bill Clinton. When the allegations against her husband were first made public, Hillary Clinton stated that they were the result of a “vast right-wing conspiracy“, characterizing the Lewinsky charges as the latest in a long, organized, collaborative series of charges by Clinton political enemies rather than any wrongdoing by her husband. She later said that she had been misled by her husband’s initial claims that no affair had taken place. After the evidence of President Clinton’s encounters with Lewinsky became incontrovertible, she issued a public statement reaffirming her commitment to their marriage, but privately was reported to be furious at him and was unsure if she wanted to stay in the marriage.

There was a variety of public reactions to Hillary Clinton after this: some women admired her strength and poise in private matters made public, some sympathized with her as a victim of her husband’s insensitive behavior, others criticized her as being an enabler to her husband’s indiscretions, while still others accused her of cynically staying in a failed marriage as a way of keeping or even fostering her own political influence. Her public approval ratings in the wake of the revelations shot upward to around 70 percent, the highest they had ever been. In her 2003 memoir, she would attribute her decision to stay married to “a love that has persisted for decades” and add: “No one understands me better and no one can make me laugh the way Bill does. Even after all these years, he is still the most interesting, energizing and fully alive person I have ever met.”

Traditional duties

Clinton initiated and was Founding Chair of the Save America’s Treasures program, a national effort that matched federal funds to private donations to preserve and restore historic items and sites, including the flag that inspired “The Star-Spangled Banner” and the First Ladies Historic Site in Canton, Ohio. She was head of the White House Millennium Council, and hosted Millennium Evenings, a series of lectures that discussed futures studies, one of which became the first live simultaneous webcast from the White House. Clinton also created the first Sculpture Garden there, which displayed large contemporary American works of art loaned from museums in the Jacqueline Kennedy Garden.

In the White House, Clinton placed donated handicrafts of contemporary American artisans, such as pottery and glassware, on rotating display in the state rooms. She oversaw the restoration of the Blue Room to be historically authentic to the period of James Monroe, the redecoration of the Treaty Room into the presidential study along 19th century lines, and the redecoration of the Map Room to how it looked during World War II. Clinton hosted many large-scale events at the White House, such as a Saint Patrick’s Day reception, a state dinner for visiting Chinese dignitaries, a contemporary music concert that raised funds for music education in public schools, a New Year’s Eve celebration at the turn of the 21st century, and a state dinner honoring the bicentennial of the White House in November 2000.

Senate election of 2000


The long-serving United States Senator from New York, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, announced his retirement in November 1998. Several prominent Democratic figures, including Representative Charles B. Rangel of New York, urged Clinton to run for Moynihan’s open seat in the United States Senate election of 2000. Once she decided to run, the Clintons purchased a home in Chappaqua, New York, north of New York City, in September 1999. She became the first First Lady of the United States to be a candidate for elected office. Initially, Clinton expected to face Rudy Giuliani, the Mayor of New York City, as her Republican opponent in the election. However, Giuliani withdrew from the race in May 2000 after being diagnosed with prostate cancer and having developments in his personal life become very public, and Clinton instead faced Rick Lazio, a Republican member of the United States House of Representatives representing New York’s 2nd congressional district. Throughout the campaign, opponents accused Clinton of carpetbagging, as she had never resided in New York nor participated in the state’s politics before this race. Clinton began her campaign by visiting every county in the state, in a “listening tour” of small-group settings. During the campaign, she devoted considerable time in traditionally Republican Upstate New York regions. Clinton vowed to improve the economic situation in those areas, promising to deliver 200,000 jobs to the state over her term. Her plan included tax credits to reward job creation and encourage business investment, especially in the high-tech sector. She called for personal tax cuts for college tuition and long-term care.

The contest drew national attention. Lazio blundered during a September debate by seeming to invade Clinton’s personal space trying to get her to sign a fundraising agreement. The campaigns of Clinton and Lazio, along with Giuliani’s initial effort, spent a record combined $90 million. Clinton won the election on November 7, 2000, with 55 percent of the vote to Lazio’s 43 percent. She was sworn in as United States Senator on January 3, 2001.

United States Senator

First term



Upon entering the Senate, Clinton maintained a low public profile and built relationships with senators from both parties. She forged alliances with religiously inclined senators by becoming a regular participant in the Senate Prayer Breakfast.

Clinton has served on five Senate committees: Committee on Budget (2001–2002), Committee on Armed Services (since 2003), Committee on Environment and Public Works (since 2001), Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (since 2001) and Special Committee on Aging.
She is also a Commissioner of the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe (since 2001).

Following the September 11, 2001, attacks, Clinton sought to obtain funding for the recovery efforts in New York City and security improvements in her state. Working with New York’s senior senator, Charles Schumer, she was instrumental in quickly securing $21 billion in funding for the World Trade Center site’s redevelopment. She subsequently took a leading role in investigating the health issues faced by 9/11 first responders. Clinton voted for the USA Patriot Act in October 2001. In 2005, when the act was up for renewal, she worked to address some of the civil liberties concerns with it, before voting in favor of a compromise renewed act in March 2006 that gained large majority support.

Clinton strongly supported the 2001 U.S. military action in Afghanistan, saying it was a chance to combat terrorism while improving the lives of Afghan women who suffered under the Taliban government. Clinton voted in favor of the October 2002 Iraq War Resolution, which authorized United States President George W. Bush to use military force against Iraq, should such action be required to enforce a United Nations Security Council Resolution after pursuing with diplomatic efforts.

After the Iraq War began, Clinton made trips to Iraq and Afghanistan to visit American troops stationed there. On a visit to Iraq in February 2005, Clinton noted that the insurgency had failed to disrupt the democratic elections held earlier, and that parts of the country were functioning well. Noting that war deployments were draining regular and reserve forces, she cointroduced legislation to increase the size of the regular United States Army by 80,000 soldiers to ease the strain. In late 2005, Clinton said that while immediate withdrawal from Iraq would be a mistake, Bush’s pledge to stay “until the job is done” was also misguided, as it gave Iraqis “an open-ended invitation not to take care of themselves.” Her stance caused frustration among those in the Democratic Party who favored immediate withdrawal. Clinton supported retaining and improving health benefits for veterans, and lobbied against the closure of several military bases.
[[File:HillaryGallup2001-2009.gif|thumb|300px|right|Hillary Rodham Clinton's Gallup Poll favorable and unfavorable ratings, 2001–2009


]]
Senator Clinton voted against President Bush’s two major tax cut packages, the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 and the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003. Clinton voted against the 2005 confirmation of John G. Roberts as Chief Justice of the United States and the 2006 confirmation of Samuel Alito to the United States Supreme Court.

In 2005, Clinton called for the Federal Trade Commission to investigate how hidden sex scenes showed up in the controversial video game Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas. Along with Senators Joe Lieberman and Evan Bayh, she introduced the Family Entertainment Protection Act, intended to protect children from inappropriate content found in video games. In 2004 and 2006, Clinton voted against the Federal Marriage Amendment that sought to prohibit same-sex marriage.

Looking to establish a “progressive infrastructure” to rival that of American conservatism, Clinton played a formative role in conversations that led to the 2003 founding of former Clinton administration chief of staff John Podesta‘s Center for American Progress, shared aides with Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, founded in 2003, and advised the Clintons’ former antagonist David Brock‘s Media Matters for America, created in 2004. Following the 2004 Senate elections, she successfully pushed new Democratic Senate leader Harry Reid to create a Senate war room to handle daily political messaging.

Reelection campaign of 2006


In November 2004, Clinton announced that she would seek a second Senate term. The early frontrunner for the Republican nomination, Westchester County District Attorney Jeanine Pirro, withdrew from the contest after several months of poor campaign performance. Clinton easily won the Democratic nomination over opposition from antiwar activist Jonathan Tasini. Clinton’s eventual opponents in the general election were Republican candidate John Spencer, a former mayor of Yonkers, along with several third-party candidates. She won the election on November 7, 2006, with 67 percent of the vote to Spencer’s 31 percent, carrying all but four of New York’s sixty-two counties. Clinton spent $36 million for her reelection, more than any other candidate for Senate in the 2006 elections did. Some Democrats criticized her for spending too much in a one-sided contest, while some supporters were concerned she did not leave more funds for a potential presidential bid in 2008. In the following months, she transferred $10 million of her Senate funds toward her presidential campaign.

Second term

Clinton opposed the Iraq War troop surge of 2007. In March 2007, she voted in favor of a war-spending bill that required President Bush to begin withdrawing troops from Iraq by a deadline; it passed almost completely along party lines but was subsequently vetoed by President Bush. In May 2007, a compromise war funding bill that removed withdrawal deadlines but tied funding to progress benchmarks for the Iraqi government passed the Senate by a vote of 80–14 and would be signed by Bush; Clinton was one of those who voted against it. Clinton responded to General David Petraeus‘s September 2007 Report to Congress on the Situation in Iraq by saying, “I think that the reports that you provide to us really require a willing suspension of disbelief.”

In March 2007, in response to the dismissal of U.S. attorneys controversy, Clinton called on Attorney General Alberto Gonzales to resign. In May and June 2007, regarding the high-profile, hotly debated comprehensive immigration reform bill known as the Secure Borders, Economic Opportunity and Immigration Reform Act of 2007, Clinton cast several votes in support of the bill, which eventually failed to gain cloture.

As the financial crisis of 2007–2008 reached a peak with the liquidity crisis of September 2008, Clinton supported the proposed bailout of United States financial system, voting in favor of the $700 billion Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, saying that it represented the interests of the American people. It passed the Senate 74–25.

Presidential campaign of 2008

Clinton had been preparing for a potential candidacy for United States President since at least early 2003. On January 20, 2007, Clinton announced via her web site the formation of a presidential exploratory committee for the United States presidential election of 2008; she stated, “I’m in, and I’m in to win.” No woman had ever been nominated by a major party for President of the United States.
In April 2007, the Clintons liquidated a blind trust, that had been established when Bill Clinton became president in 1993, to avoid the possibility of ethical conflicts or political embarrassments in the trust as Hillary Clinton undertook her presidential race. Later disclosure statements revealed that the couple’s worth was now upwards of $50 million, and that they had earned over $100 million since 2000, with most of it coming from Bill Clinton’s books, speaking engagements, and other activities.

Clinton led candidates competing for the Democratic nomination in opinion polls for the election throughout the first half of 2007.
Most polls placed Senator Barack Obama of Illinois and former Senator John Edwards of North Carolina as Clinton’s closest competitors. Clinton and Obama both set records for early fundraising, swapping the money lead each quarter.
By September 2007, polling in the first six states holding Democratic primaries or caucuses showed that Clinton was leading in all of them, with the races being closest in Iowa and South Carolina. By the following month, national polls showed Clinton far ahead of Democratic competitors. At the end of October, Clinton suffered a rare poor debate performance against Obama, Edwards, and her other opponents. Obama’s message of “change” began to resonate with the Democratic electorate better than Clinton’s message of “experience”. The race tightened considerably, especially in the early caucus and primary states of Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina, with Clinton losing her lead in some polls by December.


In the first vote of 2008, she placed third in the January 3 Iowa Democratic caucus to Obama and Edwards. Obama gained ground in national polling in the next few days, with all polls predicting a victory for him in the New Hampshire primary. However, Clinton gained a surprise win there on January 8, defeating Obama narrowly. Explanations for her New Hampshire comeback varied but often centered on her being seen more sympathetically, especially by women, after her eyes welled with tears and her voice broke while responding to a voter’s question the day before the election.

The nature of the contest fractured in the next few days. Several remarks by Bill Clinton and other surrogates, and a remark by Hillary Clinton concerning Martin Luther King, Jr., and Lyndon B. Johnson, were perceived by many as, accidentally or intentionally, limiting Obama as a racially oriented candidate or otherwise denying the post-racial significance and accomplishments of his campaign. Despite attempts by both Hillary Clinton and Obama to downplay the issue, Democratic voting became more polarized as a result, with Clinton losing much of her support among African Americans. She lost by a two-to-one margin to Obama in the January 26 South Carolina primary, setting up, with Edwards soon dropping out, an intense two-person contest for the twenty-two February 5 Super Tuesday states. Bill Clinton had made more statements attracting criticism for their perceived racial implications late in the South Carolina campaign, and his role was seen as damaging enough to her that a wave of supporters within and outside of the campaign said the former President “needs to stop.”

On Super Tuesday, Clinton won the largest states, such as California, New York, New Jersey and Massachusetts, while Obama won more states; they almost evenly split the total popular vote. But Obama was gaining more pledged delegates for his share of the popular vote due to better exploitation of the Democratic proportional allocation rules.


The Clinton campaign had counted on winning the nomination by Super Tuesday, and was unprepared financially and logistically for a prolonged effort; lagging in Internet fundraising, Clinton began loaning her campaign money. There was continuous turmoil within the campaign staff and she made several top-level personnel changes. Obama won the next eleven February caucuses and primaries across the country, often by large margins, and took a significant pledged delegate lead over Clinton. On March 4, Clinton broke the string of losses by winning in Ohio among other places, where her criticism of NAFTA, a major legacy of her husband’s presidency, had been a key issue. Throughout the campaign, Obama dominated caucuses, which the Clinton campaign largely ignored organizing for. Obama did well in primaries where African Americans or younger, college-educated, or more affluent voters were heavily represented; Clinton did well in primaries where Hispanics or older, non-college-educated, or working-class white voters predominated. Some Democratic party leaders expressed concern that the drawn-out campaign between the two could damage the winner in the general election contest against Republican presumptive nominee John McCain, especially if an eventual triumph for Clinton was won via party-appointed superdelegates. On April 22, she won the Pennsylvania primary, and kept her campaign alive. However, on May 6, a narrower-than-expected win in the Indiana primary coupled with a large loss in the North Carolina primary ended any realistic chance she had of winning the nomination. She vowed to stay on through the remaining primaries, but stopped attacks against Obama; as one advisor stated, “She could accept losing. She could not accept quitting.” She won some of the remaining contests, and indeed, over the last three months of the campaign she won more delegates, states, and votes than Obama, but it was not enough to overcome Obama’s lead.


Following the final primaries on June 3, 2008, Obama had gained enough delegates to become the presumptive nominee. In a speech before her supporters on June 7, Clinton ended her campaign and endorsed Obama, declaring, “The way to continue our fight now to accomplish the goals for which we stand is to take our energy, our passion, our strength and do all we can to help elect Barack Obama.” By campaign’s end, Clinton had won 1,640 pledged delegates to Obama’s 1,763; at the time of the clinching, Clinton had 286 superdelegates to Obama’s 395, with those numbers widening to 256 versus 438 once Obama was acknowledged the winner. Clinton and Obama each received over 17 million votes during the nomination process, with both breaking the previous record. Clinton also eclipsed, by a very large margin, Congresswoman Shirley Chisholm‘s 1972 mark for most primaries and delegates won by a woman. Clinton gave a passionate speech supporting Obama at the 2008 Democratic National Convention and campaigned frequently for him in Fall 2008, which concluded with his victory over McCain in the general election on November 4. Clinton’s campaign ended up severely in debt; she owed millions of dollars to outside vendors and wrote off the $13 million that she lent it herself.

Secretary of State


Nomination and confirmation



In mid-November 2008, President-elect Obama and Clinton discussed the possibility of her serving as U.S. Secretary of State in his administration, and on November 21, reports indicated that she had accepted the position. On December 1, President-elect Obama formally announced that Clinton would be his nominee for Secretary of State. Clinton said she was reluctant to leave the Senate, but that the new position represented a “difficult and exciting adventure”. As part of the nomination and in order to relieve concerns of conflict of interest, Bill Clinton agreed to accept several conditions and restrictions regarding his ongoing activities and fundraising efforts for the Clinton Presidential Center and Clinton Global Initiative.

The appointment required a Saxbe fix, passed and signed into law in December 2008. Confirmation hearings before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee began on January 13, 2009, a week before the Obama inauguration; two days later, the Committee voted 16–1 to approve Clinton. By this time, Clinton’s public approval rating had reached 65 percent, the highest point since the Lewinsky scandal. On January 21, 2009, Clinton was confirmed in the full Senate by a vote of 94–2. Clinton took the oath of office of Secretary of State and resigned from the Senate that same day. She became the first former First Lady to serve in the United States Cabinet.

Tenure


Clinton spent her initial days as Secretary of State telephoning dozens of world leaders and indicating that U.S. foreign policy would change direction: “We have a lot of damage to repair.” She advocated an expanded role in global economic issues for the State Department and cited the need for an increased U.S. diplomatic presence, especially in Iraq where the Defense Department had conducted diplomatic missions. She pushed for a larger international affairs budget; the Obama administration’s proposed 2010 budget contained a 7 percent increase for the State Department and other international programs. In March 2009, Clinton prevailed over Vice President Joe Biden on an internal debate to send an additional 20,000 troops to the war in Afghanistan. An elbow fracture and subsequent painful recuperation caused Clinton to miss two foreign trips in June 2009.

Clinton announced the most ambitious of her departmental reforms, the Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review, which establishes specific objectives for the State Department’s diplomatic missions abroad; it is modeled after a similar process in the Defense Department that she was familiar with from her time on the Senate Armed Services Committee. (The first such review was issued in late 2010 and called for the U.S. leading through “civilian power” as a cost-effective way of responding to international challenges and defusing crises. It also sought to institutionalize goals of empowering women throughout the world.) In September, Clinton unveiled the Global Hunger and Food Security Initiative at the annual meeting of her husband’s Clinton Global Initiative. The new initiative seeks to battle hunger worldwide as a strategic part of U.S. foreign policy, rather than just react to food shortage emergencies as they occur, and emphasizes the role of women farmers. In October, on a trip to Switzerland, Clinton’s intervention overcame last-minute snags and saved the signing of an historic Turkish–Armenian accord that established diplomatic relations and opened the border between the two long-hostile nations. In Pakistan, she engaged in several unusually blunt discussions with students, talk show hosts, and tribal elders, in an attempt to repair the Pakistani image of the U.S.

In a major speech in January 2010, Clinton drew analogies between the Iron Curtain and the free and unfree Internet. Chinese officials reacted negatively towards it, and it garnered attention as the first time a senior American official had clearly defined the Internet as a key element of American foreign policy. By mid-2010, Clinton and Obama had forged a good working relationship; she was a team player within the administration and a defender of it to the outside, and was careful that neither she nor her husband would upstage him. She met with him weekly, but did not have the close, daily relationship that some of her predecessors had had with their presidents. In July 2010, Secretary Clinton visited Korea, Vietnam, Pakistan and Afghanistan, all the while preparing for the July 31 wedding of daughter Chelsea amid much media attention. In late November 2010, Clinton led the U.S. damage control effort after WikiLeaks released confidential State Department cables containing blunt statements and assessments by U.S. and foreign diplomats. A few of the cables released by WikiLeaks concerned Clinton directly: they revealed that directions to members of the foreign service, written by the CIA, had gone out in 2009 under her (systematically attached) name to gather biometric and other personal details on foreign diplomats, including officials of the United Nations and U.S. allies.


The 2011 Egyptian protests posed the biggest foreign policy crisis for the administration yet. Clinton was in the forefront of U.S. public response to it, quickly evolving from an early assessment that the government of Hosni Mubarak was “stable” to a stance that there needed to be an “orderly transition [to] a democratic participatory government” to a condemnation of violence against the protesters. Obama also came to rely upon Clinton’s advice, organization, and personal connections in the behind-the-scenes response to developments. As protests spread throughout the region, Clinton was at the forefront of a U.S. response that she recognized was sometimes contradictory, backing some regimes while supporting protesters against others. As the 2011 Libyan uprising took place, Clinton’s shift in favor of military intervention was a key turning point in overcoming internal administration opposition and gaining the backing for, and U.N. approval of, the 2011 military intervention in Libya. Following the successful May 2011 U.S. mission to kill Osama bin Laden, Clinton played a key role in the administration’s decision not to release photographs of the dead al-Qaeda leader.

In the Mideast turmoil, Clinton saw an opportunity to advance one of the central themes of her tenure, the empowerment and welfare of women and girls worldwide. By now Clinton had set the record for most-traveled Secretary of State for a comparable period of time, logging and visiting 79 countries. Throughout her term, Clinton had indicated she had no interest in running for president again or in holding any other office. In March 2011, she expanded upon that by saying she was not interested in serving a second term as Secretary of State should Obama be re-elected in 2012.

Political positions



In a Gallup poll conducted during May 2005, 54 percent of respondents considered Clinton a liberal, 30 percent considered her a moderate, and 9 percent considered her a conservative.

Several organizations attempted to measure Clinton’s place on the political spectrum scientifically using her Senate votes.
National Journal‘s 2004 study of roll-call votes assigned Clinton a rating of 30 in the political spectrum, relative to the then-current Senate, with a rating of 1 being most liberal and 100 being most conservative. National Journal‘s subsequent rankings placed her as the 32nd-most liberal senator in 2006 and 16th-most liberal senator in 2007.
A 2004 analysis by political scientists Joshua D. Clinton of Princeton University, Simon Jackman and Doug Rivers of Stanford University found her to be likely the sixth-to-eighth-most liberal Senator.
The Almanac of American Politics, edited by Michael Barone and Richard E. Cohen, rated her votes from 2003 through 2006 as liberal or conservative, with 100 as the highest rating, in three areas: Economic, Social, and Foreign; averaged for the four years, the ratings are: Economic = 75 liberal, 23 conservative; Social = 83 liberal, 6 conservative; Foreign = 66 liberal, 30 conservative. Average = 75 liberal, 20 conservative.

Interest groups also gave Clinton scores based on how well her Senate votes aligned with the positions of the group.
Through 2008, she had an average lifetime 90 percent “Liberal Quotient” from Americans for Democratic Action
and a lifetime 8 percent rating from the American Conservative Union.

Writings and recordings

As First Lady of the United States, Clinton published a weekly syndicated newspaper column titled “Talking It Over” from 1995 to 2000, distributed by Creators Syndicate. It focused on her experiences and those of women, children and families she met during her travels around the world.

In 1996, Clinton presented a vision for the children of America in the book It Takes a Village: And Other Lessons Children Teach Us. The book made the New York Times Best Seller list and Clinton received the Grammy Award for Best Spoken Word Album in 1997 for the book’s audio recording.

Other books released by Clinton when she was First Lady include Dear Socks, Dear Buddy: Kids’ Letters to the First Pets (1998) and An Invitation to the White House: At Home with History (2000). In 2001, she wrote an afterword to the children’s book Beatrice’s Goat.

In 2003, Clinton released a 562-page autobiography, Living History. In anticipation of high sales, publisher Simon Schuster paid Clinton a near-record advance of $8 million. The book set a first-week sales record for a nonfiction work, went on to sell more than one million copies in the first month following publication, and was translated into twelve foreign languages. Clinton’s audio recording of the book earned her a nomination for the Grammy Award for Best Spoken Word Album.

Cultural and political image

Hillary Clinton has frequently been featured in the media and popular culture from a wide spectrum of perspectives. In 1995, New York Times writer Todd Purdum labeled Clinton “the First Lady as Rorschach test“, an assessment echoed at the time by feminist writer and activist Betty Friedan, who said, “Coverage of Hillary Clinton is a massive Rorschach test of the evolution of women in our society.”

Clinton has often been described in the popular media as a polarizing figure, with some arguing otherwise. James Madison University political science professor Valerie Sulfaro’s 2007 study used the American National Election Studies‘ “feeling thermometer” polls, which measure the degree of opinion about a political figure, to find that such polls during Clinton’s First Lady years confirm the “conventional wisdom that Hillary Clinton is a polarizing figure”, with the added insight that “affect towards Mrs. Clinton as first lady tended to be very positive or very negative, with a fairly constant one fourth of respondents feeling ambivalent or neutral.” University of California, San Diego political science professor Gary Jacobson‘s 2006 study of partisan polarization found that in a state-by-state survey of job approval ratings of the state’s senators, Clinton had the fourth-largest partisan difference of any senator, with a 50 percentage point difference in approval between New York’s Democrats and Republicans.

Northern Illinois University political science professor Barbara Burrell’s 2000 study found that Clinton’s Gallup poll favorability numbers broke sharply along partisan lines throughout her time as First Lady, with 70 to 90 percent of Democrats typically viewing her favorably while 20 to 40 percent of Republicans did not. University of Wisconsin–Madison political science professor Charles Franklin analyzed her record of favorable versus unfavorable ratings in public opinion polls, and found that there was more variation in them during her First Lady years than her Senate years. The Senate years showed favorable ratings around 50 percent and unfavorable ratings in the mid-40 percent range; Franklin noted that, “This sharp split is, of course, one of the more widely remarked aspects of Sen. Clinton’s public image.” McGill University professor of history Gil Troy titled his 2006 biography of her Hillary Rodham Clinton: Polarizing First Lady, and wrote that after the 1992 campaign, Clinton “was a polarizing figure, with 42 percent [of the public] saying she came closer to their values and lifestyle than previous first ladies and 41 percent disagreeing.” Troy further wrote that Hillary Clinton “has been uniquely controversial and contradictory since she first appeared on the national radar screen in 1992″ and that she “has alternately fascinated, bedeviled, bewitched, and appalled Americans.”


Burrell’s study found women consistently rating Clinton more favorably than men by about ten percentage points during her First Lady years. Jacobson’s study found a positive correlation across all senators between being women and receiving a partisan-polarized response. Colorado State University communication studies professor Karrin Vasby Anderson describes the First Lady position as a “site” for American womanhood, one ready made for the symbolic negotiation of female identity. In particular, Anderson states there has been a cultural bias towards traditional first ladies and a cultural prohibition against modern first ladies; by the time of Clinton, the First Lady position had become a site of heterogeneity and paradox. Burrell, as well as biographers Jeff Gerth and Don Van Natta, Jr., note that Clinton achieved her highest approval ratings as First Lady late in 1998, not for professional or political achievements of her own, but for being seen as the victim of her husband’s very public infidelity. University of Pennsylvania communications professor Kathleen Hall Jamieson saw Hillary Clinton as an exemplar of the double bind, who though able to live in a “both-and” world of both career and family, nevertheless “became a surrogate on whom we projected our attitudes about attributes once thought incompatible”, leading to her being placed in a variety of no-win situations. Quinnipiac University media studies professor Lisa Burns found press accounts frequently framing Clinton both as an exemplar of the modern professional working mother and as a political interloper interested in usurping power for herself. University of Indianapolis English professor Charlotte Templin found political cartoonists using a variety of stereotypes such as gender reversal, radical feminist as emasculator, and the wife the husband wants to get rid of to portray Hillary Clinton as violating gender norms.

Over fifty books and scholarly works have been written about Hillary Clinton, from many different perspectives. A 2006 survey by The New York Observer found “a virtual cottage industry” of “anti-Clinton literature”, put out by Regnery Publishing and other conservative imprints, with titles such as Madame Hillary: The Dark Road to the White House, Hillary’s Scheme: Inside the Next Clinton’s Ruthless Agenda to Take the White House, and Can She Be Stopped? : Hillary Clinton Will Be the Next President of the United States Unless …. Books praising Clinton did not sell nearly as well (other than the memoirs written by her and her husband). When she ran for Senate in 2000, a number of fundraising groups such as Save Our Senate and the Emergency Committee to Stop Hillary Rodham Clinton sprang up to oppose her. Van Natta, Jr., found that Republican and conservative groups viewed her as a reliable “bogeyman” to mention in fundraising letters, on a par with Ted Kennedy and the equivalent of Democratic and liberal appeals mentioning Newt Gingrich.

Going into the early stages of her presidential campaign for 2008, a Time magazine cover showed a large picture of her, with two checkboxes labeled “Love Her”, “Hate Her”, while Mother Jones titled its profile of her “Harpy, Hero, Heretic: Hillary”. Democratic netroots activists consistently rated Clinton very low in polls of their desired candidates, while some conservative figures such as Bruce Bartlett and Christopher Ruddy were declaring a Hillary Clinton presidency not so bad after all and an October 2007 cover of The American Conservative magazine was titled “The Waning Power of Hillary Hate”. By December 2007, communications professor Jamieson observed that there was a large amount of misogyny present about Clinton on the Internet, up to and including Facebook and other sites devoted to depictions reducing Clinton to sexual humiliation. She noted that, in response to widespread comments on Clinton’s laugh, that “We know that there’s language to condemn female speech that doesn’t exist for male speech. We call women’s speech shrill and strident. And Hillary Clinton’s laugh was being described as a cackle.” Use of the “bitch” epithet, which taken place against Clinton going back to her First Lady days and was seen by Karrin Vasby Anderson as a tool of containment against women in American politics, flourished during the campaign, especially on the Internet but via conventional media as well. Following Clinton’s “choked up moment” and related incidents before the January 2008 New Hampshire primary, both The New York Times and Newsweek found that discussion of gender’s role in the campaign had moved into the national political discourse. Newsweek editor Jon Meacham summed the relationship between Clinton and the American public by saying that the New Hampshire events, “brought an odd truth to light: though Hillary Rodham Clinton has been on the periphery or in the middle of national life for decades … she is one of the most recognizable but least understood figures in American politics.”

Once she became Secretary of State, Clinton’s image seemed to dramatically improve among the American public and become one of a respected world figure. She gained consistently high approval ratings (by 2011, the highest of her career except for during the Lewinsky scandal), and her favorable-unfavorable ratings during 2010 were easily the highest of any active, nationally prominent American political figure. She continued to do well in Gallup’s most admired man and woman poll; in 2010 she was named the most admired woman by Americans for the ninth
straight time and the fifteenth overall.

Awards and honors

Clinton has received many awards and honors during her career from American and international organizations for her activities concerning health, women, and children.

Electoral history








Notes

References

Bibliography













Further reading

External links





Official Biography of First Lady Clinton

{{navboxes
|title=Succession and navigation boxes related to Hillary Clinton
|state=collapsed
|list1=






















{{U.S. Secretary box
| before= Condoleezza Rice
| years= 2009–present
| president= Barack Obama
| department= Secretary of State}}



















}}



Category:1947 births
Category:Living people
Category:American female lawyers
Category:American feminists
Category:American legal scholars
Category:American legal writers
Category:American memoirists
Category:American Methodists
Category:American people of English descent
Category:American people of French-Canadian descent
Category:American people of Scottish descent
Category:American people of Welsh descent
Category:Arkansas lawyers
Category:Children’s rights activists
Category:College Republicans
Category:Arkansas Democrats
Category:Female foreign ministers
Category:Female United States presidential candidates
Category:Female United States Senators
Category:First Ladies and Gentlemen of Arkansas
Category:First Ladies of the United States
Category:Grammy Award winners

Category:New York Democrats
Category:Obama Administration cabinet members
Category:People from Park Ridge, Illinois
Category:Presidents of the United Nations Security Council
Category:United Methodists
Category:United States presidential candidates, 2008
Category:United States Secretaries of State
Category:United States Senators from New York
Category:Wal-Mart people
Category:Wellesley College alumni
Category:Westchester County, New York politicians
Category:Women in New York politics
Category:Women members of the Cabinet of the United States
Category:Yale Law School alumni
Category:Democratic Party United States Senators
Category:Current foreign ministers

af:Hillary Clinton
als:Hillary Clinton
am:ሂለሪ ሮድሃም ክሊንተን
ar:هيلاري كلينتون
az:Hillari Klinton
bn:হিলারি ক্লিনটন
zh-min-nan:Hillary Rodham Clinton
be:Хілары Клінтан
be-x-old:Гілары Клінтан
bcl:Hillary Rodham Clinton
bs:Hillary Clinton
br:Hillary Clinton
bg:Хилъри Клинтън
ca:Hillary Rodham Clinton
cs:Hillary Clintonová
cy:Hillary Rodham Clinton
da:Hillary Clinton
de:Hillary Clinton
et:Hillary Clinton
el:Χίλαρι Κλίντον
es:Hillary Rodham Clinton
eo:Hillary Rodham Clinton
eu:Hillary Rodham Clinton
fa:هیلاری کلینتون
fo:Hillary Clinton
fr:Hillary Rodham Clinton
ga:Hillary Rodham Clinton
gl:Hillary Clinton
gu:હિલેરી ક્લિન્ટન
ko:힐러리 클린턴
hi:हिलेरी रोढम क्लिंटन
hr:Hillary Rodham Clinton
io:Hillary Clinton
id:Hillary Clinton
is:Hillary Clinton
it:Hillary Clinton
he:הילרי רודהם קלינטון
jv:Hillary Clinton
ka:ჰილარი კლინტონი
kk:Хиллари Клинтон
sw:Hillary Rodham Clinton
ku:Hillary Clinton
la:Hilaria Clinton
lv:Hilarija Klintone
lb:Hillary Clinton
lt:Hillary Clinton
hu:Hillary Clinton
mk:Хилари Клинтон
ml:ഹിലരി ക്ലിന്റൺ
mr:हिलरी क्लिंटन
arz:هيلارى كلينتون
ms:Hillary Rodham Clinton
mn:Хиллари Клинтон
my:ဟီလာရီ ရော်ဒမ် ကလင်တန်
nl:Hillary Clinton
ja:ヒラリー・クリントン
no:Hillary Clinton
nn:Hillary Clinton
oc:Hillary Rodham Clinton
pnb:ہلری رودہم کلنٹن
ps:هيلري کلنټن
pl:Hillary Rodham Clinton
pt:Hillary Clinton
ksh:Hillary Clinton
ro:Hillary Rodham Clinton
qu:Hillary Clinton
ru:Клинтон, Хиллари
sq:Hillary Clinton
scn:Hillary Clinton
simple:Hillary Rodham Clinton
sk:Hillary Rodhamová-Clintonová
sl:Hillary Clinton
so:Hillary Clinton
sr:Хилари Клинтон
sh:Hillary Clinton
fi:Hillary Clinton
sv:Hillary Clinton
tl:Hillary Clinton
ta:இலரி கிளின்டன்
tt:Һиллари Клинтон
te:హిల్లరీ క్లింటన్
th:ฮิลลารี คลินตัน
tr:Hillary Clinton
uk:Гілларі Клінтон
ug:ھىلاري كلىنتون
vi:Hillary Clinton
war:Hillary Rodham Clinton
wuu:希拉里·克林顿
yi:הילערי ראדהעם קלינטאן
yo:Hillary Rodham Clinton
zh-yue:希拉莉
bat-smg:Hilarė Klėntuon
zh:希拉里·罗德姆·克林顿

Article source: http://article.wn.com/view/2012/01/27/Hillary_Clinton_weighs_retirement_from_politics/

No Hillary Clinton For Vice President 2012: Secretary Of State To Quit Politics [VIDEO]

Like us on Facebook

For months now, rumors have been swirling that the Secretary of State might be switching places with Joe Biden and running as President Obama’s new running mate for his 2012 re-election campaign.

Her high approval ratings–she was recently voted Gallup’s Most Admired Woman of 2011–have helped stoke the fires of those rumors. For those who supported her 2008 presidential run, it seemed Clinton’s time had come.

But then the political powerhouse made a surprising and, for some, devastating announcement: she will not continue as Secretary of State or as Vice President, if and when Obama is re-elected. In fact, she may not be returning to politics at all.

“I have made it clear that I will certainly stay on until the president nominated someone, and that transition can occur,” she said.

“But I think after 20 years… of being on the high wire of American politics and all the challenges that come with that, it would be probably a good idea to just find out just how tired I am,” she told the audience.

‘I have no idea what it will be.’

Clinton noted that her time away could be shorter than she thinks. After all, “everyone says that [they're quitting] when they leave these jobs.”

For the time being, however, Hillary Clinton is focused on what may be her final months on Capitol Hill.

“I think from my perspective, I will just work as hard as I can until the last minute that I have the honor of being Secretary,” she said.

“I’ll certainly do everything, no matter what I do, which I have no idea what it will be, to support all of you [in the State Department].”

‘I didn’t watch any of those debates.’

Clinton also voiced her support for Vice President Joe Biden, who she claims does an “excellent” job in the White House. She ended her speech by reflecting on her decision to step down, which she said was unusual and slightly uncomfortable for her.

“It’s a little odd for me to be totally out of an election season, since as Secretary of State I cannot participate,” she finished, to some laughter from the crowd.

“But you know, I didn’t watch any of those debates.” The audience erupted into applause.

 Below, watch Hillary Clinton’s startling announcement at the State Department Town Hall meeting:

To report problems or to leave feedback about this article, e-mail:
To contact the editor, e-mail:

Article source: http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/288814/20120127/hillary-clinton-vice-president-2012-secretary-state.htm

What Will Hillary Clinton Do After Leaving the State Department?

Rumors of Clinton’s going to the bank first circulated this summer, when Christine Lagarde took over the International Monetary Fund from the disgraced Dominique Strauss-Kahn. Traditionally, a European and an American have headed the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, so if France gets the IMF, the U.S. is under pressure to put forward a candidate powerful enough to quiet objections from Brazil, India, and other countries that want a shot. Clinton, with her experience in the White House and Congress, and cabinet, would be a strong contender, and her longstanding interest in development work would make it an attractive position.

Article source: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/01/28/what-will-hillary-clinton-do-after-leaving-the-state-department.html

Hillary Clinton ‘ready for a rest’

“I have made it clear that I will certainly stay on until the President nominates someone and that transition can occur” if Barack Obama wins re-election, she told a town hall meeting. “But I think after 20 years, and it will be 20 years, of being on the high wire of American politics and all of the challenges that come with that, it would be probably a good idea to just find out how tired I am.”

AP

Article source: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/hillary-clinton-ready-for-a-rest-6295944.html

Hillary Clinton done with political ‘high wire’

Post Recommended

Washington Post reporters or editors recommend this comment or reader post.

Article source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/hillary-clinton-done-with-political-high-wire/2012/01/27/gIQAfkkHVQ_video.html

Hillary Clinton to visit Europe next week

The State Department said on Friday that Clinton will go to Munich on February 3 to participate in the annual Munich Security Conference and meet with various other foreign ministers and senior officials who are attending.

Article source: http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2012/01/27/hillary_clinton_to_visit_europe_next_week/

Hillary Clinton puts a foot out the door

(CBS News) 

Two decades as one of the most recognizable faces of the Democratic Party may have finally caught up to Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton.

“It would be a — probably a good idea to just find out how tired I am,” she told a gathering of State Department employees Thursday. The remark drew laughter.

She also claims political fatigue has kept her from watching any of the Republican presidential debates.

Still, she says she’s committed to her current position.

“I have made it clear,” she said, “that I will certainly stay on until the president nominates someone and that transition can occur.”

But speculation that Clinton and Vice President Joe Biden might swap jobs continues to swirl, albeit with minimal sourcing.

Clinton: I want to step off political “high-wire”

That’s not impossible, observes Bill Clinton’s former labor secretary, Robert Reich, pointing out, “It would be good for the president, good for the party, more importantly, good for the country.”

Clinton and Biden both have rejected the idea. She said previously she has “absolutely no interest and no reason to do anything other than dismissing these stories and moving on.”

“Biden has said, “Hillary likes her job where she is. I like my job where I am”

And Clinton’s close friends call it highly unlikely. One, Lanny Davis, says, “I’ve known her for 40 years. When she says something, she means it. She’s had a great time as secretary. I know she wants to be with (daughter) Chelsea and President Clinton and relax awhile. I want her to be happy.”

But, always the clever politician — following her remarks about being tired — the secretary gave us just enough to keep on guessing, saying, “Everyone always says that (that they want to rest) when they leave these jobs.”

A recent Bloomberg poll shows nearly two-thirds of Americans have a favorable view of Mrs. Clinton.

Still, she has said in numerous interviews that she will not serve a second term as secretary of state, and won’t run for president in 2016.

To see Whit Johnson’s report, click on the video in the player above.

CBS News chief Washington correspondent and “Face the Nation” host Bob Schieffer says the president would only ask Hillary Clinton to be his running mate instead of Joe Biden if Mr. Obama felt he absolutely had to to win:

Article source: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505267_162-57367257/hillary-clinton-puts-a-foot-out-the-door/

Hillary Clinton eyes end to time on the political ‘high wire’

After 20 long years in the public eye, Hillary Rodham Clinton can see the finish line.

Sure, there likely will be talk all year about her running with President Obama as his running mate. And no matter who wins the presidency this fall, there’s always 2016 to think about.

But the secretary of state said Thursday that after decades of “being on the high wire of American politics,” it’s about time for some R R.

“It would be probably a good idea to just find out how tired I am,” she joked. Then she teased: “Everyone always says that when they leave these jobs.”

Clinton, during an event with State Department employees, had been asked, “What could we do to persuade you to run for vice president?” Clinton said she has enjoyed her time as the nation’s top diplomat and would continue to serve only as long as it takes for a replacement to be selected and confirmed after the election.

The reflective moment came precisely 20 years to the day after Clinton made one of her earliest and most high-profile public appearances — sitting with her husband, then a presidential candidate dogged by allegations of infidelity, for an interview on “60 Minutes” that aired after the Super Bowl.

A year later, she was the first lady. Before the end of her husband’s second term, she was in the U.S. Senate representing New York. And after a marathon Democratic primary fight with Obama in 2008, she was a surprise pick to serve in his Cabinet.

She conceded Thursday that it was a bit odd for her “to be totally out of an election season” now, since she is barred from political activity.

“You know, I didn’t watch any of those debates,” she said.

Even as she eyes the finish line, she spoke of the importance of finishing strong.

“The election is going to, I’m sure, suck up a lot of the attention from following areas that we think are so important,” she said. “But the good news is, you know, maybe we can even get more done if they’re not paying attention.”

Article source: http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-hillary-clinton-future-20120127,0,7092990.story

Hillary Clinton dodging political ‘high wire’

By MATTHEW LEE

Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) – Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton says she wants to step off the “high wire of American politics” after two decades and is again tamping down speculation that she might stay in government if President Barack Obama wins a second term.

Clinton told State Department employees on Thursday that she is ready for a rest and is paying no attention to the Republican presidential candidate debates. She said she wants to find out just how tired she is after working flat out as first lady, senator, aspiring presidential candidate and finally the top U.S. diplomat.

“I have made it clear that I will certainly stay on until the president nominates someone and that transition can occur” if Obama wins re-election, she told a town hall meeting. “But I think after 20 years, and it will be 20 years, of being on the high wire of American politics and all of the challenges that come with that, it would be probably a good idea to just find out how tired I am.”

But, she appeared to leave the door open for a possible eventual return, adding to laughter from the crowd that “everyone always says that when they leave these jobs.”

As secretary of state, Clinton is barred from partisan politics and she acknowledged that it is unusual not to be participating in this election season. But, she said she is enjoying being away from the fray and hasn’t watched any of the GOP debates.

“It is a little odd for me to be totally out of an election season,” she said. “But, you know, I didn’t watch any of those debates.”

Clinton said she expected the campaign for November’s election to “suck up a lot of the attention” normally devoted to foreign policy issues but she joked that that might actually help the State Department.

“The good news is maybe we can even get more done if they are not paying attention, so just factor that in.”

Copyright 2012 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Article source: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/46150322

Hillary Clinton dodging political ‘high wire’

Originally published: January 26, 2012 1:48 PM
Updated: January 27, 2012 5:41 AM

By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton speaks with

Photo credit: AP | Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton speaks with President Barack Obama after the State of the Union address on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C. (Jan. 24, 2012)

Videos


Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton says that
Hillary Clinton done with political “high wire”

Galleries


Hillary Rodham Clinton addresses the Presidential Advisory Committee
Hillary Clinton through the years


Bill and Hillary Clinton wedding day, October 11,
Clintons through the years

WASHINGTON – Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton says she wants to step off the “high wire of American politics” after two decades and is again tamping down speculation that she might stay in government if President Barack Obama wins a second term.

Clinton told State Department employees on Thursday that she is ready for a rest and is paying no attention to the Republican presidential candidate debates. She said she wants to find out just how tired she is after working flat out as first lady, senator, aspiring presidential candidate and finally the top U.S. diplomat.

“I have made it clear that I will certainly stay on until the president nominates someone and that transition can occur” if Obama wins re-election, she told a town hall meeting. “But I think after 20 years, and it will be 20 years, of being on the high wire of American politics and all of the challenges that come with that, it would be probably a good idea to just find out how tired I am.”

But, she appeared to leave the door open for a possible eventual return, adding to laughter from the crowd that “everyone always says that when they leave these jobs.”

As secretary of state, Clinton is barred from partisan politics and she acknowledged that it is unusual not to be participating in this election season. But, she said she is enjoying being away from the fray and hasn’t watched any of the GOP debates.

“It is a little odd for me to be totally out of an election season,” she said. “But, you know, I didn’t watch any of those debates.”

Clinton said she expected the campaign for November’s election to “suck up a lot of the attention” normally devoted to foreign policy issues but she joked that that might actually help the State Department.

“The good news is maybe we can even get more done if they are not paying attention, so just factor that in.”

Article source: http://www.newsday.com/news/nation/hillary-clinton-dodging-political-high-wire-1.3481830

Clinton says genocide recognition opens “dangerous door”

Clinton says genocide recognition opens dangerous door

PanARMENIAN.Net – U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Thursday, Jan 26, said the recognition of the Armenian Genocide by the U.S. “opens a door that is a very dangerous one to go through.”

This is the same Hillary Clinton who, four years ago, pledged that she would recognize the Genocide as President of the United States, Asbarez reports.

Responding to a question from a participant of a Town Hall Meeting on Thursday, who asked why the U.S. does not recognize the Genocide, Clinton characterized the Armenian Genocide as an historical issue and not a political one.

“I think it’s fair to say that this has always been viewed, and I think properly so, as a matter of historical debate and conclusions rather than political. And I think that is the right posture for the United States Government to be in, because whatever the terrible event might be or the high emotions that it represents, to try to use government power to resolve historical issues, I think, opens a door that is a very dangerous one to go through. So the issue is a very emotional one; I recognize that and I have great sympathy for those who are just so incredibly passionate about it,” Clinton told the audience.

“But I think the free market of ideas, the academic community, the open architecture of communication that is even greater now than it was in the past, are the proper fora for this kind of engagement, and that’s where I hope it is worked out. And eventually, people will have their own conclusions, which needs to be respected, but we need to encourage anyone on any side of any contentious historical debate to get out into the marketplace of ideas. Muster your evidence, put forth your arguments, and be willing to engage, and that’s what I think should happen on that too,” added Clinton who received a round of applause from the audience.

She also took time to respond to a question from the same person on Monday’s passage of the French Senate resolution criminalizing the denial of the Armenian Genocide.

“…One of our great strengths is we do not criminalize speech. People can say nearly anything they choose, and they do, in our country. And so other countries, including close friends and allies like France, have different standards, different histories, but we are, I hope, never going to go down that path to criminalize speech,” explained the Secretary of State, who seems to have forgotten that there are succinct laws against hate speech in the US, under which people can be prosecuted.

Article source: http://www.panarmenian.net/eng/news/90118/Clinton_says_genocide_recognition_opens_dangerous_door

Hillary Clinton to Step Down as Secretary of State

Hillary Clinton

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton has had enough of the political game.  The Secretary of State, Former United States Senator, Former First Lady, Former Presidential Candidate says she has enough of politics and wants to relax for a while .

She told a meeting of State Department employees,

“I have made it clear that I will certainly stay on until the president nominates someone and that transition can occur. But I think after 20 years, and it will be 20 years, of being on the high wire of American politics and all of the challenges that come with that, it would be probably a good idea to just find out how tired I am.”

She left the door open that she may get back into the fray by saying,

“everyone always says that when they leave these jobs.”

As the Secretary of State Clinton cannot engage in any activity that even resembles partisan politics.  She said she hasn’t even paid attention to or watched any of the Republican Presidential debates.

Clinton said,

“It is a little odd for me to be totally out of an election season. But, you know, I didn’t watch any of those debates.”

Clinton fully expects that with such a heated election cycle coming up that international affairs will probably be on the back burner of the President and those in government.

She then joked,

“The good news is maybe we can even get more done if they are not paying attention, so just factor that in.”

How do you think Hillary Clinton performed as Secretary of State?


jQuery(‘.nrelate_none’).removeClass(‘nrelate_none’);

Article source: http://www.inquisitr.com/186988/hillary-clinton-to-step-down-as-secretary-of-state/

US Hillary Clinton says tired of publicity

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told her State Department employees that she was ready to be out of the public eye, Politico newspaper reported.
“I think after 20 years – and it will be 20 years – of being on the high wire of American politics and all of the challenges that come with that, it would be probably a good idea to just find out how tired I am,” she was quoted as saying. Clinton, who in the past ran in senatorial and presidential elections, said this time she finds it “a little odd to be totally out of an election season.” The Democratic Party politician also said she did not even watch any of the Republican presidential hopefuls’ debates this year. She stated earlier that she would not serve in President Barack Obama’s second term, if he is reelected, and wants to focus on projects dealing with women and children rights protection.

Article source: http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-news-newspaper-daily-english-online/international/27-Jan-2012/us-hillary-clinton-says-tired-of-publicity

Madeleine Albright Reflects On Women’s Rights, Diplomacy In Wellesley Return

Madeleine Albright speaks with students at Wellesley College. (Jessica Alpert/WBUR)

Madeleine Albright speaks with students at Wellesley College. (Jessica Alpert/WBUR)

The political science majors at Wellesley College this week welcomed one of their most famous alumnae to campus: Madeleine Albright, class of 1959.

After becoming secretary of state, Hillary Clinton wrote to friends at Wellesley College to thank them. Click to enlarge. (Courtesy: Wellesley College)

After becoming secretary of state, Hillary Clinton wrote to friends at Wellesley College to thank them. Click to enlarge. (Courtesy: Wellesley College)

Albright became the country’s first female secretary of state in 1997. In doing so, Albright broke a glass ceiling that Wellesley political science professor Craig Murhpy described as  made of “gorilla glass.” But Albright was able to break through it in part because of networks of people who supported her.

As he introduced the honored guest, he smiled:  “Secretary Albright, I want to introduce you to one of those networks: the political science majors of Wellesley College.”

This is what happens if you go to Wellesley and major in Poli Sci, Albright wrote after becoming secretary of state. Click to enlarge. (Courtesy: Wellesley College)

“This is what happens if you go to Wellesley and major in Poli Sci,” Albright wrote after becoming secretary of state. Click to enlarge. (Courtesy: Wellesley College)

Albright arrived to talk foreign policy with student fellows at the Madeleine K. Albright Institute for Global Affairs, which she helped establish at Wellesley. She told the political science majors that they were in pretty rare company — given that of the three women who have served as secretary of state, two were both Wellesley graduates. Albright was the first. Hillary Clinton was the second.

As she spoke to students, Albright recalled a favorite story: “My youngest granddaughter, when she turned seven a couple of years ago said, ‘so what’s the big deal about Grandma Maddie being Secretary of State? Only girls are secretary of state.’ In her lifetime, that would be true.”

We had a chance to sit down with Albright to talk about her work as secretary of state, and began by discussing womens’ rights,  and how she tried to put them at the center of U.S. foreign policy.

Guest:

More:

Article source: http://radioboston.wbur.org/2012/01/26/madeleine-albright-reflects-on-womens-rights-diplomacy-in-wellesley-return/

Clinton Calls Genocide Recognition a ‘Dangerous Door’

Clinton at the 2010 QDDR town hall

BY ARA KHACHATOURIAN

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Thursday said the recognition of the Armenian Genocide by the US “opens a door that is a very dangerous one to go through.” This is the same Hillary Clinton who, four years ago, pledged that she would recognize the Genocide as President of the United States.

Responding to a question from a participant of a Town Hall Meeting on Thursday, who asked why the US does not recognize the Genocide, Clinton characterized the Armenian Genocide as an historical issue and not a political one.

“I think it’s fair to say that this has always been viewed, and I think properly so, as a matter of historical debate and conclusions rather than political. And I think that is the right posture for the United States Government to be in, because whatever the terrible event might be or the high emotions that it represents, to try to use government power to resolve historical issues, I think, opens a door that is a very dangerous one to go through. So the issue is a very emotional one; I recognize that and I have great sympathy for those who are just so incredibly passionate about it,” Clinton told the audience.

“But I think the free market of ideas, the academic community, the open architecture of communication that is even greater now than it was in the past, are the proper fora for this kind of engagement, and that’s where I hope it is worked out. And eventually, people will have their own conclusions, which needs to be respected, but we need to encourage anyone on any side of any contentious historical debate to get out into the marketplace of ideas. Muster your evidence, put forth your arguments, and be willing to engage, and that’s what I think should happen on that too,” added Clinton who received a round of applause from the audience.

She also took time to respond to a question from the same person on Monday’s passage of the French Senate resolution criminalizing the denial of the Armenian Genocide.

“…One of our great strengths is we do not criminalize speech. People can say nearly anything they choose, and they do, in our country. And so other countries, including close friends and allies like France, have different standards, different histories, but we are, I hope, never going to go down that path to criminalize speech,” explained the Secretary of State, who seems to have forgotten that there are succinct laws against hate speech in the US, under which people can be prosecuted.

Clinton’s letter in 2008 (click to enlarge)

Exactly four years ago this week, then Sen. Clinton had this to say: “I believe the horrible events perpetrated by the Ottoman Empire against Armenians constitute a clear case of genocide. I have twice written to President Bush calling on him to refer to the Armenian Genocide in his annual commemorative statement and, as President, I will recognize the Armenian Genocide. Our common morality and our nation’s credibility as a voice for human rights challenge us to ensure that the Armenian Genocide be recognized and remembered by the Congress and the President of the United States.”

This is, by far, one of the more patronizing statements coming out of the Secretary of State, and the Obama Administration. Her statement today calls into question whether the US has ceased to be “a voice for human rights” or has the definition of that principle changed since Barack Obama took office three years ago. Or, how did the Armenian Genocide, about which she wrote to President Bush become “a dangerous door” in a matter of four years?

Her statements indicate that the US government is beholden to a foreign government—Turkey—in its policy making and is really not an advocate for human rights worldwide but a willing participant in a systematic and calculated campaign of lies that continues to stain Turkey as a citizen of the civilized world.

“The Obama-Biden Administration – with Secretary Clinton’s latest remarks – continues to dig itself deeper and deeper into a hole of complicity in Turkey’s genocide denial,” said Aram Hamparian, Executive Director of the Armenian National Committee of America.

“It’s a sad spectacle to see Secretary Clinton hiding behind cynical appeals to scholars – the overwhelming majority of whom have already spoken forcefully against Turkey’s denials of the Armenian Genocide – to divert attention from either President Obama’s, Vice President Biden’s or her own personal promises to properly recognize this crime and, more broadly, to divert attention from America’s failure to meet her moral obligation to stand up against a foreign government’s veto of our defense of human rights,” continued Hamparian.

“The Secretary’s unfounded and offensive references to ‘historical debate’ in regards to the Armenian Genocide only embolden the Turkish Government – which, just today, again took steps toward deporting Armenians,” concluded Hamparian.

The Obama Administration’s latest ploy to massage this ridiculous message is laughable at best and devoid of any credibility. Its defense of Turkish interests at any cost, goes counter to the international community’s conventional wisdom and makes US policymakers seem backward in their approach to human rights issues.

This latest statement by Clinton should not elicit anger, but rather it should further call into question this administration’s ability to effectively lead.

Article source: http://asbarez.com/100552/clinton-calls-genocide-recognition-a-%E2%80%98dangerous-door%E2%80%99/

Hillary Clinton tells Iraq not to ‘blow this opportunity’ at prosperity by …

 
Jan 26, 2012 – 1:45 PM ET

AFP/Getty Images/Reuters

AFP/Getty Images/Reuters

Hillary Clinton, left, has told Nouri al-Maliki, right, not to ‘blow this opportunity’ in Iraq.

The United States has warned Iraq not to “blow this opportunity” to become a prosperous, unified nation, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said on Thursday, saying it must start to act like a democracy and embrace compromise.

Iraq has suffered its worst political crisis in a year with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki’s move to arrest Vice President Tareq al-Hashemi last month, which has raised fears of renewed sectarian violence following the U.S. troop withdrawal.

Speaking in a question-and-answer session with State Department employees, Clinton said U.S. ambassador to Iraq James Jeffrey has taken the lead in urging Iraqi politicians including Maliki, a Shi’ite, to settle their differences peacefully.

Related

“He is constantly … reaching out, meeting with, cajoling, pushing the players, starting with Prime Minister Maliki, not to blow this opportunity,” she said. “This is an opportunity to have a unified Iraq and the only way to do that is by compromising.”

Hashemi, a Sunni, was accused of running death squads. He has denied the charges and sought refuge in Iraq’s semi-autonomous Kurdish region, where he is unlikely to be arrested.

The current political crisis threatens to break up the country’s fragile coalition government, raising fears it could slip back into the sectarian carnage that broke out following the 2003 U.S. invasion.

Clinton said despite the downfall of Saddam Hussein, whose Sunni-dominated regime oppressed Iraq’s Shi’ite majority, Iraqis’ “minds are not yet fully open to the potential for what this new opportunity can mean to them.”

She said the United States would do whatever it could to help “but at the end of the day, Iraq is now a democracy but they need to act like one and that requires compromise.”

© 2012 Thomson Reuters

Posted in: News, U.S., World 
Tags: , ,

  • Reblogged this on rummanhz.

  • [...] on a house of two policemen and their families in central Iraq, police and hospital officials said.Hillary Clinton tells Iraq not to ‘blow this opportunity’ at prosperity by …National PostIraqi Shiite leader appeals for calm in Turkey tiesAFPBomb attacks in Musayyib and [...]

  • [...] site: Hillary Clinton tells Iraq not to ‘blow this opportunity’ at prosperity by … #821… [...]

  • [...] National Post [...]

blog comments powered by Disqus

Article source: http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/01/26/hillary-clinton-tells-iraq-not-to-blow-this-opportunity-at-prosperity-by-embracing-sectarian-violence/

Hillary Clinton sounds ready to step away from politics

Published: January 26, 2012 1:48 PM

By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton speaks with

Photo credit: AP | Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton speaks with President Barack Obama after the State of the Union address on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C. (Jan. 24, 2012)

Galleries


Hillary Rodham Clinton addresses the Presidential Advisory Committee
Hillary Clinton through the years


Bill and Hillary Clinton wedding day, October 11,
Clintons through the years

WASHINGTON – Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton says she wants to step off the “high wire of American politics” after two decades and is again tamping down speculation that she might stay in government if President Barack Obama wins a second term.

Clinton told State Department employees on Thursday that she is ready for a rest and is paying no attention to the Republican presidential candidate debates. She said she wants to find out just how tired she is after working flat out as first lady, senator, aspiring presidential candidate and finally the top U.S. diplomat.

“I have made it clear that I will certainly stay on until the president nominates someone and that transition can occur” if Obama wins re-election, she told a town hall meeting. “But I think after 20 years, and it will be 20 years, of being on the high wire of American politics and all of the challenges that come with that, it would be probably a good idea to just find out how tired I am.”

But, she appeared to leave the door open for a possible eventual return, adding to laughter from the crowd that “everyone always says that when they leave these jobs.”

As secretary of state, Clinton is barred from partisan politics and she acknowledged that it is unusual not to be participating in this election season. But, she said she is enjoying being away from the fray and has not watched any of the Republican debates.

“It is a little odd for me to be totally out of an election season,” she said. “But, you know, I didn’t watch any of those debates.”

Clinton said she expected the campaign for November’s election to “suck up a lot of the attention” normally devoted to foreign policy issues but she joked that that might actually help the State Department.

“The good news is maybe we can even get more done if they are not paying attention, so just factor that in.”

Article source: http://www.newsday.com/news/nation/hillary-clinton-sounds-ready-to-step-away-from-politics-1.3481830

Ice-T: Hillary Clinton A ‘G,’ Will Be First Woman President

PARK CITY, Utah — Regardless of the outcome of the presidential primaries, Ice-T already has his mind made up about the forthcoming election.

The rapper and actor, who is making his directorial debut at the Sundance Film Festival with the documentary “Something From Nothing: The Art of Rap,” says he expects President Barack Obama to be re-elected. After that, he predicts Hillary Clinton will be the next president.

The 53-year-old entertainer said, “She did the Secretary of State job, she was a G, she held it down, she didn’t cry,” referring to the former New York Senator with the hip-hop term for gangster (a positive thing).

“Obama will support her,” he said, “and she’ll be the first woman president.”

Ice-T’s documentary premiered at the Sundance festival, which continues through Sunday in Park City, Utah.

“;
var coords = [-5, -72];
// display fb-bubble
FloatingPrompt.embed(this, html, undefined, ‘top’, {fp_intersects:1, timeout_remove:2000,ignore_arrow: true, width:236, add_xy:coords, class_name: ‘clear-overlay’});
});

Article source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/26/ice-t-hillary-clinton-a-g-first-woman-president_n_1234023.html

Hillary Clinton says she’s done with ‘high wire of American politics’

Hillary Clinton talks to President Obama ahead of the State of the Union on Jan. 24, 2012. (Evan Vucci/AP)

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told State Department employees Thursday that she will not stay on in the job if President Obama wins re-election, saying that she is ready to step off “the high wire of American politics,” according to the AP.

A State Department official confirmed Clinton’s comment, writing to Yahoo News: “Yes, she did [say that]. She said she would stay on until Obama nominates another Secretary of State.”

Clinton was answering a question at a State Department “Town Hall” event Thursday morning when she made the statement. The event was ostensibly to mark the anniversary of the Department’s issuing of its first “Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review” (QDDR)–a major agency vision/planning document that Clinton sees as a key legacy of her tenure as Obama’s top diplomat. But as often happens with Clinton–(see the dozens of reports noting the return of her famous headband when she attended Obama’s State of the Union address Tuesday night)–her own celebrity news instantly eclipsed the subject at hand.

“Clinton tells State employees she’s not staying on if Obama re-elected but will work until last minute,” CNN’s Elise Labott first posted on Twitter.

Clinton has previously said in numerous interviews that she would serve only one term as Obama’s Secretary of State. She has said that she loves the job but has found the constant international travel physically grueling, and has longed to work on promoting women’s and children’s development, writing and travel, from private life.

“There’s so many things I’m interested in, I mean, really going back to private life and spending time reading, and writing, and maybe teaching, doing some personal travel, not the kind of travel where you bring along a couple of hundred people with you,” Clinton elaborated to Tavis Smiley last year.

But her soaring popularity numbers and global celebrity status have fueled constant speculation on her future political plans. She and the White House have vehemently denied a persistent rumor that she might be nominated to run as Obama’s vice president at the DNC this fall. She has also previously denied that she will pursue another run at the presidency in 2016 (though not all of her aides are convinced).

Other popular Yahoo! News stories:

Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood’s son among U.S. NGO officials barred from leaving Egypt
UN envoy Susan Rice shores up interest group support, in move seen advancing Secretary State bid
James Miller tapped for top Pentagon policy job

Want more of our best national security stories? Visit The Envoy or connect with us on Facebook and on Twitter.

Want more of our best political stories? Visit The Ticket or connect with us on Facebook, follow us on Twitter, or add us on Tumblr.

Article source: http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/envoy/hillary-clinton-says-she-done-high-wire-american-175721782.html

She The People

Little Rock, Ark. — Hillary Clinton wore a headband Tuesday night at the State of the Union address: Was this some kind of signal that she’s headed to a presidential ticket near you?

Before everyone starts yelling about how shallow and sexist it is to even discuss a female cabinet member’s fashion choice, let’s be real for a second. Social media went bonkers about it. Women in particularly noticed that Hillary, who has let her hair grow long in recent months, had returned to the look she had when she first appeared on the national stage in 1991. Some tweeted about it. Others emailed me wondering if it was a secret code to Hillary’s political future. (A future as the first female vice-
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton greets retiring Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, D-Ariz., before President Barack Obama’s State of the Union address.
(Pablo Martinez Monsivais – AP)
president? A 2016 White House run? Retirement?)

Or was it just a look that said that as secretary of state, she can finally wear her hair any way she wants?

The Hillary headband took a lot of heat in the 1990s as her critics railed her for continually changing her image, and especially her hair styles. In Barbara Olsen’s book, “Hell to Pay: The Unfolding Story of Hillary Rodham Clinton,” the late Olsen, who was no Clinton fan, wrote: “She took an old hippie headband and gave it to the hosts of The Regis and Kathie Lee Show, saying, ‘I don’t need them anymore and thought you might want it for Halloween.’ ”

There was nothing hippie about Hillary’s headband Tuesday night. It was sleek, black and bedazzling. Disclosure: I love headbands and I want that headband.

Pierce Mattie, CEO of a beauty fashion PR firm in New York, says that headbands are currently trendy.

“They were a big hit at the Golden Globes and we expect to see them on the runways at New York’s fashion week next month,” he said. “Hillary has always favored headbands, so I’m sure she’s thrilled they’re back. She may want to keep her long hair, and headbands provide easy polish when her hectic schedule doesn’t allow time for intricate styling. She may be growing out her bangs for a new hairdo, guess we’ll see in about eight weeks.”

Hillary may have had no clue that her headband would generate such speculation.

But for fans of the Clintons, the headband was a visual cue, a reminder of an electric time in politics, when Bill and Hillary were building a bridge to the 21st century.

It was hard to see it and not start singing “Don’t Stop Thinking About Tomorrow.” Hillary’s shout-out to history reminded many Democrats of a time when the country elected its first Baby Boomer president and embarked on eight years of peace and prosperity.

On Wednesday, Hillary didn’t rock the headband when she addressed Brazilian youth ambassadors at an event in Washington. She preferred a ponytail.

In true Hillary form, she keeps her supporters guessing what’s next. Even if it is – for now – just about her hair.

Suzi Parker is an Arkansas-based political and cultural journalist and author of “Sex in the South: Unbuckling the Bible Belt.” Follow her on Twitter at @SuziParker

Article source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/she-the-people/post/stop-the-tresses-hillarys-headband-is-back/2012/01/25/gIQAHTiKRQ_blog.html

She The People

Little Rock, Ark. — Hillary Clinton wore a headband Tuesday night at the State of the Union address: Was this some kind of signal that she’s headed to a presidential ticket near you?

Before everyone starts yelling about how shallow and sexist it is to even discuss a female cabinet member’s fashion choice, let’s be real for a second. Social media went bonkers about it. Women in particularly noticed that Hillary, who has let her hair grow long in recent months, had returned to the look she had when she first appeared on the national stage in 1991. Some tweeted about it. Others emailed me wondering if it was a secret code to Hillary’s political future. (A future as the first female vice-
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton greets retiring Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, D-Ariz., before President Barack Obama’s State of the Union address.
(Pablo Martinez Monsivais – AP)
president? A 2016 White House run? Retirement?)

Or was it just a look that said that as secretary of state, she can finally wear her hair any way she wants?

The Hillary headband took a lot of heat in the 1990s as her critics railed her for continually changing her image, and especially her hair styles. In Barbara Olsen’s book, “Hell to Pay: The Unfolding Story of Hillary Rodham Clinton,” the late Olsen, who was no Clinton fan, wrote: “She took an old hippie headband and gave it to the hosts of The Regis and Kathie Lee Show, saying, ‘I don’t need them anymore and thought you might want it for Halloween.’ ”

There was nothing hippie about Hillary’s headband Tuesday night. It was sleek, black and bedazzling. Disclosure: I love headbands and I want that headband.

Pierce Mattie, CEO of a beauty fashion PR firm in New York, says that headbands are currently trendy.

“They were a big hit at the Golden Globes and we expect to see them on the runways at New York’s fashion week next month,” he said. “Hillary has always favored headbands, so I’m sure she’s thrilled they’re back. She may want to keep her long hair, and headbands provide easy polish when her hectic schedule doesn’t allow time for intricate styling. She may be growing out her bangs for a new hairdo, guess we’ll see in about eight weeks.”

Hillary may have had no clue that her headband would generate such speculation.

But for fans of the Clintons, the headband was a visual cue, a reminder of an electric time in politics, when Bill and Hillary were building a bridge to the 21st century.

It was hard to see it and not start singing “Don’t Stop Thinking About Tomorrow.” Hillary’s shout-out to history reminded many Democrats of a time when the country elected its first Baby Boomer president and embarked on eight years of peace and prosperity.

On Wednesday, Hillary didn’t rock the headband when she addressed Brazilian youth ambassadors at an event in Washington. She preferred a ponytail.

In true Hillary form, she keeps her supporters guessing what’s next. Even if it is – for now – just about her hair.

Suzi Parker is an Arkansas-based political and cultural journalist and author of “Sex in the South: Unbuckling the Bible Belt.” Follow her on Twitter at @SuziParker

Article source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/she-the-people/post/stop-the-tresses-hillarys-headband-is-back/2012/01/25/gIQAHTiKRQ_blog.html

Gaffes in Succession: Why Hillary Should Not Be Vice President

We need to keep the Clintons out of the White House. I realize that this statement may sound like blasphemy to my fellow Democrats, but rest assured I am not hating on Bill’s or Hillary’s records.

I say this because several recent editorials, most notably by The New York Times columnist Bill Keller, have argued for a switch on the Obama 2012 ticket: Hillary Clinton as Obama’s running mate, and Joe Biden replacing her as Secretary of State.

On the surface, this sounds like a good idea. Clinton has been the most admired woman in America for 10 years running, according to Gallup, an objective poll that measures public opinion, beating out Michelle Obama and even Oprah. Clinton’s current approval ratings stand at 64 percent, the highest of any political figure in the country. She was a realistic possibility for the presidential nomination in 2008, and many of her supporters hope that a position as vice-president would make her the heir apparent for the 2016 nomination.

Joe Biden seems to be a natural choice for Secretary of State. He spent years as chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, during which he voted in favor of American intervention in the former Yugoslavia, Afghanistan and Iraq. He also met with over 150 foreign leaders from 60 countries, according to the Wall Street Journal, and has continued his involvement in foreign affairs as one of the president’s key advisers. As Vice President, he visited Iraq approximately once every two months in 2009-10, and became heavily involved in negotiations with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.

Both Clinton and Biden are qualified for each others’ jobs, but qualification does not mean that they should give up their current positions.

Overall, Clinton’s tenure as Secretary of State has been quite successful. Although she has stayed out of the limelight, she has racked up an impressive log of experience in the past four years. She has overseen the withdrawal of American troops from Iraq, the escalation of tensions with Iran and the slow process of democratic reforms in Myanmar. She spoke up for the rights of homosexuals across the world and helped reestablish diplomatic relations between Turkey and Armenia, two long-feuding states.

Bill Keller and others argue that an Obama-Clinton ticket would virtually guarantee Obama’s reelection. They claim that Clinton would “reinvigorate” a Democratic base that has become disillusioned with Obama’s inability to get any legislation past House Republicans. But these editorials do not talk about what would happen after November 2012.

I do not believe that an Obama-Clinton ticket would guarantee Obama’s reelection. Bill Keller told NPR’s Neal Conan that putting Clinton on the ticket would “excite a lot of women.” The number of women that would vote for Hillary Clinton because she’s a woman is probably about equal to the number of men who would not vote for Hillary Clinton because she’s a woman. Such people are probably out there, but their numbers are so negligible that they won’t make a difference either way.

I also do not think that Obama will reinvigorate that “feeling of historic possibility,” as Keller says, that carried him in 2008, even if Clinton is on the ticket. Voters probably realize that vice presidents really don’t do much. They serve as important advisers to the president and can break ties in the Senate (but unfortunately not partisan gridlock). Having Hillary Clinton “a heartbeat away” from becoming the first female president is a rather morbid statement that insults Clinton’s dedicated base: I doubt most of Clinton’s supporters would hope for Obama’s death so that Clinton could step in as president. I believe that they would rather see her as the first elected woman president, and her closeness to the office as vice president really has no standing.

Should Hillary Clinton make the switch to Vice President? The Minaret’s Kelsey Allagood says no. | Samantha Battersby/The Minaret

If the Obama camp indeed sees the Clintons, as Bill Keller writes, as representing the “deal-cutting, calculating, schmoozing” side of American politics, then they should also see that those qualities make for a perfect Secretary of State. Joe Biden, on the other hand, is a working-class fellow from Scranton who says the word “f****ing” on live television and has been painted as a stumbling buffoon by American media. Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina said of his former colleague: “If there were no gaffes, there’d be no Joe. He’s someone you can’t help but like.”

While Biden’s blue-collar American clumsiness may win him fans at home, foreign dignitaries in scrupulously-orchestrated diplomatic meetings may not take so kindly to Secretary of State Biden. This is why it is so important that Biden remain Obama’s vice-president. On the campaign trail, Biden will serve as the often aloof Obama’s connection to working-class America. Biden will serve as a counterweight to the two most likely Republican candidates, Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich. The latter two are very personally wealthy and have claimed to pay much lower taxes than average Americans. To many voters, Romney and Gingrich represent the slick Washington insiders that no one wants in office anymore.

While Hillary Clinton is not an “empty suit,” as some Republicans have dubbed Romney, she still comes with that baggage of being a political legacy and a Washington resident.

She is not a hokey “street pol,” but an empathetic yet controlled diplomat who has yet to make an international gaffe. Biden’s slips of tongue can be endearing for a vice president, because his role is mostly behind-the-scenes. But they would not be tolerated on the international stage.

And if Hillary is tired after her traveling 237,597 miles as Secretary of State, don’t try to push her into being Obama’s heir simply because she may make a good president. Biden has developed a very successful advisory role for himself while maintaining his blue-collar liberal friendliness, and need not be catapulted into the spotlight simply because he knows his foreign policy.

Biden has thrived as Obama’s second-hand man, and will be useful on the campaign trail. Let Hillary Clinton lead as Secretary of State or as President, where she will be most effective.

Kelsey Allagood can be reached at kelsey.allagood@spartans.ut.edu.

Article source: http://theminaretonline.com/2012/01/25/article20740

Gaffes in Succession: Why Hillary Should Not Be Vice President

We need to keep the Clintons out of the White House. I realize that this statement may sound like blasphemy to my fellow Democrats, but rest assured I am not hating on Bill’s or Hillary’s records.

I say this because several recent editorials, most notably by The New York Times columnist Bill Keller, have argued for a switch on the Obama 2012 ticket: Hillary Clinton as Obama’s running mate, and Joe Biden replacing her as Secretary of State.

On the surface, this sounds like a good idea. Clinton has been the most admired woman in America for 10 years running, according to Gallup, an objective poll that measures public opinion, beating out Michelle Obama and even Oprah. Clinton’s current approval ratings stand at 64 percent, the highest of any political figure in the country. She was a realistic possibility for the presidential nomination in 2008, and many of her supporters hope that a position as vice-president would make her the heir apparent for the 2016 nomination.

Joe Biden seems to be a natural choice for Secretary of State. He spent years as chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, during which he voted in favor of American intervention in the former Yugoslavia, Afghanistan and Iraq. He also met with over 150 foreign leaders from 60 countries, according to the Wall Street Journal, and has continued his involvement in foreign affairs as one of the president’s key advisers. As Vice President, he visited Iraq approximately once every two months in 2009-10, and became heavily involved in negotiations with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.

Both Clinton and Biden are qualified for each others’ jobs, but qualification does not mean that they should give up their current positions.

Overall, Clinton’s tenure as Secretary of State has been quite successful. Although she has stayed out of the limelight, she has racked up an impressive log of experience in the past four years. She has overseen the withdrawal of American troops from Iraq, the escalation of tensions with Iran and the slow process of democratic reforms in Myanmar. She spoke up for the rights of homosexuals across the world and helped reestablish diplomatic relations between Turkey and Armenia, two long-feuding states.

Bill Keller and others argue that an Obama-Clinton ticket would virtually guarantee Obama’s reelection. They claim that Clinton would “reinvigorate” a Democratic base that has become disillusioned with Obama’s inability to get any legislation past House Republicans. But these editorials do not talk about what would happen after November 2012.

I do not believe that an Obama-Clinton ticket would guarantee Obama’s reelection. Bill Keller told NPR’s Neal Conan that putting Clinton on the ticket would “excite a lot of women.” The number of women that would vote for Hillary Clinton because she’s a woman is probably about equal to the number of men who would not vote for Hillary Clinton because she’s a woman. Such people are probably out there, but their numbers are so negligible that they won’t make a difference either way.

I also do not think that Obama will reinvigorate that “feeling of historic possibility,” as Keller says, that carried him in 2008, even if Clinton is on the ticket. Voters probably realize that vice presidents really don’t do much. They serve as important advisers to the president and can break ties in the Senate (but unfortunately not partisan gridlock). Having Hillary Clinton “a heartbeat away” from becoming the first female president is a rather morbid statement that insults Clinton’s dedicated base: I doubt most of Clinton’s supporters would hope for Obama’s death so that Clinton could step in as president. I believe that they would rather see her as the first elected woman president, and her closeness to the office as vice president really has no standing.

Should Hillary Clinton make the switch to Vice President? The Minaret’s Kelsey Allagood says no. | Samantha Battersby/The Minaret

If the Obama camp indeed sees the Clintons, as Bill Keller writes, as representing the “deal-cutting, calculating, schmoozing” side of American politics, then they should also see that those qualities make for a perfect Secretary of State. Joe Biden, on the other hand, is a working-class fellow from Scranton who says the word “f****ing” on live television and has been painted as a stumbling buffoon by American media. Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina said of his former colleague: “If there were no gaffes, there’d be no Joe. He’s someone you can’t help but like.”

While Biden’s blue-collar American clumsiness may win him fans at home, foreign dignitaries in scrupulously-orchestrated diplomatic meetings may not take so kindly to Secretary of State Biden. This is why it is so important that Biden remain Obama’s vice-president. On the campaign trail, Biden will serve as the often aloof Obama’s connection to working-class America. Biden will serve as a counterweight to the two most likely Republican candidates, Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich. The latter two are very personally wealthy and have claimed to pay much lower taxes than average Americans. To many voters, Romney and Gingrich represent the slick Washington insiders that no one wants in office anymore.

While Hillary Clinton is not an “empty suit,” as some Republicans have dubbed Romney, she still comes with that baggage of being a political legacy and a Washington resident.

She is not a hokey “street pol,” but an empathetic yet controlled diplomat who has yet to make an international gaffe. Biden’s slips of tongue can be endearing for a vice president, because his role is mostly behind-the-scenes. But they would not be tolerated on the international stage.

And if Hillary is tired after her traveling 237,597 miles as Secretary of State, don’t try to push her into being Obama’s heir simply because she may make a good president. Biden has developed a very successful advisory role for himself while maintaining his blue-collar liberal friendliness, and need not be catapulted into the spotlight simply because he knows his foreign policy.

Biden has thrived as Obama’s second-hand man, and will be useful on the campaign trail. Let Hillary Clinton lead as Secretary of State or as President, where she will be most effective.

Kelsey Allagood can be reached at kelsey.allagood@spartans.ut.edu.

Article source: http://theminaretonline.com/2012/01/25/article20740

Hillary Clinton, Nirupama Rao discuss civil nuclear cooperation, Iran, Afghanistan

Article source: http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics/nation/hillary-clinton-nirupama-rao-discuss-civil-nuclear-cooperation-iran-afghanistan/articleshow/11639310.cms

Hillary Clinton, Nirupama Rao discuss civil nuclear cooperation, Iran, Afghanistan

Article source: http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics/nation/hillary-clinton-nirupama-rao-discuss-civil-nuclear-cooperation-iran-afghanistan/articleshow/11639310.cms

State of the Union fashion: What Gabrielle Giffords, Michelle Obama and Hillary Clinton wore

All eyes were on President Obama last night for his State of the Union address, but Michelle Obama was always on the periphery — and she couldn’t be missed, standing out in a bright sapphire gown amid a sea of black.
Guests applaud first lady Michelle Obama during President Barack Obama’s State of the Union address.
(Susan Walsh – AP)

The address is not known for statement-making fashion, especially for men: Black suits and red ties or military dress were the norm, with the only colorful accessory being Sen. John Kerry’s (D-Mass.) black eye. But three women — Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, and Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.) — were widely admired for what they wore. (You can read more of our State of the Union coverage over at Post Politics.)

Obama wore Los Angeles designer Barbara Tfank’s dress, which the designer described as a “criss cross bodice cap-sleeved slim dress in silk twill” to the Hollywood Reporter. Obama’s dress was sleek, and the perfect shade of Democratic blue. It’s the third time she’s worn Tfank. Previous occasions include a floral dress for a meet-and-greet with Duchess Catherine, and an emerald green cocktail dress at a 2010 awards ceremony.

Giffords‘s choice of a cheery apricot-colored jacket made her easy to spot on a crowded House floor — and everyone was angling to take a look. Just over a year since she was shot in an assassination attempt, Giffords returned to the floor for the second time since she was gravely injured, and her courage was met by resounding applause from the entire chamber, and hugs and kisses from President Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, and Clinton. Giffords, who announced last week that she is resigning from office, matched her bright jacket with black pants and sneakers.


Retiring Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, (D-Ariz.), center, is greeted by Rep. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz. Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) stands at right.
(Saul Loeb/AP)

Clinton brought back one of her style staples — a youthful headband, one of her go-to hairstyles when she was First Lady. She wore a black pantsuit and a triple strand of pearls. Headbands made a comeback at this year’s Golden Globe Awards, but Clinton’s thin black headband was simpler than the ones worn on the red carpet.


Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton greets Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.) before the State of the Union speech.
(Bill O’Leary/The Washington Post)

More State of the Union coverage:

VIDEO: Obama’s speech in less than 60 seconds

5 Policies to watch from the SOTU

Transcript: Read Obama’s full prepared remarks

Infographic: Breaking down the speech by issue

View Photo Gallery: Tuesday’s speech was President Obama’s third State of Union address and his sixth address to Congress overall.

Article source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/arts-post/post/state-of-the-union-fashion-what-gabrielle-giffords-michelle-obama-and-hillary-clinton-wore/2012/01/25/gIQAJNfSQQ_blog.html

Yahoo! audience reacts: 63% say Obama made the case for a second term

We followed your reactions online to Tuesday’s State of the Union address by President Barack Obama. On Twitter, you were talking about the women in the room–Gabrielle Giffords was the top trending topic on Twitter at the start of the speech after her touching embrace with the president, and Hillary Clinton and the phrase “First Lady” were top terms in “#sotu”-tagged tweets.

At the end of the speech we asked the Yahoo! audience if they felt Obama had made the case for a second term: Of the more than 16,300 respondents, 63 percent said he should get another four years.

Obama search switches from singing to SOTU

In the hours before the speech, the top Obama search was “Obama sings at Apollo,” referencing the president’s recent bravo performance at the Apollo theater where he sang Al Green’s “Let’s Stay Together.”

At 9 p.m. EST, when the speech began, the top searches for the president’s name were “President Obama” and “Obama State of the Union” and “Obama speech.”

Obama more searched than GOP primary candidates

More people have searched for Obama today on Yahoo! than for all of the Republican candidates combined on the day of any recent GOP primary contest.

Yahoo! audience: Obama deserves more credit for Iraq; Bush tax cuts for wealthy should expire

Of nearly 13,000 participants in a poll of Yahoo! readers, 62 percent felt the president deserved more credit for bringing troops home from Iraq, and of 9,450 respondents, 84 percent agreed with Obama that it was time to phase out Bush-era tax cuts on the wealthiest 2 percent of Americans.


Other popular Yahoo! News stories:

In State of the Union, Obama warns of inequality
Mitch Daniels: Obama divided America
Why Bloomberg Businessweek passed on ‘bloody’ Mitt Romney cover

Want more of our best political stories? Visit The Ticket or connect with us on Facebook, follow us on Twitter, or add us on Tumblr.

Article source: http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/yahoo-audience-reacts-65-obama-made-case-second-035052036.html

Nirupama Rao meets Hillary Clinton; discusses range of bilateral issues

WASHINGTON: A wide range of bilateral and regional issues, including the importance of civil nuclear cooperation, were discussed during the first meeting of Indian Ambassador to the US Nirupama Rao with the Secretary of State Hillary Clinton here.

“They talked about maintaining the momentum in our bilateral relationship and our strategic dialogue,” State Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland told reporters.

“They also talked about the full range of bilateral issues, including the importance of our civil nuclear cooperation and our continued efforts to chart a way forward that’ll bring India the benefits of American nuclear technology,” she said.

This was Rao’s first meeting with Clinton after she took over as Indian Ambassador to the US in Washington late last year.

Rao, who has already done a lot of travel around the US and been to a lot of US universities, gave the secretary some flavour for that, the Spokesperson said.

“They talked about Afghanistan and the important role that India plays in supporting the new Silk Road Initiative, and private sector capacity building in Afghanistan,” Nuland said, adding that they also discussed about Burma.

Responding to questions, she said the two countries are still working through the legal and regulatory issues that the US has with India.

Clinton and Rao also talked about Iran and how New Delhi and Washington can work together on the issue of US and EU sanctions against Tehran, she said.

US is urging India to decrease its dependence on Iranian oil, which New Delhi insists that was very difficult to achieve.

“As we have said a number of times over the last week and a half, we have had intensive conversations with the government of India in Delhi about this legislation, and we are continuing to work with them on how we can implement it together in a phased and managed way,” Nuland said.

“I am not going to give you an up-and-down scorecard on our consultations with each of these countries as they happen, and I am not in a position to comment on stray Israeli media reports,” the spokesperson said.

Article source: http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics/nation/nirupama-rao-meets-hillary-clinton-discusses-range-of-bilateral-issues/articleshow/11636855.cms

Hillary Clinton Brings Back the Headband; Are Man Buns a Trend?

HAIR

• Will Hillary Clinton bring back headbands? [Gloss]

• Other than beards, the newest beauty trend for men is the man bun, apparently. [NYT]

• Shiloh Jolie-Pitt has a tomboyish cropped haircut; let’s all make unnecessary comments about what this means for her kiddie style. [Us]

NAIL

• Here are nine red nail polishes for a classic manicure. [Allure]

Article source: http://nymag.com/daily/fashion/2012/01/hillary-clintons-headband-man-buns-trendy.html

Hillary Clinton’s Bob Back to the 1990s

Philly.com comments are intended to be civil, friendly conversations. Please treat other participants with respect and in a way that you would want to be treated. You are responsible for what you say. And please, stay on topic.

If you see an objectionable post, please report it to us using the “Report Abuse” button.

More About Philly.com comments.

About your comments: These comments are monitored by Philly.com staff. We reserve the right at all times to remove any information or materials that are unlawful, threatening, abusive, libelous, defamatory, obscene, vulgar, pornographic, profane, indecent or otherwise objectionable.

Personal attacks, especially on other participants, are not permitted. We reserve the right to permanently block any user who violates these terms and conditions.

Article source: http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/mirrorimage/138038953.html

State of the Union fashion: What Gabrielle Giffords, Michelle Obama and …

All eyes were on President Obama last night for his State of the Union address, but Michelle Obama was always on the periphery — and she couldn’t be missed, standing out in a bright sapphire gown amid a sea of black.
Guests applaud first lady Michelle Obama during President Barack Obama’s State of the Union address.
(Susan Walsh – AP)

The address is not known for statement-making fashion, especially for men: Black suits and red ties or military dress were the norm, with the only colorful accessory being Sen. John Kerry’s (D-Mass.) black eye. But three women — Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, and Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.) — were widely admired for what they wore. (You can read more of our State of the Union coverage over at Post Politics.)

Obama wore Los Angeles designer Barbara Tfank’s dress, which the designer described as a “criss cross bodice cap-sleeved slim dress in silk twill” to the Hollywood Reporter. Obama’s dress was sleek, and the perfect shade of Democratic blue. It’s the third time she’s worn Tfank. Previous occasions include a floral dress for a meet-and-greet with Duchess Catherine, and an emerald green cocktail dress at a 2010 awards ceremony.

Giffords‘s choice of a cheery apricot-colored jacket made her easy to spot on a crowded House floor — and everyone was angling to take a look. Just over a year since she was shot in an assassination attempt, Giffords returned to the floor for the second time since she was gravely injured, and her courage was met by resounding applause from the entire chamber, and hugs and kisses from President Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, and Clinton. Giffords, who announced last week that she is resigning from office, matched her bright jacket with black pants and sneakers.


Retiring Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, (D-Ariz.), center, is greeted by Rep. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz. Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) stands at right.
(Saul Loeb/AP)

Clinton brought back one of her style staples — a youthful headband, one of her go-to hairstyles when she was First Lady. She wore a black pantsuit and a triple strand of pearls. Headbands made a comeback at this year’s Golden Globe Awards, but Clinton’s thin black headband was simpler than the ones worn on the red carpet.


Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton greets Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.) before the State of the Union speech.
(Bill O’Leary/The Washington Post)

More State of the Union coverage:

VIDEO: Obama’s speech in less than 60 seconds

5 Policies to watch from the SOTU

Transcript: Read Obama’s full prepared remarks

Infographic: Breaking down the speech by issue

View Photo Gallery: Tuesday’s speech was President Obama’s third State of Union address and his sixth address to Congress overall.

Article source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/arts-post/post/state-of-the-union-fashion-what-gabrielle-giffords-michelle-obama-and-hillary-clinton-wore/2012/01/25/gIQAJNfSQQ_blog.html

Influential First Ladies Since 1900: Barbara Bush to Jackie Kennedy

Given the attention surrounding the first lady’s influence in the White House, thanks most recently to the release of New York Times correspondent Jodi Kantor’s book The Obamas, The Daily Beast convened a panel of experts to offer some historical perspective on the achievements of previous first ladies. It’s a tough thing to quantify, as there’s no formal job description, it’s an unelected position without any explicit power, and it’s limited by cultural and social mores. To create a ranking, we asked participants to measure the influence, on a scale of 1 to 10, of former first ladies in office since 1900 on the role itself, on women’s rights and social issues, and on the image of the president in the context of her cultural environment.

Article source: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/01/24/influential-first-ladies-since-1900-barbara-bush-to-jackie-kennedy.html

Is Clinton Closing Door on Lieberman?

The U.S.  State Dept. Tuesday dodged a reporter’s suggestion that U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton won’t meet with Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman.

State Department spokesman Olivia Nuland was asked why Lieberman, who is planning a visit to the United States, is “having trouble getting senior meetings with people in the State Department? It doesn’t look as if the Secretary will be meeting with him…. I’m wondering if it has anything to do with his conservative views. As a general rule, is he welcomed in the State department?”

Nuland said she was not aware the a visit by Foreign Minister Lieberman has been confirmed. Officials at his office told Arutz Sheva Wednesday that he is planning the trip “in the near future” but that no itinerary has been set.

Pressed by the report concerning Lieberman’s acceptance by the State Department, Nuland did not directly answer if Secretary Clinton would receive him and limited her response to saying, “He has had meetings with State Department officials in the past. State Department officials have also met with him in Israel.”

In other comments on Israel at the daily press session, Nuland rejected the idea that the Quartet’s January 26 deadline is the last word on the continuation of talks between the Palestinian Authority and Israel.

The quartet has demanded that both sides present proposals on security arrangements and borders by that date. The PA did so right away, repeating its previous demands for a Palestinian Authority country on all of the land on Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria restored to Israel in the Six-Day War in 1967.

Israel last week presented a 21-point proposal that the PA rejected out of hand, and its chief negotiator said Tuesday, following the fifth session in Amman, there would be no more talks.

Nuland, who spoke before the PA’s declaration, said, “We are hoping to do is to move from these preliminary discussions that are ongoing now to real concrete proposals by both sides that can be exchanged in a real, direct negotiation.”

Article source: http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/152094

Hillary Clinton’s Headbands Are Back & Better Than Ever

hillary clinton  barack obamaPresident Obama’s State of the Union address last night touched on some hot button issues like tax rates, immigration, Wall street, and manufacturing, but he failed to mention one point of contention: Hillary Clinton’s headband. It’s like he doesn’t even care, you know? Anyway, our Secretary of State hasn’t necessarily been praised for her fashion sense over the years, but last night Hill was right on trend. In a sleek black pant suit, Hillary looked professional and polished. Her couple of bracelets and that black headband with a sparkle here and there really added a nice, stylish touch. These headbands, I tell ya, they are certainly having their moment in the sun.

Hill’s had some fashion wins over the years, but they were few and far between. It’s nice to see that she took a moment to consider her accessories before last night’s address and went with something even Charlize Theron would approve. The headband made a splash on the Golden Globes red carpet a few weeks ago, and now they’ve made their way into Congress.

They’re on a fast trajectory — no one knows where they’ll show up next. Prom’s just around the corner; maybe teens will hop on board and rock the look at that oh-so-important senior dance. But before that main event, we have the Academy Awards at the end of next month. I’m sure we’ll see a headband or two on that red carpet.

Until then, we’ll have to take our headband fixes where we can get them, and Hillary’s supply is seemingly endless. However, I hope she’s burned that puffy, braided blue one she owns along with anything else that’s padded head-wear; those are headbands from hell.

But if last night’s choice is any indication, Hillary’s headbands are back, and better than ever.

Headbands: Yay or nay?

 

Photo via Win McNamee/Getty

Article source: http://thestir.cafemom.com/beauty_style/132014/hillary_clintons_headbands_are_back

President Barack Obama wishes Down Under a Happy Australia Day

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has wished Australians a “happy” national day celebration.

“On behalf of President [Barack] Obama and the people of the United States, I am delighted to congratulate the Australian people as you celebrate Australia Day this January 26,” Clinton reportedly said.

Now that’s diplomacy.

Australia Day is akin to America’s Independence Day.

Australians gather in their homes, backyards and — for those who work in essential services, or sometimes just for a party-pooping boss — their offices to reflect on the true meaning of Australian-ness.

More often than not that amounts to firing up the barbecue, drinking large quantities of beer and watching Test match cricket, or else spending the entire day on the nearest beach.

Yes, there are few things Australians hold more sacred that their Australian-ness… and their public holidays.

To know that a US Secretary of State — who between financial crises, nuclear standoffs and breakouts of democracy must be very busy indeed — takes the time to send a message on behalf of the US President to little old us is a special feeling indeed.

But that’s not all, not by a long shot.

The President himself has reportedly written to Australian Governor-General Quentin Bryce ahead of  January 26:

“As I noted when I visited Australia in November, the US-Australia alliance has served as an anchor of stability, security, and prosperity in the world for six decades,” Obama wrote, according to the Australian Associated Press.

“As you celebrate your national day, know that the United States stands with you in friendship now and in the future. I wish all Australians a safe and happy holiday celebration and continued peace and prosperity in the coming year.”

Granted, it’s been a warm and fuzzy few months for US-Australia relations.

The White House announced a wholesale redirection of American foreign policy — and military resources — toward Asia.

Key to its strategy will be Forward Operating Base Darwin, Australia (our term, not theirs… yet), where US Marines, their war machines and military supplies will share digs with Australian forces.

(GlobalPost reports: G’day Mr. President — Barack Obama lands in Australia)

Their brief, Obama said back in November, would be to allow the US to “meet the demands of a lot of partners in the region” in terms of training, exercises and “security architecture.”

Unofficially, analysts agreed, the build-up is a counterbalance to the rising influence of China in the region.

Regardless, Australia has evidently found its way into Washington’s birthday book and — depending how long the friendship lasts — can expect regular salutations for a while to come.

On reflection, the comparison with July 4 — named for the date in 1776 when the US Congress officially adopted the Declaration of Independence — may be stretching things a little.

January 26 marked a very different kind of occasion Down Under.

On that day in 1788, the First Fleet of 11 convict ships arrived from Great Britain and a Union Jack was raised at Sydney Cove by the fleet’s commander Captain Arthur Phillip, establishing the first European colony on the continent.

According to records, on board were 759 convicts, their Marine guards, some with families, a few civil officers and enough supplies to tide them over until they became self-sufficient.

Never mind that Australia was already well-established in the minds of its inhabitants, the Aborigines. Back then a nation wasn’t settled until the Europeans arrived.

When you think about it, perhaps Thanksgiving would be a closer comparison, minus the shared harvest feast…

But hey, either way the ties between Australia and America are, in the words of Hillary Clinton, “as close as any.”

Australia — like the US — is a county of immigrants which owed everything to its ability to integrate people of many cultures, creeds and skill sets.

As Australian neurosurgeon Charlie Teo, who after 10 hugely successful years in the US returned to Australia “for lifestyle reasons and for our children’s heritage,” puts it in 2012 Australia Day address:

My time in the USA made me reflect on how a country that was not that much older or bigger than ours had achieved such a standing on the world stage.

In general, Americans were not more intelligent, diligent or talented than Australians. They have natural resources, so do we. Their pioneers did it tough, so did ours. They had a national pride, so do we.

The message is all of this is simple: this Australia Day, Aussies can take a day off work, fire up the barbee and put the beer on ice knowing that America really cares.

And who knows, if we’re still together in a few years Australians may just star celebrating July 4 , too.

http://www.globalpost.com/dispatches/globalpost-blogs/down-under/australia-day-hillary-clinton-july-4-independence-thanksgiving

  • |

Article source: http://www.globalpost.com/dispatches/globalpost-blogs/down-under/australia-day-hillary-clinton-july-4-independence-thanksgiving

Obama In SOTU: If Hillary And I Can Get Along…

If two former archenemies can work together to bring down Osama bin Laden, no partisan gap is too wide to close, President Obama reminded skeptics Tuesday night.

Our Alison Gendar reports:

The two former antagonists, he said, are himself – and Hilary Clinton.

“One of my proudest possessions is the flag that the SEAL Team took with them on the mission to get bin Laden,” Obama said in a powerful end to his State of the Union speech. “On it are each of their names. Some may be Democrats. Some may be Republicans. But that doesn’t matter.

“Just like it didn’t matter that day in the Situation Room, when I sat next to Bob Gates – a man who was George Bush’s defense secretary; and Hillary Clinton, a woman who ran against me for president,” he added.

“All that mattered that day was the mission. No one thought about politics. No one thought about themselves,” he said.

Caption: Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and Treasury Secretary Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner greet President Barack Obama after the president delivered his State of the Union address on Capitol Hill in Washington, Tuesday, Jan. 24, 2012. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)

Share

Article source: http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/dailypolitics/2012/01/obama-in-sotu-if-hillary-and-i-can-get-along

Clinton doubts France will accelerate Afghan pullout

WASHINGTON — US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton voiced doubt Friday that France would accelerate its troop pullout from Afghanistan, after four French troops were killed by an Afghan soldier.

But the Pentagon said it was up to Paris whether to bring its forces home from Afghanistan early, as Clinton and other US officials offered condolences to the loved ones of the soldiers killed.

“I’m in great sympathy with what happened to the French soldiers. It was terrible and I can certainly appreciate the strong feelings that are being expressed,” the chief US diplomat said at a press conference.

The United States offered “our deepest condolences,” she said.

“We are in close contact with our French colleagues and we have no reason to believe that France will do anything other than continue to be part of the very carefully considered transition process as we look at our exit as previously agreed upon in Lisbon,” Clinton added.

In Lisbon, on November 20, 2010, NATO leaders endorsed a plan for their soldiers to start handing security responsibilities to Afghan forces, with the aim of ceding full control by the end of 2014.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy warned Friday he may accelerate the withdrawal of France’s 3,600 troops from Afghanistan after an Afghan soldier shot dead four unarmed French troops during a sports session inside a base.

Sarkozy suspended French military training and joint combat operations with Afghan troops, and sent Defense Minister Gerard Longuet to probe the attack in which at least 15 French soldiers were also wounded, eight seriously.

At the Pentagon, Navy Captain John Kirby said: “We mourn for their losses today, but those are decisions that only the French government and the French people can make.”

“Their contributions are theirs to determine and theirs to amend as they see fit,” Kirby said, calling the French “great allies and great friends.”

White House spokesman Jay Carney said French forces had served with “valor and honor” in Afghanistan, but did not comment on the French leader’s remarks.

State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said Wendy Sherman, the under secretary for political affairs, had discussed the incident in Washington with her French counterpart Jacques Audibert.

Deployed mainly in the provinces of Kabul and Kapisa, the scene of Friday’s shooting, the French forces are currently scheduled to be withdrawn by the end of 2013.

The incident was the latest in a string of attacks by allied Afghan forces on US and NATO soldiers, which a classified report leaked to the New York Times said reflected a “systemic” problem and not just isolated incidents.

Between May 2007 and May 2011, at least 58 US and NATO personnel were killed in 26 attacks by Afghan soldiers and the police, the classified 70-page report said, according to The Times.

It includes an April 2011 incident in which an Afghan Air Force colonel killed eight US officers and a contractor with shots to the head inside their headquarters.

“We believe that they do appear to be increasing in frequency in recent months. What we can’t discern is a cause for that,” said Kirby.

“We’re certainly concerned about these incidents and ISAF officials are taking a look at it. But we also don’t believe that this is an endemic or systemic problem. The great majority of partnered operations, and frankly most of our operations are partnered, are done successfully, smoothly, efficiently,” he said.

The report emphasizes the killings are the result of a decade of contempt that each side has for each other, and profound ill will among both civilians and militaries on both sides. It downplayed the role of Taliban infiltrators in the incidents.

“Lethal altercations are clearly not rare or isolated; they reflect a rapidly growing systemic homicide threat (a magnitude of which may be unprecedented between ?allies? in modern military history),” the report said, according to The Times.

Official NATO statements downplaying the incidents “seem disingenuous, if not profoundly intellectually dishonest,” said the report.

Copyright © 2012 AFP. All rights reserved.
More »

Article source: http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5g5IX7JaE2lklkCQh4ukq5FSwfjTw?docId=CNG.972d5530050a245099d94a3baa5fed6b.01

Hillary wishes us a happy Australia Day

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has wished Australians ‘a safe and happy holiday celebration’ on Australia Day.

‘On behalf of President (Barack) Obama and the people of the United States, I am delighted to congratulate the Australian people as you celebrate Australia Day this January 26,’ Ms Clinton said in a statement.

‘As we mark more than six decades of the US-Australia alliance, an anchor of stability, security and prosperity throughout the world, we continue to strengthen this friendship and chart a common path forward together.’

Ms Clinton says last year’s visit to Australia by President Obama reaffirmed the depth of the US-Australian partnership, with the two countries committed to finding ‘new ways to work together to expand stability and opportunity in the Asia-Pacific region and around the world’.

She said the ties between ‘our people and nations are as close as any’.

‘As you celebrate your national day with family, friends, and loved ones, know that the United States stands with you as a committed partner joined by common bonds of friendship and family,’ she said.

‘I wish all Australians a safe and happy holiday celebration and continued peace and prosperity in the coming year.’

Article source: http://bigpondnews.com/articles/Politics/2012/01/25/Hillary_wishes_us_a_happy_Australia_Day_711212.html

State of the Union guests

Post Recommended

Washington Post reporters or editors recommend this comment or reader post.

Article source: http://washingtonpost.com/national-politics/state-of-the-union-guests/2011/01/19/ABlr9eJ_gallery.html

Hillary Clinton defends Presidents pipeline decision – KHAS

Opponents and proponents of the Keystone XL Pipeline saga continue to speak out. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is the latest to defend the President’s decision.

Mrs. Clinton held a news conference with Germany’s foreign minister at the State Department. She took some time to comment on President Obama’s rejection of the controversial Keystone Pipeline.

“This announcement is not a judgment on the merits of the pipeline, but an arbitrary nature of a deadline that prevented the State Department from gathering the information necessary to approve the project,” said Clinton.

And, the opponents of the president’s decision continue to speak out.
North Dakota Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Heidi Heitkamp wants President Barack Obama to reconsider his decision to block construction of the Keystone XL oil pipeline.

The pipeline would carry oil from Canada to Gulf Coast refineries.
Heitkamp says it would help North Dakota’s efforts to export its own oil production.

Article source: http://www.khastv.com/news/local/Hilary-Clinton-defends-Presidents-pipeline-decision-137794523.html

Tadic-Clinton talk beneficial, says Fuele

European Enlargement Commissioner Stefan Fuele said Monday in Brussels that he believes it is useful that Serbian President Boris Tadic and U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton discussed Kosovo this past weekend.

Fuele said he is not familiar with the content of the talk, but the United States’ involvement in finding a solution for Kosovo is beneficial to all sides.

According to a press release which the State Department delivered to a Tanjug correspondent on Sunday, in the phone call which happened at the initiative of the U.S. State Secretary, Clinton appealed to Serbia to continue its efforts aimed at normalizing relations with Kosovo.

The U.S. Secretary of State also added the United States is ready to help both sides.

Talking on the sidelines of the ministerial meeting in Brussels, where the situation in Kosovo is one of the topics on the agenda, Fuele commented on Sunday’s EU accession referendum in Croatia, calling its outcome a positive message to Serbia and other countries in the Western Balkans.

They should take advantage of the momentum created by Croatia’s successful preparations for EU accession, Fuele concluded.

Article source: http://www.emg.rs/en/news/serbia/173280.html

Kareem Abdul-Jabbar Gives Hillary Clinton the Stinkface

Kareem Abdul-Jabbar Gives Hillary Clinton the StinkfaceWASHINGTON, DC – JANUARY 18: U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton meets with Cultural Ambassador Kareem Abdul Jabbar at the State Department January 18, 2012 in Washington, DC. According to the State Department, Jabbar, a National Basketball Association superstar and hall of fame player, ‘will lead conversations with young people on the importance of education, social and racial tolerance, cultural understanding, and using sports as a means of empowerment.’ (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

Article source: http://jezebel.com/5877389/kareem-abdul+jabbar-gives-hillary-clinton-the-stinkface

Barack Obama attacked Hillary Clinton in negative campaign leaked memos show

The tactic, not uncommon in the electioneering arena, contradicted Obama’s
previous efforts to style himself as a political reformist who deplored
negative assaults on his opponents.

“It was a character attack,” Neera Tanden, who acted as policy
director during Clinton’s race for the presidential nomination, said. “I
went over to Obama, I’m a big supporter of the President, but their campaign
was entirely a character attack on Hillary as a liar and untrustworthy. It
wasn’t an ‘issue contrast,’ it was entirely personal.”

Ms Tanden now works for Obama as director of domestic policy.

Article source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/9032170/Barack-Obama-attacked-Hillary-Clinton-in-negative-campaign-leaked-memos-show.html

Clinton, Peres speak in virtual peace conference

Move over Camp David, Israeli-Palestinian peace has gone virtual.

Facebook on Monday played host to the first-ever online peace conference, put together by a group called Yala Yong Leaders, a group aimed at creating dialogue between Israelis, Palestinians and Americans.

The Yala online peace conference.

“I am delighted to send greetings to all of you who have gathered in this virtual space to help shape the future of the Middle East,” US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said in a pre-recorded video statement, projected on a YouTube billboard in a virtual park.

Noting the role of technology in fomenting the revolutions of the Arab Spring, Clinton commended the Israeli and Arab conference participants for using the Internet to promote peace through dialogue.

RELATED:
Peres writes ode to Ethiopian Jewry
Clinton slams Iran nuclear move, urges talks

“You come to the table with the hope that you can look past your differences and lay the foundation for peace, and I admire your resolve to engage in these very difficult discussions,” Clinton said. “Your voices will continue to be invaluable in the process.”

The conference included taped messages from a wide range of personalities, including President Shimon Peres, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, former US White House peace envoy Dennis Ross, UNESCO head Irina Bokova, actress Sharon Stone and Barcelona football coach Pep Guardiola.

“Peace,” said Peres, “is not necessarily a monopoly of governments. It
can be and should be peace among people. So let the governments
negotiate, let the administrations build, but you make the people come
together: straight, directly, openly.”

 In a written message to the conference, Abbas said, “Watching the force
of reason, dignity, and courage takes us through leaps of hope into a
brighter future.”

Ross, who acknowledge that “obviously we are in a difficult time now,”
made clear he didn’t believe the popular movements in the Arab world –
movements that led to the victory by the Islamists in the Egyptian
parliament – do not necessarily make peace more difficult to achieve
now.

Ross said that while it is critical for leaders to make peace, it is
fundamental for the people on both sides to believe in that peace. And,
he added, “I believe that ultimately if peace is between people, then
having states become much more representative is ultimately a good
thing.”

The conference, also sponsored by the Shimon Peres Center for Peace,
took place through a Facebook software platform called Shaker, which
creates a virtual space for users’ online avatars to walk around,
interact, and view conference material together.

This virtual reality, however, was ultimately not divorced from the
hateful reality on the ground, as a number of people took to the
organizers’ Facebook page to write anti-Semitic and anti-Israel
comments.

For example, someone named Samer Hussam posted the following: ” To all
the Palestinians in this group, you are helping to give the Zionists
more time to create a new reality on the ground. Go back to national
resistance. People, do not cover up the crimes of the Zionists. Do not
sell the rights of your people for trips outside the country.” Another
post read, “Go to hell, Israel the big nation of terrorists. Viva Free
Palestine.”

Cnaan Liphshiz contributed to this report

Article source: http://www.jpost.com/DiplomacyAndPolitics/Article.aspx?id=254811

Hillary Clinton Joins Mahmoud Abbas on Facebook for “Conference for the Young …

From left to right: Israeli PM Netanyahu, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and PA President Mahmoud Abbas. Photo: wiki commons.

Eventually a new generation of lawmakers, diplomats, and general citizenry, equipped with new sets of tools, will control the fate of the Middle East and shape the future of the region’s political landscape.

In Egypt, social media was used to provide the world with instant information it might not have otherwise received, helping to spark revolution.  In Syria, people have leveraged social media to disseminate video and other information that may have saved lives.

So why not use the internet to foster discussion, debate and ideas for peace between Israelis and Arabs?

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Israeli President Shimon Peres, and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas joined other political leaders and celebrities to do just that, beginning Monday morning. Using Facebook, the world’s most widely used social media platform, the Yala Young Leaders are hosting a “virtual conference” where leaders such as Clinton voiced their optimism for progressive new forums to settle dispute.

According to their website, Yala’s mission is “for participants to become better informed and more effective advocates in their home communities who assertively seek political change by dealing directly with political leaders, community organizations and individuals.”

“This conference is an opportunity for all of you, both Arab and Israeli, to engage in dialogue about your shared future and about peace in the region, as well as your day-to-day problems, worries and dreams,” said Clinton.

She added, “you come to the table with the hope that you can look past your differences and lay the foundation for peace, and I admire your resolve to engage in these very difficult discussions.  Your voices will continue to be invaluable in the process.”

NBA Commissioner David Stern joined actress Sharon Stone and FC Barcelona coach Pep Guardiola in helping to foster the dialogue.

While not everyone was thrilled about the idea -  including Basel Dasouky, who wrote on the wall of the Conference’s Facebook page “END OF ZIONISM=PEACE” at 11:30am ET – many were happy to have a voice, including Naser Alqadi.  “Peace will be achieved,” he said.

The Shimon Peres Center for Peace was also an integral part of putting together the conference.

Article source: http://www.algemeiner.com/2012/01/23/hillary-clinton-joins-mahmoud-abbas-on-facebook-for-conference-for-the-young-of-the-middle-east/

Geithner, Clinton Say EU Ban on Iran Oil a ‘Strong Step’

U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the
European Union’s agreement to ban oil imports from Iran and to
freeze assets of the Iranian central bank are a “strong step”
to “dramatically increase the pressure on Iran” and are
consistent with steps the U.S. has taken.

“Taken in combination with the many other sanctions on
Iran that continue to be implemented by the United States and
the international community, this new, concerted pressure will
sharpen the choice for Iran’s leaders and increase their cost of
defiance of basic international obligations,” Geithner and
Clinton said in a joint statement today.

To contact the reporters on this story:
Cheyenne Hopkins at
Chopkins19@bloomberg.net;

To contact the editor responsible for this story:
Christopher Wellisz at
cwellisz@bloomberg.net

<!—->

Article source: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-01-23/geithner-clinton-say-eu-ban-on-iran-oil-a-strong-step-.html

PIc and PUB Barack Obama attacked Hillary Clinton in negative campaign leaked memos show

The tactic, not uncommon in the electioneering arena, contradicted Obama’s
previous efforts to style himself as a political reformist who deplored
negative assaults on his opponents.

“It was a character attack,” Neera Tanden, who acted as policy
director during Clinton’s race for the presidential nomination, said. “I
went over to Obama, I’m a big supporter of the President, but their campaign
was entirely a character attack on Hillary as a liar and untrustworthy. It
wasn’t an ‘issue contrast,’ it was entirely personal.”

Ms Tanden now works for Obama as director of domestic policy.

Article source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/9032170/PIc-and-PUB-Barack-Obama-attacked-Hillary-Clinton-in-negative-campaign-leaked-memos-show.html

Hillary Clinton Reportedly Rejected President Obama’s 2011 State Department Budget

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton “rejected” President Obama’s proposed 2011 budget for her department, according to a memo obtained by the New Yorker‘s Ryan Lizza, and described in the magazine Monday.

“At the proposed funding levels, we will not have the capacity to deliver either the full level of civilian staffing or the foreign assistance programs that underlie the civilian-military strategy you outlined for Afghanistan; nor the transition from U.S. Military to civilian programming in Iraq; nor the expanded assistance that is central to our Pakistan strategy,” Clinton wrote in the six-page memo.

As military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan draw down, responsibility for those conflict zones increasingly falls to the State Department, which will be staffing the largest U.S. embassy in the world in Baghdad and overseeing a team of several thousand armed contractors.

At the same time, the State Department’s budget, especially for non-military foreign operations, has been under near constant assault from budget-conscious congressional critics.

To defend its ability to operate abroad, the State Department has launched a major public information campaign to promote the fact that the American foreign aid budget is only about 1 percent of the federal budget, even as surveys show that the average American assumes it to be closer to 25 percent.

Hillary Clinton has taken the battle with Congress over foreign aid funding public before — telling legislators last year that she would “recommend personally” that the president veto a proposed House bill severely curtailing State Department operations.

“If you go out to the American public and you say ‘what’s the easiest thing to cut?’ it’s always foreign aid,” Clinton said at an event with Defense Secretary Leon Panetta last August. “We understand that we have a case to make and there is a new way of looking at it.”

“We know we are going to have to put everything on the table. I’m not saying we should be exempt … I’m just saying that as we look at everything that is on the table, we have to try to do a reasonable analysis of what our needs and interests are,” she added.

But the portions of the memo described in the New Yorker shows the lengths Clinton has had to go to personally persuade the president of the urgency of protecting her budget.

“I want to emphasize that I fully understand the economic realities within which this budget is being constructed, and I share your commitment to fiscal responsibility. But I am deeply concerned about these funding levels,” Clinton wrote. “You and I often speak about the need to restore the capacity of civilian agencies. There is little room for progress unless you provide guidance that you are open to an increase in overall funding levels.”

Earlier on HuffPost:

“;
var coords = [-5, -72];
// display fb-bubble
FloatingPrompt.embed(this, html, undefined, ‘top’, {fp_intersects:1, timeout_remove:2000,ignore_arrow: true, width:236, add_xy:coords, class_name: ‘clear-overlay’});
});

Article source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/23/hillary-clinton-state-department-budget_n_1223743.html?ref=politics

Mitt Romney Needs a Hillary Clinton Cry

On Saturday night Mitt Romney delivered essentially the same speech to South Carolina voters that he did to New Hampshire voters. The only trouble is that Mitt won in New Hampshire, whereas he lost in South Carolina. Everyone knows that you feel differently when you win than when you lose. Where is the pathos? Where is the regret? Where is the disappointment? I didn’t see any on Saturday night. If you listened without knowing the results, you might be convinced that in fact Mitt Romney had actually won tonight, rather than lose by a stunningly large margin in a state where he led the polls just a week ago. A normal person, a relatable person, would have come on the stage and said, “Well, I blew it. I’m sorry. And by the way, here are my tax returns!” The crowd would have laughed, would have roared, would have forgiven, and would now be raring to go fight the fight in Florida. Instead, what did we hear? We heard a man who put a good face on defeat, who believes that by looking good and sounding optimistic, he can win over the crowd.

In many ways, Mitt Romney strikes me as old fashioned, a candidate from the 1950s. This is a man who thinks hard. This is a man who shields his personal life from public view as much as he can, despite running for president. This is a man who has genuinely lived a life of traditional family values, and therefore does not feel the need to brag about them. This is a man who shirks from cheap shots to his opponents, who prefers to take the high road in running for the highest public office we have. These are not bad qualities, and in fact I admire them. But 60 years have passed since Eisenhower led, and today Americans prefer candidates who feel, rather than candidates that think. Ask Hillary Clinton, and she’ll tell you. Hillary Clinton pulled her win in the New Hampshire primary of 2008 because she cried, not because she thought. Her tears proved to us that she was a real person, rather than a robot set on autopilot, giving speech after speech about public policy issues. We wanted a human being, someone who understood our pain. We already knew how well Hillary could think; we wanted to be sure that she could also feel.

When Mitt Romney answered “Maybe” in response to Jon King’s question as to whether he would release his tax returns, Mitt sealed his own fate in the South Carolina primary. Not only was it the wrong answer to the question, more importantly the answer played into the narrative of a man with something to hide. The most consistent attack on Mitt Romney, and the one that sticks, is that he is a man who does not reveal his true self. On issues like abortion, gay rights and health care, we think we know where he stands today but he hasn’t convinced us that his change of heart has been anything other than political opportunism. Mitt’s devotion to the Mormon faith confirms this storyline as well, because Mormonism is a religion which shrouds itself in secrecy, revealing its innermost traditions only to the most “worthy” practitioners of the faith. When confronted about these issues, Mitt is enigmatic, obscuring his own self in pious language that does not ring true. Why doesn’t that language ring true? Because Mitt is not talking in the kind of language we are now accustomed to hearing. Because Mitt has not convinced us that we know how he really “feels.”

Mitt Romney, America demands that you cry! If you can’t cry when you lose, then cry when you win. Only don’t wait too long, or you may not get the chance to cry at all.


Follow Lisa Wexler on Twitter:

www.twitter.com/lisawexler

Article source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lisa-wexler/mitt-romney_b_1222603.html

Barack Obama attacked Hillary Clinton in negative campaign leaked memos show

The tactic, not uncommon in the electioneering arena, contradicted Obama’s
previous efforts to style himself as a political reformist who deplored
negative assaults on his opponents.

“It was a character attack,” Neera Tanden, who acted as policy
director during Clinton’s race for the presidential nomination, said. “I
went over to Obama, I’m a big supporter of the President, but their campaign
was entirely a character attack on Hillary as a liar and untrustworthy. It
wasn’t an ‘issue contrast,’ it was entirely personal.”

Ms Tanden now works for Obama as director of domestic policy.

Article source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/9032170/Barack-Obama-attacked-Hillary-Clinton-in-negative-campaign-leaked-memos-show.html

GOP 2012: The Anti-Primary

Watching Barack Obama battle Hillary Clinton during the 2008 Democratic primary race, you sometimes had a strange sense that neither of them could possibly lose. Obama had a movement of delirious activists and newcomers behind him, while Hillary had Clinton machine loyalists, women and other groups ready to fight to the bitter end for her. By and large, each side had to concede that the other candidate was pretty formidable in his or her own way, and the differences were mostly argued out at the margins. It was like two unstoppable forces on a collision course. 

In the 2012 Republican race, the dynamic is reversed. Within the context of the GOP, both Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich are horrendously flawed. Party activists and conservative leaders see Romney as an ideological chameleon who can’t be trusted to advance their agenda, and one who increasingly appears to be a political klutz. But the GOP’s Washington-based leadership–its top pundits, lobbyists and financiers–can’t believe Newt Gingrich has even made it this far. To them he is unstable and unelectable–a man who dresses up like Pericles in front of his mirror but could never defeat Barack Obama, much less govern the country. Which leaves the party with what you might call two immovable objects. I don’t exactly see how one defeats the other. But it’s also hard, at the moment, to see how either one crosses the primary finish line. Seeing how that happens–if that happens–will make for fascinating viewing this winter and spring.

Article source: http://swampland.time.com/2012/01/22/gop-2012-the-anti-primary/

GOP 2012: The Anti-Primary

Watching Barack Obama battle Hillary Clinton during the 2008 Democratic primary race, you sometimes had a strange sense that neither of them could possibly lose. Obama had a movement of delirious activists and newcomers behind him, while Hillary had Clinton machine loyalists, women and other groups ready to fight to the bitter end for her. By and large, each side had to concede that the other candidate was pretty formidable in his or her own way, and the differences were mostly argued out at the margins. It was like two unstoppable forces on a collision course. 

In the 2012 Republican race, the dynamic is reversed. Within the context of the GOP, both Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich are horrendously flawed. Party activists and conservative leaders see Romney as an ideological chameleon who can’t be trusted to advance their agenda, and one who increasingly appears to be a political klutz. But the GOP’s Washington-based leadership–its top pundits, lobbyists and financiers–can’t believe Newt Gingrich has even made it this far. To them he is unstable and unelectable–a man who dresses up like Pericles in front of his mirror but could never defeat Barack Obama, much less govern the country. Which leaves the party with what you might call two immovable objects. I don’t exactly see how one defeats the other. But it’s also hard, at the moment, to see how either one crosses the primary finish line. Seeing how that happens–if that happens–will make for fascinating viewing this winter and spring.

Article source: http://swampland.time.com/2012/01/22/gop-2012-the-anti-primary/

Inside Alonso’s atelier

Post Recommended

Washington Post reporters or editors recommend this comment or reader post.

Article source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/capitalbusiness/inside-alonsos-atelier/2012/01/18/gIQAQBr8IQ_gallery.html

Clinton Speaks to France’s Juppe Over Possible Afghan Pullout

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe spoke by
telephone yesterday evening about France’s threatened early
withdrawal from Afghanistan, the French foreign ministry said in
an e-mailed statement.

President Nicolas Sarkozy suspended operations with the
Afghan army and said France may withdraw its troops from the
country after an Afghan soldier killed four of its military
personnel, the second time in a month an Afghan soldier has
killed French troops.

Defense Minister Gerard Longuet and Admiral Edouard
Guillard, chief of staff, are in Afghanistan to assess the
situation, and Sarkozy said in a speech Jan. 20 that he’ll
decide on the future of France’s 3,900 troops in the country
based on their report. Sarkozy meets Afghan President Hamid Karzai Jan. 27 in Paris.

“The President of the Republic will draw all the
consequences of the attack against our forces,” the foreign
ministry said in the statement. Clinton offered her condolences
for the deaths, which bring to 82 the number of French military
personnel killed in Afghanistan.

Longuet told reporters in Afghanistan that the Afghan
soldier who killed the French troops was a Taliban infiltrator.

Karzai today told Longuet that the the shooting “was an
isolated case by an individual who is in custody and being
investigated,” according to a statement from Karzai’s office.

To contact the reporter on this story:
Gregory Viscusi in Paris at
gviscusi@bloomberg.net

To contact the editor responsible for this story:
James Hertling at
jhertling@bloomberg.net

<!—->

Article source: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-01-22/clinton-speaks-to-france-s-juppe-over-possible-afghan-pullout.html

Building the future in Ivory Coast with school meals

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton traveled to the Ivory Coast (Côte d’Ivoire) this week and spoke of hope for the future. Hope was something not often talked about when this African nation was embroiled in violence last year over a disputed election.

The fighting is now over. A chance for Ivory Coast to build a promising future has begun. Clinton said, “I am inspired by how quickly not only the government but the people have moved from the violence and conflict of last spring to successful legislative elections in December and to a commitment that is in the air to build a better future for all Ivoirians and particularly for the next generation.”

Hunger, though, is still a major threat in the Ivory Coast. A report from the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) said, “In spite of the improved security situation, food security remains a major concern. Access to food for many households is being constrained by the disruption of their livelihoods.”

Advertisement

Catherine Bragg, of the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), told IRIN news, “I don’t want the world to move on and say everything in Côte d’Ivoire is fine.”

Humanitarian aid is critical for this country traveling the road to peace. A whole generation of children in the Ivory Coast needs nutrition and education, something many had to go without during the months of fighting and displacement. In January, the UN World Food Programme (WFP) started to provide school feeding to 600,000 children in 3,400 schools around the country. The initiative also provides food for about 25,000 voluntary teachers.

The school feeding gives these children a very important meal, which includes rice, of about 700 calories. Providing food at school boosts attendance rates not to mention class performance. So two key areas of Ivory Coast’s recovery are addressed with this program.

This free meal is of the utmost importance for so many impoverished families that lost so much during the conflict. Funding, though, is the critical issue going forward. WFP relies on voluntary donations from the international community. Food to reinforce peace depends on keeping the donor pipeline moving.

WFP says that the Ivory Coast school feeding program is only 11 percent funded. The program can run for the time being. However, by April supplies will be needed to maintain the school feeding. Donations now are critical because it can take several months for a donation to translate into delivered food. If no action is taken there is the the risk of children facing reduced rations or even losing their school meal come spring. This would impact the recovery process and the health and education of children.

As Clinton said while in the Ivory Coast, “Families need good schools to send their children to attend, everyone needs good healthcare, and I am very hopeful that the president’s agenda will help revitalize this dynamic, very important country at a time when we all need to do more to set a positive vision for the future.”

School meals are a vital building block for this vision. So it’s important that this program be supported and evolve into a national school feeding program for the Ivory Coast. Such a vision need not be too far off in the future, if the will exists now.

Article first published as Building the Future in Ivory Coast with School Meals on Blogcritics.

Article source: http://www.examiner.com/global-hunger-in-national/building-the-future-ivory-coast-with-school-meals

UK basketball notebook: SEC divided on 18-game schedule – Lexington Herald

The political season brings the debate between Hillary Clinton‘s it-takes-a-village interdependence and conservatism’s every-man-is-an-island self-reliance. So, too, does the sporting world contain a version of this dueling dynamic.

The Southeastern Conference leaders discussing how to schedule in future basketball seasons must weigh the collective good versus individual best interest.

Kentucky sits squarely on the side of independence. UK Athletics Director Mitch Barnhart will continue trying to convince the SEC not to expand from 16- to 18-game league schedules. A smaller number of league games frees Kentucky to schedule its traditional opponents (North Carolina, Louisville and Indiana) and other made-for-TV matches in the non-conference portion of the schedule.

“Mitch has made that very plain,” said Larry Templeton, the former Mississippi State athletics director who now heads a four-man panel seeking a formula for future schedules in all sports.

When asked whether Barnhart has been lobbying for a 16-game SEC schedule, Templeton said, “I don’t know if I’d use the word ‘lobby.’ I think Mitch was very organized in his presentation. The ADs listened. I’m sure it’ll get back on the table because we’ve got to go back there. Knowing Mitch, I don’t think that conversation is over.”

Templeton noted that another athletics director will try to convince the SEC to go back to divisional play in basketball. He declined to say which athletics director.

But knowing that Rick Stansbury of Mississippi State was the only coach to vote to continue divisional play, a good guess would be State Athletics Director Scott Stricklin. Stansbury saw divisions as a way to give more teams a chance to play for a championships, and no doubt avoid finishing, say, in 13th place.

“It’ll be on the table,” Templeton said of a return to divisional play. “It’ll be decided by a vote of the ADs.”

What was perceived as the collective good led the SEC to expand its basketball schedule from 16 to 18 games. That was supposed to happen this season, but the league decided to table the move for a year so it would coincide with Texas AM and Missouri joining the SEC in 2012-13.

The idea behind the move to 18 games could be likened to the philosophy often attributed to John F. Kennedy: a rising tide lifts all boats. To get more NCAA Tournament bids, league teams had to play tougher schedules. Two more league games meant two more quality opponents to enhance each team’s Ratings Percentage Index (RPI).

Kentucky’s oft-proclaimed exceptionalism applies in this case. UK needs no RPI enhancement. “They’ve been the ones to step up and play what we’d consider the best of the best schedule,” Templeton said.

If, as expected, the league adopts an 18-game schedule, how will it be played? That’s to be decided by the Templeton-led group that includes Executive Associate Commissioner Mark Womack and associate commissioners Mark Whitworth and Greg Sankey.

The “natural assumption” is that playing each SEC team once makes for 13 games, Templeton said. Then five opponents would be played a second time. SEC consultant C.M. Newton will meet with Templeton’s group this week to discuss.

Templeton expressed hope that a model can be presented to ADs at either the SEC men’s or women’s tournament in March.

Football teams will continue to play eight-game SEC schedules. When asked about adding a ninth game, Templeton said, “I don’t hear any talk whatsoever, and I don’t think there’s anybody who even wants to put it on the table.”

With SEC football already so competitive, and some teams already playing a quality non-conference opponent (think Kentucky-Louisville or the 2012 opener pitting Alabama against Michigan), a ninth league game would be too much of a good thing.

Flopping

The eternal block/charge debate revived by UK Coach John Calipari last week raised a sidebar issue: What about flopping?

A referee can call a technical foul on a defender who flops. But have you ever seen that called? “I’ve not seen it called,” said John Adams, a former referee and now the NCAA national men’s basketball officiating coordinator.

Adams said he could not agree with the idea that coaches teach players to flop. There are many (blush) who think they do.

“I think flopping is a growing concern for everybody involved in our game,” Adams said.

Flopping made a mockery of the game in the late 1960s and early 1970s. Some players seemingly spent more time trying to sneak into position to take a “charge” than playing basketball. Most memorably, Dan Issel picked up his fifth foul near mid-court when he accidently ran into the late Vaughn Wedeking of Jacksonville.

“It’s OK for the time being,” Adams said of the frequency of flopping. “Till we determine flopping is an epidemic. Then we’ll get a Manhattan Project after it.”

Adams said he equated flopping with a foul on the defender.

“We used to say, the flopper is the fouler,” he said. “If you flop, you foul.”

But players get away with flopping sometimes. And no flopper gets a technical foul.

Adams suggested a way to differentiate a flop from a charge.

“When a flopper throws his head back, he’s generally flopping,” Adams said. “Because if I hit you in the middle of your body, your reaction is to bend over. … If I’m looking for contact, I throw myself back. That’s flopping.”

Upon further review

Blue Ribbon Yearbook editor Chris Dortch agreed last week to provide a mid-season review of his publication’s predicted All-America team for 2011-12. He saw only one player he’d drop: UK forward Terrence Jones.

“I looked up the stats of all our first-team All-Americans, and four of the five are having about the sort of years we expected,” Dortch wrote in an email.

Kris Joseph (Syracuse), Harrison Barnes (North Carolina), Jared Sullinger (Ohio State) and Jordan Taylor (Wisconsin) lead their teams in scoring. While stats are not everything, few would argue with those selections.

A mini-question involves Taylor’s shooting (39.3 percent overall, 31.3 percent from three-point range going into last week). But his 81 assists and only 31 turnovers in 19 games bolsters his case.

“The only player who hasn’t performed up to the level we anticipated is Terrence Jones,” Dortch wrote. “The question many would ask is, does that reflect negatively on our powers of prognostication or on Jones’ ability? My answer would be that of the five schools that produced a first-team Blue Ribbon All-American, none of them, save Kentucky, has been impacted so significantly by newcomers. Anthony Davis and Michael Kidd-Gilchrist are just special; that’s all you can say. And I think that in a way, Jones has deferred to them. He hasn’t had to do as much as we thought he was capable of doing.”

Dortch noted his reluctance to put freshmen on Blue Ribbon’s pre-season All-America team. So he did not place such stars as Kevin Durant, Michael Beasley, DeMarcus Cousins and John Wall on Blue Ribbon’s past teams.

“If I could have looked into a crystal ball and seen what Davis and MKG are doing now, I might have placed one of them on the team ahead of Jones,” Dortch wrote. “And in hindsight, I might have made North Carolina’s Kendall Marshall the point guard, given his off-the-charts assist totals and assist-to-turnover ratio.”

In UNC’s first 18 games, Marshall had 173 assists and 50 turnovers.

“Obviously, with the benefit of hindsight, I wish we’d have put Thomas Robinson of Kansas on our first team because, at this point, he’s probably the consensus choice to be national player of the year,” Dortch wrote. “If there’s anyone we really missed on, it’s him.”

Ouch

We know that newspapers are waning while bloggers/tweeters/talk shows are whining.

But did Mississippi State Coach Rick Stansbury have to twist the knife during last week’s SEC teleconference?

When acknowledging that his players probably would not treat Mississippi merely as the next opponent, Stansbury said, “It’s human nature (to be excited by a rivalry). Kids read the paper. Or your blogs.”

Stumbling to recover, Stansbury added, “Probably don’t read no paper. (Players) read your blogs on those telephones.”

Word play

Comedian Stephen Colbert coined the term “truthiness” to label a gut feeling that seems truth, even if the facts don’t cooperate. It was named Word of the Year for 2005 by the American Dialect Society.

Auburn Coach Tony Barbee took the lead last week in the race for SEC basketball word of the year.

During the league’s weekly teleconference, a reporter asked about the importance of scoring from Frankie Sullivan, who had 19 points against Ole Miss the previous weekend.

“It’s a ‘humendous’ addition for us when he’s scoring the ball,” said Barbee, seeming to combine the words “huge” or “humongous” and “tremendous.”

As with “truthiness,” anyone listening knew what Barbee meant: Sullivan can be a key contributor for the Tigers.

“We’re still looking for that catalyst,” the Auburn coach said. “One or two guys who can step up and make plays” in the clutch.

Barbee noted how Sullivan’s work ethic made him a worthy candidate for go-to guy.

Major/minor domo

Bob Kesling, the voice of Tennessee basketball, used the post-game radio interview as a way to show a difference in approach by new coach Cuonzo Martin and his predecessor, Bruce Pearl.

“With Bruce, you just asked three questions,” he said. “With Cuonzo, you ask 20 questions.”

Translation: Martin is not as verbose as Pearl. So more questions are needed to fill the time.

“Bruce was the Pied Piper, the majordomo,” Kesling said. “Cuonzo pushes the band out in front of him.”

GPAs

The Kansas men’s basketball team posted a 2.63 grade-point average in the fall semester of 2011. That team GPA included walk-on and scholarship players, spokesman Chris Theisen said.

By comparison, UK’s basketball team had a 2.71 GPA.

Kansas announced that eight of its teams posted a grade-point average of 3.0 or better. The school said that 239 of its athletes — or 47 percent of its teams in 2011-12 — made the Athletics Directors’ Honor Roll with GPAs of 3.0 or better. Eighteen had 4.0 GPAs.

Overall, Kansas athletes combined for a 2.84. Football had the lowest GPA: 2.46.

Correction

A note last week incorrectly stated that Leonard Hamilton (Florida State), Roy Williams (UNC) and Mike Krzyzewski (Duke) are the only coaches to head Atlantic Coast Conference programs for more than three seasons.

Wrong.

There’s also Seth Greenberg, who is in his ninth season at Virginia Tech.

‘Big Blue Slam’

This week will see the annual Big Blue Slam, a competition between UK and Florida fans involving blood donations. Kentucky won three of the previous four “Slams.”

The Kentucky Blood Center and Gainesville’s LifeSouth Community Blood Center participate in the event, which is intended to increase blood supplies when winter weather can cause them to decrease. The KBC centers (Beaumont and Andover in Lexington, plus Somerset and Pikeville) will be open from 9 a.m. to 7 p.m. each day this week.

Fans can schedule an appointment at Kybloodcenter.org or by calling 1-800-775-2522.

To spur fans, each donor will receive a Big Blue Slam T-shirt and be entered in a drawing for an entertainment package that includes a 50-inch 3-D Smart TV, Blu-Ray home theater system, X-Box 360 with Kinect and popcorn machine.

Happy birthday

To Rupp’s Runt Larry Conley. He turns 68 today. … To Perry Stevenson. He turns 25 on Monday. … To N.C. State Coach Mark Gottfried. The former Alabama player and coach turned 48 on Friday. … To Southern California Coach Kevin O’Neill. The former Tennessee coach turns 55 on Tuesday.

Article source: http://www.kentucky.com/2012/01/21/2037706/uk-basketball-notebook-sec-divided.html

Jodi Kantor discusses The Obamas and the controversy around Michelle

Jodi Kantor's new book The Obamas has already rattled cages in Washington. She talks to the Toronto Star about what she' learnt in the course of researching the book.Jodi Kantor's new book The Obamas has already rattled cages in Washington. She talks to the Toronto Star about what she' learnt in the course of researching the book.

Jodi Kantor’s new book The Obamas has already rattled cages in Washington. She talks to the Toronto Star about what she’ learnt in the course of researching the book.

Rene Johnston/Toronto Star

Image

Model, matriarch, monster.

For an American First Lady, it’s so easy to get it wrong when doing the “image thing.” And for the country’s First Couple, so rare to get it right. Think of Hillary Clinton standing, tight-lipped, behind her erring man.

Michelle and Barack Obama, on the other hand, captivated the nation and the world at the 2009 inaugural ball when they whirled on the dance floor, gazing into each other’s eyes like newlyweds — the perfect merger of progressive politics and marital bliss.

But, says New York Times writer Jodi Kantor, life’s not like that.

In her 360-page double portrait, The Obamas, she paints a more complex picture of a couple struggling with their own priorities and insecurities, and a marriage surviving — if not thriving — under intense stress.

But what does that mean to Main Street at a time when the whole country needs a dose of Valium?

Quite a lot, Kantor believes. In the Obama marriage, the personal is political. With Barack growing up a self-reliant loner, Michelle is his anchor in the real world: an exacting critic when she feels he has strayed too far from his bedrock principles, and a strong presence whose loyalty he can count on to navigate Washington’s treacherous waters.

But the move to the White House was turbulent and divisive, with the president’s and First Lady’s staffs facing off against each other on the role that she should play, and the way in which the president should advance his policies.

Kantor’s book, based on four years of research and interviews with some 200 sources, has won favourable reviews. But before it was even on bookstore shelves, it ran into a firestorm of controversy — beginning with the First Lady’s complaint (admittedly without having read it) that she was portrayed as “some kind of angry black woman.”

International eyebrows were raised at the book’s depiction of former White House press secretary Robert Gibbs cursing Michelle with the F word: a reaction, it says, to Gibbs’s feeling that his efforts were denigrated when he quashed a report that the First Lady had told the French president’s wife, Carla Bruni-Sarkozy, that life in the White House was “hell.”

Q: So, what was it like when the reporter became the story?

A: It was a surreal scene. My husband and I and my daughter were standing in our pyjamas watching this unfold on television.

Part of my surprise was that it seemed to cause more of a furor than my previous work. I’ve been dealing with these issues for a long time (as a Washington reporter) with fairly little controversy.

For me, the important thing was that at every point in reporting where I discovered Mrs. Obama was frustrated about something I tried really hard to find out what her motivation was.

The problem with the phrase “angry black woman” is that it’s such a dangerous stereotype. It almost presumes that frustration is unreasonable, and it’s a way of dismissing what went on.

In every instance where she’s presented as feeling frustrated her logic is very clear. I don’t think she looks unreasonable or high-strung. The role she is in is quite a frustrating one. The real history of first ladies is that they are very tough — steel is practically a job requirement.

Men do not get elected president without a tenacious, canny wife.

But there is so much in the book about (Michelle) as a support for her husband, a very protective mother, someone who truly wants to make a contribution and is very creative and persistent in the way she does so.

Q: The book is coming out during a volatile presidential election. Were you aiming for that when you planned it?

A: I was. I wrote it to explore the questions people would have going into the election. What happens when you take two pretty regular people and put them into the white House and turn them into the president and First Lady?

Having covered them for five years I really wanted to know what the adjustment was. But when I started reporting the book I didn’t have the material I later had. For instance, I didn’t know that Michelle Obama was initially having a difficult time in the White House. What struck me is that it’s a world of its own — and a pretty bizarre one. I thought a lot of the images were wrong.

The nature of the modern presidency is that it’s inherently dramatic. It’s such an unbelievably difficult job. Every administration is an embattled one because of the political climate. Also, the Obama presidency is a bit of an experiment, there is so much that is new about it. Part of the story is that the president and First Lady each have a difficult relationship with politics.

Q: What did you learn that surprised you?

A: White House aides live in that little world so much that something I think is remarkable is everyday to them. An aide told me that Mrs. Obama was thinking of not moving to Washington immediately after the inauguration, and sticking out the school year with her kids. This person mentioned it very casually, and it just stopped me in my tracks.

Of course, it never happened. But it says so much about who she is. She was really an outsider and she didn’t realize how it worked. A commuter first lady would never have flown with the American people. But there’s a kind of outsider wisdom to it, too.

When I started learning how confined and strange White House life is, I tried to use historical research to enrich the reporting. I found myself asking whether it was even necessary for the first family to live in the White House.

Grover and Frances Cleveland moved out of the White House in the 1880s with their children. At that time the grounds were open like a public park and strangers were manhandling their kids.

I found myself questioning the way things work. Is the job of president really doable? Is the mould of “first ladyhood” going to be broken? Can she ever hold a job?

You have to ask, “Is public life livable, or is the level of scrutiny so high that almost nobody can sustain it?” I really did want to push readers to think about those things.

Q: And it’s even harder to be the first family in the age of celebrity. As you point out, the price tags of Michelle Obama’s clothes have been scrutinized, along with her style and image. Yet if she didn’t keep up appearances she’d be criticized too.

A: It’s really complicated with the Obamas. The blessing and curse of what they are doing is that they want to be role models. . . in my reporting I found that they are very conscious of this. Part of their reason is a larger motivation to send a message of social mobility and opportunity, of what is possible.

That’s a big theme of Mrs. Obama’s first ladyhood. But putting yourself out there as a role model triggers enormous burdens. Everything you do is under great scrutiny.

Q: Michelle Obama is very protective of her daughters. But with the elections nearing, will we see more of the Obamas as a family?

A: Absolutely. Ten years ago when the girls were young they were nobodies. Barack Obama had a name most Americans thought was weird, and he had a background unfamiliar to a lot of people. But right from the beginning when they saw his wife and two adorable daughters the family sent a message that this is a regular kind of guy.

When Americans view his handling of the economy, his rating isn’t impressive. When they rate him (personally), even Republican candidates answer that he’s a good family man.

Q: They started out as newbies, wanting to change the political order. How has the White House changed them?

A: To me they’ve become more conventional politicians. They entered the White House wanting to do things in their own way. In many ways they ended up doing things more conventionally. A couple of years ago, Barack Obama refused to wear one of those little U.S. flag lapel pins. He thought it was cheesy — “why do I need to prove my patriotism by wearing a label?”

That was four generations ago. Now he does more of what he’s supposed to do. It’s probably necessary. They are learning how to be president and First Lady. But there is a bit of loss there, too. One reason people were so excited about them in 2008 is that they seemed so original and interesting, and most politicians aren’t. There was a freshness to them.

Q: Have you got more or less confidence in them now, as a presidential couple?

A: As a reporter I don’t have a political opinion on that. But I have seen Michelle Obama master the role of First Lady. I did have some suspense about whether she could make her peace with the White House. Externally, she always projected a positive image. She was popular and stayed that way.

But around the time of her Spain trip (a short but much-criticized break last summer with her younger daughter and friends) there was a kind of rebellion against the confinements of First Ladyhood. I really wondered if she was going to make it. But she has. She has equipped herself well for another four years, if they get it.

Q: And the president?

The question is whether he will apply some of what he learned. Because in a way, his story is the ultimate political education. He came to Washington without a lot of experience, but he’s gained a lot in the last couple of years. He’s a bit of a shape-shifter, always transforming himself. So the question is, who will he be next?

Q: Will Michelle’s next act be Eleanor Roosevelt?

A: I do think there is an analogy in terms of moral conscience, and having a vision of who her husband can be as president. But I also think there is a fantasy that First Ladies will fill that role.

Remember American Wife, about Laura Bush, by Curtis Sittenfeld? At the end of the book there’s a fantasy that she will stand up to her husband and single-handedly reverse the Iraq war. It’s why Curtis is a novelist and I’m a journalist.

Article source: http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/1119269--jodi-kantor-discusses-the-obamas-and-the-controversy-around-michelle

Clinton calls Egyptian foreign minister

WASHINGTON — US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Saturday called Egypt’s foreign minister to discuss the country’s economic and political situation, as well as events in Syria, the State Department said.

It said the telephone call covered the same ground as President Barack Obama’s discussion with Field Marshal Hussein Tantawi on Friday, which the White House said was focused on Egypt’s need for a democratic transition.

Clinton’s call to Foreign Minister Mohammed Amr came as official election results showed that Egypt’s Islamists, led by the once-banned Muslim Brotherhood, clinched more than two-thirds of parliamentary seats in historic polls held last year after the ouster of long-time president Hosni Mubarak.

“They also compared notes on Syria in advance of the Arab League meetings this weekend,” the State Department said in a brief statement.

Copyright © 2012 AFP. All rights reserved.
More »

Article source: http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5g742FMXK-uedJz1cJT32XFUEdAjg?docId=CNG.50f40d449718c0f6af0d4c3fc833c8a7.b1

Clinton Seeks EU Sanctions To Force Iran Back Into Talks

The United States expect the European Union to take steps to pressure Iran back into negotiations on its controversial nuclear activity, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has said.

“We have a very strong partnership with the EU, and we expect to see the EU taking some additional steps to keep the pressure on Iran in the coming days,” Clinton said during a news conference with her German colleague Guido Westerwelle.

The statement came as the European Union is expected to impose tough new sanctions on Tehran on Monday, banning the import of Iranian oil.

Of some 2.2. million barrels of Iranian daily oil exports, 18 percent is bound for European markets, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. Oil exports make up some 60 percent of the Tehran’s revenues.

Iran’s continuing “pursuit of nuclear weapons,” as well as “needless provocations” such as the threats to block the strategic Straits of Hormuz, place the Islamic Republic on a “dangerous path,” Clinton said.

“Iran does have a choice to make,” she said. “It can come back to the table… and address the nuclear program concerns that the international community rightly has or face increasing pressure and isolation.”

“I want to underscore, we do not seek conflict,” she added. “We strongly believe the people of Iran deserve a better future.”

Western nations suspect Iran, which is already under numerous international sanctions, of pursuing a secret nuclear weapons program but Tehran insists it needs nuclear power solely for civilian purposes.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said earlier this week a ban on Iranian oil exports would “hurt” ordinary people and was more about stirring up unrest than nuclear non-proliferation.

“This has nothing to do with a desire to strengthen nuclear non-proliferation,” he said. “It’s aimed at stifling the Iranian economy and the population in the apparent hope of provoking discontent.”

Sanctions would also prove “an obstacle” to the revival of a dialog between Iran and the six world powers involved in negotiations on its nuclear program, Lavrov said.

About the author:

RIA Novosti is Russia’s leading news agency in terms of multimedia technologies, website audience reach and quoting by the Russian media.

Article source: http://www.eurasiareview.com/21012012-clinton-seeks-eu-sanctions-to-force-iran-back-into-talks/

Obama-Clinton 2012?

The very moment Hillary Clinton lost her nomination battle against Barack Obama, the big question burst to the fore. Should Hillary be the running mate? In the next breath, would Hillary be the running mate?

The complications in 2008 were too messy perhaps. Some bad blood was freshly spilled between Clinton and Obama, mostly thanks to Bill Clinton’s criticisms of his wife’s challenger. As well, it was not clear Clinton would deign to serve what is lamented as the dullest job in the West Wing. Still, four years later with President Obama struggling, Democrats are again asking themselves who helps Obama more and who hurts him more: Joe Biden or Hillary Clinton.

The most recent champion of Clinton for Veep is The New York Times’ Bill Keller. He heaps on the praise: “Hillary Clinton is 64 years old, with a Calvinist work ethic, the stamina of an Olympian, an E.Q. to match her I.Q., and the political instincts of a Clinton.” But would all those strengths reinforce the weaknesses, real or perceived, of Obama? Does that even matter to the voters Clinton would bring on board?

In 2008, she did particularly well with white blue-collar voters, not to mention women. The Democrats lost some of them in the 2010 mid-terms. Would they come back?

Robert Reich, former Secretary of Labor to Bill Clinton, argues Obama needs Hillary to “stir the passions and enthusiasm of a Democratic base that’s been disillusioned with his cave-ins to regressive Republicans.” When the woman herself was asked late last year about replacing Biden on the ticket, Clinton told NBC News, “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.” As good a job as Clinton has done as Secretary of State? What’s your prediction for the 2012 Democratic ticket?

Guest:

Matt Rodriguez, Democratic strategist; former senior Obama advisor in 2008, who now runs the Los Angeles office for the Dewey Square Group

Bill Keller, Op-Ed columnist for The New York Times and former Executive Editor of The New York Times

Article source: http://www.scpr.org/programs/airtalk/2012/01/20/22191/obama-clinton-2012/

Clinton seeks EU sanctions to force Iran back into talks

The United States expect the European Union to take steps to pressure Iran back into negotiations on its controversial nuclear activity, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has said.
“We have a very strong partnership with the EU, and we expect to see the EU taking some additional steps to keep the pressure on Iran in the coming days,” Clinton said during a news conference with her German colleague Guido Westerwelle. The statement came as the European Union is expected to impose tough new sanctions on Tehran on Monday, banning the import of Iranian oil.
Of some 2.2. million barrels of Iranian daily oil exports, 18 percent is bound for European markets, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. Oil exports make up some 60 percent of the Tehran’s revenues.
Iran’s continuing “pursuit of nuclear weapons,” as well as “needless provocations” such as the threats to block the strategic Straits of Hormuz, place the Islamic Republic on a “dangerous path,” Clinton said.
“Iran does have a choice to make,” she said. “It can come back to the table… and address the nuclear program concerns that the international community rightly has or face increasing pressure and isolation.”
“I want to underscore, we do not seek conflict,” she added. “We strongly believe the people of Iran deserve a better future.”
Western nations suspect Iran, which is already under numerous international sanctions, of pursuing a secret nuclear weapons program but Tehran insists it needs nuclear power solely for civilian purposes.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said earlier this week a ban on Iranian oil exports would “hurt” ordinary people and was more about stirring up unrest than nuclear non-proliferation.
“This has nothing to do with a desire to strengthen nuclear non-proliferation,” he said. “It’s aimed at stifling the Iranian economy and the population in the apparent hope of provoking discontent.”
Sanctions would also prove “an obstacle” to the revival of a dialog between Iran and the six world powers involved in negotiations on its nuclear program, Lavrov said.

Article source: http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-news-newspaper-daily-english-online/international/21-Jan-2012/clinton-seeks-eu-sanctions-to-force-iran-back-into-talks

New US Ambassador Already Facing Critics In Russia

Michael McFaul, the architect of the reset of relations with Russia, is now the U.S. ambassador to Moscow as the countries work through a series of difficult issues. Here, McFaul is shown at his Jan. 10 swearing-in at the Sate Department, a ceremony presided over by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
Enlarge Astrid Riecken/Getty images

Michael McFaul, the architect of the reset of relations with Russia, is now the U.S. ambassador to Moscow as the countries work through a series of difficult issues. Here, McFaul is shown at his Jan. 10 swearing-in at the Sate Department, a ceremony presided over by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Michael McFaul, the architect of the reset of relations with Russia, is now the U.S. ambassador to Moscow as the countries work through a series of difficult issues. Here, McFaul is shown at his Jan. 10 swearing-in at the Sate Department, a ceremony presided over by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Astrid Riecken/Getty images

Michael McFaul, the architect of the reset of relations with Russia, is now the U.S. ambassador to Moscow as the countries work through a series of difficult issues. Here, McFaul is shown at his Jan. 10 swearing-in at the Sate Department, a ceremony presided over by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

In the early days of the Obama administration, Michael McFaul made his mark as the architect of the so-called reset of relations with Russia.

Now, as the new U.S. ambassador to Moscow, McFaul may need to reset relations once again as the two countries go through another rough patch.

The U.S. and Russia have been in a war of words over Syria, Sudan and many other international issues. There are growing complaints inside the Kremlin that the U.S. is trying to stir up trouble, supporting protests that have eroded Prime Minister Vladimir Putin’s popularity as he seeks to reclaim to the president’s post in a March election.

Putin at one point accused Secretary of State Hillary Clinton of sending the protesters a signal to take to the streets. The U.S. rejected that charge and insists it is still committed to good relations with Russia.

Clinton also praised McFaul as the right person for the job when she swore him in recently at the State Department, with an audience that included just about every Washington-based expert on Russia.

“The coming months and years will be crucial for Russian democracy. Russians from all walks of life and every corner of this great country are making their voices heard, both face to face and in cyberspace, expressing their hopes for the future,” Clinton said.

“Few Americans know Russia or know democracy better than Mike McFaul,” Clinton said of the envoy, a former Stanford professor and a think-tank analyst who has written extensively about developing democracies.

A Facebook Introduction

McFaul quickly reached out to Russia’s Facebook generation with a video introducing himself — but was skewered just as quickly in the official Russian media.

On Russia’s Channel One, commentator Mikhael Leontiev claims McFaul is not a specialist on Russia but purely a specialist in one thing — promoting democracy.

Some see that as a plus, including Lilia Shevtsova, one of McFaul’s former colleagues at the Moscow Carnegie Center.

It will be a great challenge for Mike, as one of the architects of the reset, to prepare the platform to reset the reset.

“He has a lot of friends in Russia among different political forces,” she says. “He knows also the algebra, the textbook of democratic transition, which by the way creates a lot of consternation among some political forces in Russia. You know there’s a suspicion on the part of the political establishment that Mike has come to Russia in order to teach Russians how do to the Orange Revolutions.”

Shevtsova was referring to the street protests in Ukraine after a disputed election in 2004. McFaul has already met with opposition figures in Moscow, feeding into this stereotype.

One of his predecessors, former U.S. Ambassador James Collins, says the reaction in the Russian state-run media was predictable and shouldn’t deter the U.S. envoy at all.

“This was a shot across the bow. Don’t interfere in our electoral politics. Be aware that we have a limited tolerance for this. But the fact of the matter is he has a responsibility to remain in touch with all dimensions of the political spectrum,” Collins says.

Low Expectations This Year

The reset of relations has had some accomplishments on arms control and cooperation on Afghanistan and Iran.

But Collins has low expectations for this coming year, with both countries holding presidential elections and focused on their domestic politics. In addition, the uprisings in the Arab world have touched off disputes, including a sharp one over Syria.

The U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice, recently raised concerns about reports of continued Russian arms shipments to Syria.

“Unfortunately, there is not an arms embargo against Syria, which we certainly think is overdue, in part because, as you well know, some members of the council, including Russia, have indicated opposition to any form of sanction, even those that mirror what the Arab League has already implemented,” Rice says.

Meanwhile, Russia’s foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, has been complaining that U.S. support for uprisings could lead to a “very big war.”

Shevstova, the analyst, says perhaps it’s time for McFaul to work on that reset of relations again.

“It will be a great challenge for Mike, as one of the architects of the reset, to prepare the platform to reset the reset,” she said.

McFaul seems ready for the challenge. On his Twitter feed, he recently wrote, “This is going to be fun.”

Article source: http://www.npr.org/2012/01/21/145532923/new-u-s-ambassador-already-facing-critics-in-russia

Blood on Whose Hands?

Pfc. Manning, you will remember, is the young soldier who is soon to be court-martialed for passing some 750,000 military and diplomatic documents, a large chunk of them classified, to the website WikiLeaks.  Among those leaks, there was indeed some serious stuff about how Americans dealt with civilians in invaded countries.  For instance, the documents revealed that the U.S. military, then the occupying force in Iraq, did little or nothing to prevent Iraqi authorities from torturing prisoners in a variety of gruesome ways, sometimes to death.

Then there was that gun-sight video – unclassified but buried in classified material — of an American Apache helicopter opening fire on a crowd on a Baghdad street, gunning down a dozen men, including two Reuters employees, and injuring more, including children.  There were also those field reports about how jumpy American soldiers repeatedly shot down civilians at roadside checkpoints; about night raids gone wrong both in Iraq andAfghanistan; and a count of thousands of dead Iraqi civilians, a tally whose existence the U.S. military had previously denied possessing.

Together, these leaks and many others offered a composite portrait of military and political debacles in Iraq and Afghanistan whose grinding theme has been civilian casualties, a fact not much noted here in the U.S.  A tiny number of low-ranking American soldiers have been held to account for rare instances of premeditated murder of civilians, but most of the troops who kill civilians in the midst of the chaos of war are not tried, much less convicted.  We don’t talk about these cases a lot either.  On the other hand, officials of all types make free with lusty condemnations of Bradley Manning, whose leaks are luridly credited with potential (though not actual) deaths.

Putting Lives in Danger

“[WikiLeaks] might already have on their hands the blood of some young soldier or that of an Afghan family,” said Admiral Mike Mullen, then Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, on the release of the Afghan War Logs in July 2010.  This was, of course, the same Admiral Mullen who hadendorsed a major escalation of the war in Afghanistan, which would lead to a tremendous “surge” in casualties among civilians and soldiers alike.  Here are counts — undoubtedly undercounts, in fact — of real Afghan corpses that, at least in part, resulted from the policy he supported: 2,412 in 2009, 2,777 in 2010, 1,462 in the first half 2011, according to the U.N. Assistance Mission to Afghanistan.  As far as anyone knows, here are the corpses that resulted from the release of those WikiLeaks documents: 0.  (And don’t forget, thestalemate war with the Taliban has not budged in the period since that surge.)  Who, then, has blood on his hands, Pfc. Manning — or Admiral Mullen?

Of course the admiral is hardly alone.  In fact, whole tabernacle choirs have joined in the condemnation of Manning and WikiLeaks for “causing” carnage, thanks to their disclosures.

Robert Gates, who served as secretary of defense under George W. Bush and then Barack Obama, also spoke sternly of Manning’s leaks, accusinghim of “moral culpability.”  He added, “And that’s where I think the verdict is ‘guilty’ on WikiLeaks. They have put this out without any regard whatsoever for the consequences.”

This was, of course, the same Robert Gates who pushed for escalation in Afghanistan in 2009 and, in March 2011, flew to the Kingdom of Bahrain to offer his own personal “reassurance of support” to a ruling monarchy already busy shooting and torturing nonviolent civilian protesters.  So again, when it comes to blood and indifference to consequences, Bradley Manning — or Robert Gates?

Nor have such attitudes been confined to the military. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton accused Manning’s (alleged) leak of 250,000 diplomatic cables of being “an attack on the international community” that “puts people’s lives in danger, threatens our national security, and undermines our efforts to work with other countries to solve shared problems.”

As a senator, of course, she supported the invasion of Iraq in flagrant contravention of the U.N. Charter.  She was subsequently aleading hawk when it came to escalating and expanding the Afghan War, and is now responsible for disbursing an annual $1.3 billion in military aid to Egypt’s ruling junta whose forces have repeatedly opened fire on nonviolent civilian protesters.  So who’s been attacking the international community and putting lives in danger, Bradley Manning — or Hillary Clinton?

Harold Koh, former Yale Law School dean, liberal lion, and currently the State Department’s top legal adviser, hasannounced that the same leaked diplomatic cables “could place at risk the lives of countless innocent individuals — from journalists to human rights activists and bloggers to soldiers to individuals providing information to further peace and security.”

This is the same Harold Koh who, in March 2010, provided a tortured legal rationale for the Obama administration’s drone strikes in Pakistan, Yemen, and Somalia, despite the inevitable and well-documented civilian casualtiesthey cause.  So who is risking the lives of countless innocent individuals, Bradley Manning — or Harold Koh?

Much of the media have clambered aboard the bandwagon, blaming WikiLeaks and Manning for damage done by wars they once energetically cheered on.

In early 2011, to pick just one example from the ranks of journalism, New Yorker writer George Packer professed his horror that WikiLeaks had released a memo marked “secret/noforn” listing spots throughout the world of vital strategic or economic interest to the United States.  Asked by radio host Brian Lehrer whether this disclosure had crossed a new line by making a gratuitous gift to terrorists, Packer replied with an appalled yes.

Now, among the “secrets” contained in this document are the facts that the Strait of Gibraltar is a vital shipping lane and that the Democratic Republic of the Congo is rich in minerals. Have we Americans become so infantilized that factoids of basic geography must be considered state secrets?  (Maybe best not to answer that question.)  The “threat” of this document’s release has since been roundly debunked by various military intellectuals.

Nevertheless, Packer’s response was instructive.  Here was a typical liberal hawk, who had can-canned to the post-9/11 drumbeat of war as a therapeutic wake-up call from “the bland comforts of peace,” now affronted by WikiLeaks’ supposed recklessness.  Civilian casualties do not seem to have been on Packer’s mind when he supported the invasion of Iraq, nor has he written much about them since.

In an enthusiastic 2006 New Yorker essay on counterinsurgency warfare, for example, the very words “civilian casualties” never come up, despite theircentrality to COIN theory, practice, and history.  It is a fact that, as Operation Enduring Freedom shifted to counterinsurgency tactics in 2009, civilian casualties in Afghanistan skyrocketed.  So, for that matter, have American military casualties.  (More than half of U.S. military deaths in Afghanistan occurred in the past three years.)

Liberal hawks like Packer may consider WikiLeaks out of bounds, but really, who in these last years has been the most reckless, Bradley Manning — or George Packer and some of his pro-war colleagues at the New Yorkerlike Jeffrey Goldberg (who has since left for the Atlantic Monthly, where he’s been busily clearing a path for war with Iran) and editor David Remnick?

Centrist and liberal nonprofit think tanks have been no less selectively blind when it comes to civilian carnage. Liza Goitein, a lawyer at the liberal-minded Brennan Center at NYU Law School, has also taken out after Bradley Manning.  In the midst of an otherwise deft diagnosis of Washington’s compulsive urge to over-classify everything — the federal governmentclassifies an amazing 77 million documents a year — she pauses just long enough to accuse Manning of “criminal recklessness” for putting civilians named in the Afghan War logs in peril — “a disclosure,” as she puts it, “that surely endangers their safety.”

It’s worth noting that, until the moment Goitein made this charge, not a single report or press release issued by the Brennan Center has ever so much as uttered a mention of civilian casualties caused by the U.S. military.  The absence of civilian casualties is almost palpable in the work of the Brennan Center’s program in  “Liberty and National Security.”  For example, this program’s 2011 report “Rethinking Radicalization,” which explored effective, lawful ways to prevent American Muslims from turning terrorist, makes not a single reference to the tens of thousands of well-documented civilian casualties caused by American military force in the Muslim world, which according to many scholars is the prime mover of terrorist blowback.  The report on how to combat the threat of Muslim terrorists, written by Pakistan-born Faiza Patel, does not, in fact, even contain the words “Iraq,” “Afghanistan,” “drone strike,” “Pakistan” or “civilian casualties.”

This is almost incredible, because terrorists themselves have freely confessed that what motivated their acts of wanton violence has been the damage done by foreign military occupation back home or simply in the Muslim world.  Asked by a federal judge why he tried to blow up Times Square with a car bomb in May 2010, Pakistani-American Faisal Shahzad answered that he was motivated by the civilian carnage the U.S. had caused in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan.  How could any report about “rethinking radicalization” fail to mention this?  Although the Brennan Center does much valuable work, Goitein’s selective finger-pointing on civilian casualties is emblematic of a blindness to war’s consequences widespread among American institutions.

American Military Whistleblowers

Knowledge may indeed have its risks, but how many civilian deaths can actually be traced to the WikiLeaks revelations?  How many military deaths?  To the best of anyone’s knowledge, not a single one.  After much huffing and puffing, the Pentagon has quietly denied – and then denied again – that there is any evidence at all of the Taliban targeting the Afghan civilians named in the leaked war logs.

In the end, the “grave risks” involved in the publication of the War Logs and of those State Department documents have been wildly exaggerated.  Embarrassment, yes.  A look inside two grim wars and the workings of imperial diplomacy, yes.  Blood, no.

On the other hand, the grave risks that were hidden in those leaked documents, as well as in all the other government distortions, cover-ups, and lies of the past decade, have been graphically illustrated in aortal red.  The civilian carnage caused by our rush to war in Iraq and by our deeply entrenched stalemate of a war in Afghanistan (and the Pakistani tribal borderlands) is not speculative or theoretical but all-too real.

And yet no one anywhere has been held to much account: not in the political class, not in the military, not in the think tanks, not among the scholars, nor the media.  Only one individual, it seems, will pay, even if he actually spilled none of the blood.  Our foreign policy elites seem to think Bradley Manning is well-cast for the role of fall guy and scapegoat.  This is an injustice.

Someday, it will be clearer to Americans that Pfc. Manning has joined the ranks of great American military whistleblowers like Dan Ellsberg (who was first in his class at Marine officer training school); Vietnam War infantrymanRon Ridenhour, who blew the whistle on the My Lai massacre; and the sailors and marines who, in 1777, reported the torture of British captives by their politically connected commanding officer.  These servicemen, too, were vilified in their times. Today, we honor them, as someday Pfc. Manning will be honored.

Chase Madar is the author of The Passion of Bradley Manning, to be published by OR Books in February.  He is an attorney in New York, a TomDispatch regular, and a frequent contributor to the London Review of BooksLe Monde DiplomatiqueAmerican Conservative Magazine, and CounterPunch.  (To listen to Timothy MacBain’s latest Tomcast audio interview in which Madar discusses the coming trial of Bradley Manning, click here, or download it to your iPod here.) He tweets@ChMadar.

Follow TomDispatch on Twitter @TomDispatch and join us on Facebook.

Copyright 2012 Chase Madar 

Read more by Tom Engelhardt

Article source: http://original.antiwar.com/engelhardt/2012/01/19/blood-on-whose-hands/

Surrogate Leaders in Power!

Examiner.com is the inside source for everything local. We are powered by Examiners, the largest pool of passionate contributors in the world.

Examiners provide unique and original content to enhance life in your local city wherever that may be. Examiners come from all walks of life and contribute original content to entertain, inform, and inspire.

Article source: http://www.examiner.com/republican-in-oakland/surrogate-leaders-power

Hillary Clinton: no indication France will pull out from Afghanistan

France has almost 4,000 troops in Afghanistan as part of the 130,000-strong
NATO-led force there. French troops mainly patrol Kapisa, a mountainous
province near Kabul. They are due to leave by around the end of 2013.

More than 2,500 foreign troops have died in Afghanistan since the NATO-led war
began in 2001. The latest killings take the French toll to 82.

Article source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/9029331/Hillary-Clinton-no-indication-France-will-pull-out-from-Afghanistan.html

Clinton says Iran”s threats put it on "dangerous path"

Article source: http://www.kuna.net.kw/ArticleDetails.aspx?id=2216147&language=en

Race Baiting in South Carolina Primary Politics? Just Ask Hillary Clinton

If the Juan Williams race baiting debate attack on Newt Gingrich somehow leaves you with any doubt that there’s something about the South Carolina primaries that seems to bring out the worst in this sort of political behavior, you need look no further than the 2008 Democratic primary to see just how down and dirty things can get in the Palmetto State.

Four years ago, the Democratic primary was split with Sen. Barack Obama winning the Iowa caucuses and Hillary Clinton pulling out a comeback victory in New Hampshire. The political tag team of Bill and Hillary Clinton felt secure about the South Carolina black vote because of President Clinton’s persistent high approval ratings among African-Americans, but they were about to get their first real taste of Sen. Obama’s Chicago-style political game. Sen. Obama and his team were able to take a couple of innocuous statements by the Clintons and twist them into a race related controversy.

It started when Hillary Clinton said to an interviewer on Fox News;

I would point to the fact that that Dr. King’s dream began to be realized when President Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, when he was able to get through Congress something that President Kennedy was hopeful to do, the President before had not even tried, but it took a president to get it done.

That’s the complete quote but the New York Times ran no less than three separate stories that shortened it to;

“Dr. King’s dream began to be realized when President Lyndon Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964,” Mrs. Clinton said in trying to make the case that her experience should mean more to voters than the uplifting words of Mr. Obama. “It took a president to get it done.”

They omitted Mrs. Clinton’s reference to JFK, which, combined with remarks from a Clinton supporter caused some initial drama with Ted Kennedy, who went  on to endorse Barack Obama. The Clintons were about to come down with a dose of press bias karma. On January 9, 2008 the New York Times editorial board set the race-baiting table.

Why Mrs. Clinton would compare herself to Mr. Johnson, who escalated the war in Vietnam into a generational disaster, was baffling enough. It was hard to escape the distasteful implication that a black man needed the help of a white man to effect change. She pulled herself back from the brink by later talking about the mistreatment and danger Dr. King faced. Former President Bill Clinton, who seems to forget he is not the one running, hurled himself over the edge on Monday with a bizarre and rambling attack on Mr. Obama.

A few days later, here’s Bob Herbert bringing the dessert, writing in his The New York Time column;

I could also sense how hard the Clinton camp was working to undermine Senator Obama’s main theme, that a campaign based on hope and healing could unify, rather than further polarize, the country.

So there was the former president chastising the press for the way it was covering the Obama campaign and saying of Mr. Obama’s effort: “The whole thing is the biggest fairy tale I’ve ever seen.”

But – it wasn’t true. Watch Bill Clinton’s entire remarks and it’s 100% clear as to what he’s referring to as “the biggest fairy tale” and it’s not Obama’s candidacy. Nor is it the notion, as Herbert claims, that “a campaign based on hope and healing could unify.” No, the “fairy tale” is the idea that Obama was consistently opposed to the war in Iraq. Clinton points out speeches that Obama made and votes he cast as a Senator. His comments strike me as neither bizarre nor rambling, as the Times had claimed.

No matter. When Hillary Clinton appeared on Meet the Press just prior to the South Carolina primary, the late Tim Russert led with the race card attack against Clinton, including the quote from Herbert’s New York Times piece. Russert even plays a selectively edited clip of Clinton’s comments, where he cuts out every single part of what Clinton says leaving only ‘this whole thing is the biggest fairy tale I’ve ever seen.”

Russert follows this butchered video clip with the quote from South Carolina Senator and Congressional Black Caucus member James Clyburn that had also appeared in the Times; “To call that dream a fairytale, which Bill Clinton seem to be doing, could very well be insulting to some of us.” Hillary Clinton tries to point out that Russert is not playing the entire clip, but he shuts her down and plays a quote from Donna Brazil expressing disappointment in Bill Clinton and his “tone.” Russert continues to filibuster relentlessly for a couple of minutes, quoting the New York Times

In their book Game Change, John Heilemann and Mark Halperin fill in some of the backstage detail.

A few days after New Hampshire, a memo surfaced, produced by Obama’s South Carolina operation, that grouped together MLK/LBJ and “fairytale” along with other race-freighted incidents — including Billy Shaheen’s and Penn’s invocations of Obama’s youthful cocaine use — to suggest that the Clintons were playing the race card. Then there was Illinois congressman and Obama campaign cochair Jesse Jackson, Jr., who went on MSNBC and noted that while Clinton had teared up in New Hampshire, she never cried over Hurricane Katrina. “Those tears also have to be analyzed,” Jackson said, “particularly as we head to South Carolina, where 45% of African-Americans will participate in the Democratic contest.”

To Bill, the picture was all too clear. By accusing him and Hillary of slapping the race card on the table, the Obama campaign was doing exactly that itself. And though it infuriated him, he couldn’t help but respect the artfulness of the play. The Obama’s were tough; they weren’t  just sitting back and letting the nomination slip away.

On Meet the Press, Clinton tries to take the high road against the charge, referring to Senator Obama as an extraordinary person and candidate. A few days later, Hillary Clinton was trounced in the South Carolina primary.

If that’s how the Obama campaign treated a fellow Democrat and “the first black president,” just imagine the GOP candidate — and the American people — are in store for come this fall.

Article source: http://biggovernment.com/lstranahan/2012/01/20/race-baiting-in-south-carolina-primary-politics-just-ask-hillary-clinton/

Hillary Clinton: no indication France will pull out from Afghanistan

France has almost 4,000 troops in Afghanistan as part of the 130,000-strong
NATO-led force there. French troops mainly patrol Kapisa, a mountainous
province near Kabul. They are due to leave by around the end of 2013.

More than 2,500 foreign troops have died in Afghanistan since the NATO-led war
began in 2001. The latest killings take the French toll to 82.

Article source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/9029331/Hillary-Clinton-no-indication-France-will-pull-out-from-Afghanistan.html

Photo: Cultural Ambassador Kareem Abdul-Jabbar and Hillary Clinton

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton met with Hall-of-Famer Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, the NBA’s All-Time Leading Scorer and a New York Times’ best-selling author, to discuss his new role as a global Cultural Ambassador. [...]

“I am excited and honored to serve my country as a Cultural Ambassador for the U.S. Department of State,” said Kareem Abdul-Jabbar who has focused his efforts after his NBA career on engaging youth through socially-minded projects and education. “I look forward to meeting with young people all over the world and discussing ways in which we can strengthen our understanding of one another through education, through sports, and through greater cultural tolerance.”

Article source: http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nba-ball-dont-lie/photo-cultural-ambassador-kareem-abdul-jabbar-hillary-clinton-192627345.html

US steals EU’s thunder in West Africa

Cristina Barrios is a researcher at the Spanish think tank FRIDE who has written on French and EU policy towards Africa. Paul Nolan is a freelance journalist.

“US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s two-day tour of Liberia, Côte d’Ivoire, Cape Verde and Togo has shown that the US still shines on the African stage. No European dignitary could compete with the heat and warmth generated by Clinton.

Whereas the US brings hope and a ‘yes-we-can’ attitude to the African continent, Europe shies away, cowered and apologetic. The EU foreign policy of choice is to keep a low profile and, as a result, it fails to register – even in a region such as West Africa, where the EU actually does quite a lot.

Instead of sending its chief diplomat Catherine Ashton to the inauguration of Liberian President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, EU Commission President José Manuel Barroso sent a congratulatory message. The EU is once again missing out on the symbolism.

Sirleaf, winner of the 2011 Nobel peace prize, was Africa’s first female president. The Obama administration’s decision to send Hillary Clinton shows its understanding of a sense of history and narrative – something that has escaped European diplomatic circles.

For Europe to regain a standing on the world stage, it needs to support its own narrative of human rights beyond Commission communications and light criticism of imperfect elections. Clinton also met with Ivorian President Alassane Ouattara, while the EU has only sent Development Commissioner Andris Piebalgs in the past months. Despite the EU’s broader role in the Côte d’Ivoire peace process and political transition, it continually chooses to don its development hat in bilateral relations.

Clinton’s high-profile visit to Cape Verde is another example of ‘smart’ diplomacy in action. This will win points in international circles even if it results in small material gain. The country has recently been in the limelight after former leader Pedro Pires was singled out for the Mo Ibrahim award and its musical talent showcased by the sad loss of singer Cesária Évora.

The US will be hoping that the stardust will be rubbing off on them. Once again, this is about promoting good will, which is something that has bypassed the EU. In October 2011, Ashton formally congratulated Cape Verde for its ratification of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court – but how much will this win the people’s hearts and minds?

It is to Europe’s detriment that it does not recognise its potential in gaining influence as a key player in international relations. The US shines in West Africa, and EU policies are often behind the scenes. But until it emerges from the shadows and shares an idea of ‘destiny’ and a human – and not just bureaucratic – dimension, Europe will forever have to play second fiddle to the US.

The EU also continues to shy away of defending interests, boasting a 2012 allocation of €640 million for humanitarian aid, with some 15% per cent going to what it terms ‘forgotten crises’. They are surely battles too remote to hold any interest for the White House.

Whilst acting in the interests of blighted populations, the EU doesn’t even have the right spokesperson to make these facts real in the wider world. By contrast, Clinton sought to advance US strategic interests with a quick visit to Togo.

Since 2007, the EU has awarded €384.7 million in development cooperation to this country, and supported the electoral process with €2.5 million. Yet, it is the United States that welcomes the country’s steps towards greater democracy.

Ashton has boasted getting speaking rights at the UN General Assembly in the last months, but as Togo historically takes a seat at the Security Council for the next two years, it is the US that gets its voice heard and not Europe.”

Article source: http://www.euractiv.com/global-europe/us-steals-eus-thunder-west-africa-analysis-510257

After a Campaign That Fell Apart, a Second Act Is Still Possible

Sarah Palin got a reality show. Hillary Clinton is secretary of state. Mike Huckabee is on television and the radio. Rudy Giuliani still has his name on the door of that giant law firm.

What will Rick Perry’s second act be?

He has nearly three years, including another legislative session, left in his term as governor. He opened and closed his presidential run with a message that’s still relevant in national politics and probably useful to the Republicans once their nomination battle is over.

It’s not the jobs thing. It’s the federalism thing. Mr. Perry’s book, “Fed Up!,” fueled his biggest applause line in his last debate: “I’m saying the state of Texas is under assault by federal government. I’m saying also that South Carolina is at war with this federal government and with this administration.”

When the Republicans are through spitting at one another and ready to sling arrows at the Democrat in the White House, that line of thinking could be useful.

Before Mr. Perry joined the race, last spring and early summer, his line was that he wanted to cut the federal government’s power and increase the influence of the states. He is still a leading voice in that federalism argument. Maybe that’s a path he’ll pursue after he rests.

It’s hard to see any of that right now. The story of Mr. Perry’s candidacy was a backward tale of someone starting at the top and ending at the bottom.

Go East, man!

Mr. Perry’s best day in the polls preceded his campaigning. He looked so good on paper, remember?

This was the guy who was acceptable to the social conservatives, the fiscal conservatives, the religious conservatives, the Tea Party folks, the Southerners, the TV cameras. He was good-looking and a good speaker.

He was Ms. Palin, without the baggage.

There were some early concerns. George W. Bush, his predecessor as governor, had been out of office less than four years. Was America ready for another chief executive with boots?

Mr. Perry didn’t have any significant foreign policy experience or knowledge. He started late and hadn’t boned up on specific national issues. Sure, he had the federalism thing and Texas’ job growth to brag about, but it doesn’t hurt to know something about the specifics of the federal government’s executive branch if you’re asking voters to let you run it.

But Republicans were shopping, and with Mr. Perry they could check a lot of boxes on their wish lists.

The prevailing theory is that he had it in his hands and blew it. He started the race at the front of the pack. Voters weren’t committed to anyone else and were more than willing to consider new faces.

And then came all of those little moments that moved him from the Ronald Reagan column to the Dan Quayle column. If he quit politics right now, he’d go into the record books as the “Oops” guy.

If that’s all that went wrong with his campaign, and if this is the same Republican Party it was four years ago, or two years ago, then states’ rights — everybody versus the federal government — could be important in the general election.

Mr. Perry could be useful to the eventual nominee.

He ran badly, but he departed well. He knew he wouldn’t win South Carolina and did not want to be blamed — as Fred Thompson was in 2008 — for splitting conservative voters and giving the victory to a moderate. So he quit before the primary and threw whatever support he had left to Newt Gingrich, the front-runner in the Not Romney part of the race.

Now it’s time to come back to Austin, lie low, rest up and plot his next step. Maybe he’ll just keep quiet, do his state job and avoid national politics.

Or maybe this was just the beginning. He did not lose the race in a way that disqualifies him in the future, whether it’s for another national race or a place in an administration or a pundit’s chair on cable television.

While the governor who entered with an argument against federal authority and an assertion of state independence was announcing his decision to exit the race on Thursday morning in South Carolina, some state employees were enjoying a day off.

It was Confederate Heroes Day.

rramsey@texastribune.org

Article source: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/20/us/politics/for-rick-perry-a-second-act-in-politics-is-still-possible.html?amp

Hillary Clinton Amuses, Mark Whalburg Did Not Stop 911, Prince Harry To Climb …

Anna Paquin, Margaret, Pimples and The Highlander

Alex Cranz and Rebecca Jane chat about Anna Paquin’s new film, Highlanders, and our favorite fictional presidents.

Article source: http://www.fempop.com/2012/01/19/hillary-clinton-amuses-mark-whalburg-did-not-stop-911-prince-harry-to-climb-everest/

Clinton offers best wishes for Lunar New Year

<!–enpproperty 2012-01-20 10:25:36.0Clinton offers best wishes for Lunar New YearHillary Clinton,Lunar New Year,Barack Obama,Asia-Pacific region,Lunar New Year,Year of the Dragon,Spring Festival1159073Americas2@webnews/enpproperty–>

WASHINGTON – US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Thursday offered her best wishes to those celebrating the Lunar New Year, saying she and President Barack Obama are committed to 21st century partnership with the people of the Asia-Pacific region.

“On behalf of President Obama and the people of the United States, I’m delighted to send best wishes for peace, prosperity, and good health to everyone celebrating the Lunar New Year,” the top US diplomat said in a written statement.

“Around the world, people will welcome the Year of the Dragon with rich and varied traditions,” she said, noting that Asian Americans will gather with family and friends in communities across the United States to “celebrate their vibrant heritage and the ties that unite all of us.”

“President Obama and I are committed to our 21st century partnership with the people of the Asia-Pacific region, and we will continue to deepen ties with our allies and partners, while strengthening lasting bonds of friendship and cooperation,” she said.

“Throughout this new year, and in the years to come, let us continue to work together to realize new opportunities and make progress on the shared challenges we face,” she added.

Article source: http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/world/2012-01/20/content_14481799.htm

Liberia: Secretary Clinton Assures Prez. Sirleaf of Continued Support



Heritage (Monrovia)

AllAfrica aggregates reports from Africa’s news media.
This is an article from the Liberian press.

20 January 2012







United States Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Monday assured President Ellen Johnson- Sirleaf of her government’s continued support in accelerating the development programs and priorities of the Liberian government. Speaking during bilateral talks with Liberian government officials, Secretary Clinton praised the Sirleaf administration for the level of progress made in the country. Acknowledging further the achievements, the top U.S. diplomat said the Liberian government has built a strong foundation and that the United States would help the country to speed up the transition to a post-conflict society. Mrs. Clinton said her government would work towards aligning its systems and support with the priorities of the Liberian government. “We have to find creative ideas that would back up your priorities in infrastructure, roads, ports, the power sector, agriculture,” she said.

Mrs. Clinton also spoke of the role the United States government could play in tackling unemployment, particularly among the youth, disclosing that the U.S. would try to re-program some of its aid “because we know how essential it is that people begin to feel like they have a stake in the future.”

Secretary Clinton said the United States also wants to support Liberia’s reconciliation agenda which, she noted, is critical in national development. The United States government, she said, will continue to support Liberia in its security sector reform program, with particular focus on the police force. She observed that changes could be made to strengthen the police force and improve accountability. “We are going to continue to collaborate with you to assist you in that area,” the Secretary of State assured the President.

Mrs. Clinton lauded efforts by government in tackling corruption, and hoped it would not relent in its fight. In general, she said, her government was very positive “about what we see happening.”

Briefing Secretary of State Clinton and delegation earlier, President Johnson Sirleaf indicated that the country’s development agenda is well on track. She said government has identified its priorities and is now moving into the agricultural sector, with emphasis on food security, working with small farmers.

The inadequate supply of electric power, the President said, is a major constraint facing government, adding that efforts are continuing to find a long-term solution to the problem.

The President also spoke of progress between the government and opposition political parties to move the country forward, but stressed that a major priority of government is to provide skills training for disadvantaged youths to make them more productive citizens.

President Sirleaf also informed the delegation of the country’s long-term development agenda, aimed at transforming Liberia into a middle-income country by the year 2030. The President acknowledged that the agenda is ambitious, but pointed out that with hard work, the goal is achievable.

The President assured the U.S. Secretary of State and delegation that government will continue to adopt measures to help fight corruption in the country. She admitted that despite steady progress, the punishment phase has been slow. Judicial reforms would be needed to help address some of the issues associated with corruption cases. “Once we have those reforms in place, we would see much action on the punishment side,” the Liberian leader stated.

Monday’s meeting was also attended by Liberia’s Ministers of Defense, Justice, Planning and Economic Affairs, Agriculture, State, and Gender and Development; Liberia’s Ambassador to the United States, William Bull; as well as the Acting Chairman of the Liberty Party, Senator Clarice Jah.

The Secretary of State was accompanied to the meeting by the U.S. Ambassador to Liberia, Linda Thomas-Greenfield, Assistant Secretary of State Johnnie Carson, Senator Christopher Coons (Delaware), the Chairman of the Africa Sub-Committee on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Mrs. Clinton’s Chief of Staff, Sheryl Mills, among others.

Be the first to Write a Comment!

Today’s Featured News

Civil Servants in Zimbabwe Plan Five-Day Strike
Uganda: Besigye Arrested As Police Break Up Rally
Boko Haram Escape: Nigerian Govt Demands Answers

Business/Technology News

Sudan, South Sudan’s Oil Wrangles Intensify
Angola Denies Misuse of Oil Funds
World Bank, IMF Sounds Warning on Africa’s Economies

More News on allAfrica.com

The Garowe principles- A solution or a deepening of the crisis?
A Somali National …

Maiombe Environment Network Sets up Production Centre of Native Trees
The Maiombe …

Meteorite Fell From Mars – Scientists
Rare and expensive fragments of a Mars meteorite fell …

Having Got More of the Ocean, Let’s Use It Well
We applaud the government for beating the …

Harare Presents 2012 Service Delivery Plan
HARARE City Council has presented to Government …

FC Johansen Owner Saves Female Team’s World Cup Dream
FC Johansen owner and CEO, Isha …


Article source: http://allafrica.com/stories/201201200836.html

Hillary Clinton Keystone XL pipeline testimony won’t happen

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will not testify at a House Energy and Commerce Committee hearing on the Keystone XL pipeline next week.

Instead, Kerri-Ann Jones, assistant secretary of State for Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs and the point person at the department on the proposed pipeline, will testify on behalf of the department at the committee’s hearing next Wednesday morning.

Continue Reading

A State Department spokeswoman said earlier Thursday that the department and committee were in talks to discuss “what is appropriate so they get the full picture.”

The hearing will be the first since Wednesday’s decision by President Barack Obama to reject TransCanada’s proposed pipeline in light of the need to find an alternative route for the 1,700-mile pipeline in Nebraska. The hearing will in part focus on legislation from Rep. Lee Terry (R-Neb.) to put FERC in charge of the pipeline instead of the White House and State Department. Republicans have criticized the move to delay a presidential permit for the pipeline on politics surrounding Obama’s reelection effort and view the quasi-independent FERC as being friendlier to industry.

This article first appeared on POLITICO Pro at 6:34 p.m. on January 19, 2012.

Article source: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0112/71683.html

Quinn to Meet with Hillary Clinton on Opening More Foreign Markets to IL Business

Chicago – Gov. Pat Quinn has meetings planned with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski while he’s in Washington.

A Quinn spokeswoman says the meeting with Clinton is to discuss ways of opening up foreign markets to more Illinois businesses.

The Democrat also accepted an award today from Americans for the Arts at a U.S. Conference of Mayors breakfast.

Officials with the arts group say Quinn has demonstrated dedication to using the arts to jumpstart economic development, citing efforts to make Illinois a more attractive destination for filming movies. Officials also mentioned a new performing arts center at Western Illinois University that received state capital funds and will create jobs.

Quinn is meeting tomorrow with members of the Democratic Governors Association in Maryland.

Article source: http://www.myfoxchicago.com/dpp/news/metro/governor-quinn-to-meet-hillary-clinton-open-foreign-markets-to-illinois-businesses-20120119

Gov. Quinn to meet with Hillary Clinton – Chicago Sun

The Associated Press

January 19, 2012 2:14PM