And Al Giordano has a very interesting read as to why Hillary SHOULD NOT be Secretary of State:
Meanwhile, among the 70 percent or so of the Netroots for whom events have not bamboozled us into thinking that anything at all has changed about Clintonian operating procedure (and have only seen it confirmed by the media freak show and cat-and-mouse Hamlet games surrounding talk of and lobbying for the Secretary of State post), some folks definitely need to learn to see the difference between the ex-Clintonites and the eternally stuck-in-the-90s ones.
Sometimes the best way to test reality is to go see what they are saying on the other side of the ideological spectrum. On the neoconservative right, the gushing over Clinton as Secretary of State from Kissinger on down has been very revealing (and has led some of the right-wing wiseguys that are sometimes capable of seeing the political machinations – in this case John Fund, Rush Limbaugh and Kathryn Jean Lopez – to suggest that we are witnessing another classic Obama “head fake” simply because it seems too good to be true that the Obama that just kicked their asses at the ballot box would so immediately hand back to them that gift that keeps on giving).
The right wing loves the idea of a Secretary of State Clinton.
But they’re super scared about what an Attorney General Eric Holder could accomplish to undo all the harm that they have wrought.
You know, I just don’t know. Even though I snarked earlier about Broder, my gut instinct was to oppose her in this position, but to not think it is the end of the world if she is Secretary of State. I stated earlier today that I was ambivalent, and it was pointed out in the comments that I did initially say she was a bad pick. And as I noted in the comments, this really is not an inconsistency for me. I can think she is a bad pick but not really be wedded to that position (despite flashes of rage during the primary when I was appalled by the notion of Hillary anywhere near a potential Obama administration). To state again, if I really thought it would be the end of the world, I would have had 35 posts by now (go ahead and look for Schiavo posts in 2005, I dare you), with the last 25 ending with the statement “This is my final thought on the matter.” So, again, I am ambivalent.
At some point, and this blog is going on seven years, you have to realize that when you have been wrong about so many things, not having an answer or an opinion is perfectly ok. Obama seems to be pretty competent, so I will just sit back and wait and see. If he picks her, it will not be the end of the world, if he does not, life will go on. Again, ambivalent. I can see the pros and the cons.