Two items are on the wires here that worry me:

1. The Russian Parliament has just approved longer term for Putin. Presidential term now six years.

2. Obama's considering Hillary Clinton for Secretary of State.

I don't know which worries me more!

Great news about Putin, regarding the yank it makes no difference as they are all tarred with the same stick?

Bill,

I don't give a damn about Putin and Russia.

As for Hillary, she is no worse than Obama politically. She is a liberal democrat. She is probably just as smart as Madeline Albright or Angela Merkel, maybe even more so.

It will look bad a white woman running after the black man.

No, it will be a half-breed running after a white woman. Business as usual.

Why will you be running after a white woman???????

For the same reason you are an ignorant fool and you know nothing. You tell me why.

YYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN.

Figment:

It's not Hillary's politics which worry me. It's her personal character. She's a scheming, power-hungry "lady", who will walk over corpses to get more. She dumped Bill when he got in trouble, and there's no quesiton that she'd like to be President. Now whether that will involve doing Obama in (politically, not physically) or not remains to be seen. At any rate, I wouldn't trust her too far. I wouldn't put it past her at all to represent the US in a bad light if it would help her get what she's after.

Someone suggested she could cover Obama's back. That's the last place I'd want her. She'd be looking for where to put the knife.

As for Putin, he's an ex-KGB and still thinks like one. I don't doubt his patriotism, but I'm not at all convinced that he's good for Russia.

"She dumped Bill when he got in trouble,"

Bill,
Hilary didn't dump her cheating husband and this is what she did wrong. She should have given him the booth.

You are being too soft on Bill Clinton and too harsh on Hilary Clinton.

BTW Personally, I prefer Sarah Palin LOL

"She should have given him the booth."

Actually, she should have given him the BOOT. OR, she could have put him in a BOOTH and shipped him to Argentina ????LOL

DP:

Perhaps we're reading the same signals differently.

As I understand it, Hillary ran for the hills when the Monica Lewinski scandal broke. She only went back to Bill when she saw that he didn't fall as hard as she expected him to do, besides which it looked better for her to play the forgiving wife.

I sort of expected him to fall, too, especially when Arkansas disbarred him, but somehow he not only survived that, but went on the lecture circuit and made a fortune. It wouldn't have looked good for her at all to split from him then. I still think she's about as trustworthy as trying to make friends with a rattlesnake.

Personal opinion: Given the history, and the PC situation (as I understnad PC to mean these days), I should think that keeping Condoleezza would be the way to go. Her only flaw is that she's a Republican.

"As I understand it, Hillary ran for the hills when the Monica Lewinski scandal broke."

No, Bill. She "stood by her man" (as the song goes), Hillary went on TV and accused their/his "enemies" of conspiring to bring her husband down. She testified in his defence and she never uttered a ward against him. Don't know where you got this "running away to the hills" story but it could have been from the yellow press.

Her behaviour displeased a lot of the feminists and she had some hard time explaining to them her behaviour. And, in my opinion, she is not as much to the left as her reputation goes. Look at Clinton, her husband: he stole the Republican agenda for haven's sake!

Actually she would be a good Secretary of state me thinks. She is very smart, intelligent and once upon a time she was a Republican;-). She switched and like most turncoats she had to show how sinciere she is by going to the left far beyond necessary.

Plenty of examples like that. LOL

DP:

"She is very smart, intelligent..."

That's exactly what worries me about her. She's TOO smart. She's a schemer (pardon a nautical expression) from keel to masthead.

Of course, it's arguable that ALL politicians have to be schemers, but I think you get the drift of what I'm trying to say. Someone with Hillary's ego and grasping for power, coupled with that intelligence, is--to me, anyway--an explosive mixture that we just don't need at this time.

Condoleezza, on the other hand, is also smart and intelligent. Plus she has the experience and the contacts that we need. Her being black should satisfy those who think there needs to be more racial balance in the government, too, so that's a plus in her favor.

Bill,

Hillary HAS the experience. She had an office in the White House and she did exert influence. She worked on policies (the Health Plan) but it back-fired. Beyond certain point it is useless to compare experience for “too much experience” can have a negative impact on flexibility and trying to move with the times.

As far as ego goes—I think that there is a difference between ego and ambition. Hillary is very ambitious, but I don’t see her too much driven by her ego. It is an old stereotyping to assume that all smart and intelligent women are driven by their ego and are greedy for power. It is my opinion that Bill Clinton fits more your description of Hillary for he seems to crave admiration and approval too much. It massages his ego...;-)

Condy is fine too. But she is not interested, and she prefers Academia at this point of time. I suspect that her ego is quite big in size: she is very aloof--sure of her unquestionable superiority. How about that scenario? ;-)