� Previous | Main | Next �
March 16, 2011 3:07 PM
ABC News'�Kirit Radia�reports:
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told an interviewer today that she would not accept a role in a possible second Obama administration.
The executive producer of the CNN show John King USA, Michelle Jaconi, tweeted that Secretary Clinton told the network in an interview in Cairo today that she ?would NOT be in an Obama 2nd term cabinet.?
Clinton had been rumored to take over for Defense Secretary Robert Gates, but has suggested she was not open to the job.
Clinton also told CNN she wouldn't want to be vice president or run for president again.
"You know, I had a wonderful experience running and I am very proud of the support I had and very grateful for the opportunity, but I'm going to be, you know, moving on," she said, according to a transcript.
While today?s comments would be the most definitive, Clinton has also said in the past that she has was leaning against another term as Secretary of State.
In January, she told The Today Show that a second term wasn?t something she was ?committing to or even thinking about.?
When asked during a PBS interview in January 2010 whether she could imagine staying on the job for another four years, she replied ?No, I really can?t,? saying a full 8 years would be ?very challenging.?
Clinton has said that once she leaves the Obama administration she would like to focus her work on women and girls, something she has remained passionate about during her time as America?s top diplomat.
- Kirit Radia
�
March 16, 2011 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (74)
There is not a snowballs chance in hell of Obama winning re-election so she really has nothing to worry about. To bad she could not run against him she would probably win this time.
Posted by: wade | Mar 17, 2011 12:17:48 AM
"Obama will get reelected and you Americans will get flushed down the Toilet once again." - GOPakaGreedyOilParty
I couldn't agree more.
Posted by: Noz | Mar 16, 2011 11:04:20 PM
Good, maybe she'll wash her hair.
Posted by: Freedom | Mar 16, 2011 11:04:17 PM
"Any traction the Repubs got after the last election is gone."
Rasmussen Generic Congressional Ballot, March 14: Republican 46%, Democrat 39%.
Posted by: Fascist Hyena | Mar 16, 2011 11:03:40 PM
Cool! We're not interested in a second term of BO, either.
Posted by: JustMe | Mar 16, 2011 10:24:40 PM
Any traction the Repubs got after the last election is gone. You look like a party of lunatics who hate the middle class and women. I'm not a fan of Obama at all, but he will win again easily. As for Hillary she is smart to leave the sinking ship with high ratings. It's bad for the country because she seemed like the only competent one in this administration.
Posted by: Lila | Mar 16, 2011 8:29:36 PM
BTW; One Thing President Obama Is No, and That Is a Cheap Empty Suit. Cause Those Suits Are Expensive; and I hope they are paid for by TEA TAX MONEY:::
Posted by: Vern | Mar 16, 2011 8:28:01 PM
Okay; Lets Say We get Rid of President Barack H.Obama In 2012, FINE, Now Who DO WE REPLACE HIM WITH?
Posted by: Vern | Mar 16, 2011 8:24:46 PM
No to Oboma to the next term and no to the republicans!
Posted by: GOLD5672 | Mar 16, 2011 8:14:27 PM
Please take "him" with you.
Posted by: LongT | Mar 16, 2011 7:58:13 PM
"Hillary Clinton Will Leave State Department if Obama Wins Reelection in 2012"
She must be a little slow. So MANY others have already left. They know "Mr. Present" is nothing more than a cheap suit.
Posted by: wheresmymoney | Mar 16, 2011 7:52:16 PM
"It should not be forgotten that our gigantic military budget is one of the primary drivers of our deficits."
Defense is 20% of federal spending. Social Security is 20%. Medicare and Medicaid are 23%. interest on the debt is 9%. The rest is discretionary and "other mandatory."
Posted by: Fascist Hyena | Mar 16, 2011 7:33:36 PM
She really is smarter than she appears, she can see the writing on the wall. I told you people before, these people are not as stupid as they are acting. Obama sees it too, he intends to play golf and watch basketball the rest of his term.
Posted by: cujo47 | Mar 16, 2011 7:29:24 PM
How is obama going to win again WITHOUT the independent vote?
Posted by: KRF | Mar 16, 2011 7:00:36 PM
Maybe Chelsea is going to have a baby! Grandma Clinton!
Posted by: just keepin It real | Mar 16, 2011 6:46:24 PM
Making significant cuts to the military is political suicide, possibly even if it's completely bipartisan.
Posted by: Skip | Mar 16, 2011 6:38:31 PM
Skip | Mar 16, 2011 6:25:23 PM
I know it was for defense against Iran, but we were discussing Russia's reaction to it. BTW, I am for a huge cut in defense with several cuts not even affecting our readiness. Stop all training deployments and cut ALL travel by 30% for annual meetings (they can teleconference). Cut, by attrition, 15% of the 0-3's and above as we are very top heavy. Quit making changes to the uniforms and organizations as it costs millions to make the changes. Cut pilot training flights by 20% and they will still remain ready. We fly training more than any nation on earth. Many ways to cut the military while remaining a superpower.
Posted by: lfrichar | Mar 16, 2011 6:35:11 PM
The only person interested in seeing Obama elected to a second term, other than Obama, is George W. Bush, who is thankful that he is now only the second worst, rather than the worst, president in US history. Obama is a total failure. He should be repudiated by the Democrats and another Democrat should run in his place. Barring that, it's anyone but Obama, even Donald Duck would be a better choice.
Posted by: Zadeekah | Mar 16, 2011 6:33:12 PM
?Hillary Clinton Rules Out Second Term As Secretary Of State ? ?
Certainly that's the ONLY good decision she's made as Sec. State ? it?s VERY UNLIKELY our new REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT will want her to stay on.
Posted by: TeaPartyPatriot | Mar 16, 2011 6:29:02 PM
It should not be forgotten that our gigantic military budget is one of the primary drivers of our deficits.
Posted by: Skip | Mar 16, 2011 6:27:40 PM
Answer those questions and you will find the system is quite effective and worthy of keeping us even safer from big, bad Russia
======================
The missile shield was designed to protect Europe from Iran, not Russia...with the obvious problem some of you have with enemy identification it's no wonder the Russians get nervous.
Posted by: Skip | Mar 16, 2011 6:25:23 PM
Skip | Mar 16, 2011 6:14:48 PM
In closing, you remember Gates and the killing of the F-22 program? China was so afraid they didn't want them to land on their continent. Originially contracted for 750 to replace the aging F-15, the government cut the numbers to 388. After further review, they cut the number down to 187 (eventhough the Air Force pleaded for at least 260). After all was said and done, had we originally contracted for 260 aircraft, it would have cost the exact same as what we paid for 187. When the government can't decide what to do, it costs alot more money to fix it. Oh, Gates, the original proponent of the F-22, is now the opponent since he now works under this administration. MANY times the government makes these decision. Another example is we wated over $4 billion on a new Presidential helicopter and then killed the program, under the very same SecDef Gates. Smart guy huh?
Posted by: lfrichar | Mar 16, 2011 6:23:28 PM
Skip | Mar 16, 2011 6:14:48 PM
Well Skip, that missile system was researched, developed, tried and tested by the USA and it works great. All of the R&D money and testing we did was a waste huh? Actually, what system do you think is protecting us right now? Why do you think Russia was so against it? Answer those questions and you will find the system is quite effective and worthy of keeping us even safer from big, bad Russia.
Posted by: lfrichar | Mar 16, 2011 6:18:10 PM
Why would I give an entity more money to mismanage
======================
-like by blowing megabucks on a European missile defense shield that nobody is certain will really work, but is guaranteed to seriously aggravate the largest military power in the region.
Posted by: Skip | Mar 16, 2011 6:14:48 PM
green.goddess | Mar 16, 2011 5:46:20 PM
Tax increases? I would be happy to accept a tax increase as soon as the government can show me any evidence they can cut spending. Why would I give an entity more money to mismanage when they have already proven they can't manage what they have. Obama has increased the Education Dept by almost 200% and have you seen any difference in our education system? I am all for a spending cut across the board of 15% (as a start). I am also all for a new tax code, ZERO loopholes and a flat tax at 17% (possibly graduated for low incomers). I do have some heart.
Posted by: lfrichar | Mar 16, 2011 6:06:09 PM
lfrichar | Mar 16, 2011 4:59:17 PM posted ?So is your idea to take all the government contracted jobs and make them civil service jobs??
No, the idea is to return to pre-Bush spending, especially cutting expensive contractors. Privatization isn't always the ideal cost effective solution. Why not create a required civil service job if that salary is HALF the cost of outsourcing with a mercenary business?
You can see spending charted year by year at USAspending.gov. The federal government has massively increased its expenditures on "contracts" from 2002 to 2011, spending over $4 TRILLION.
And while you are at it, google "You Fix the Budget" - it's an interactive puzzle to close Federal budget gaps short term and long term. You'll notice it includes sensible options for both spending cuts and tax increases.
Posted by: green.goddess | Mar 16, 2011 5:46:20 PM
Skip | Mar 16, 2011 5:27:13 PM
You've been reading the Obama news again haven't you? The system would have worked just fine, but in order to cancel something to appease our ex-enemy Russia, they had to come up with a reason. Their answer is to use our naval ships in the area as coverage. Hmm, sooner or later those ships leave the area. A missile defense system is for protection, as well as a deterrent andinthis case, we, and our allies, got neither. But hey, that guarantees more work abroad for our Navy i guess huh?
Posted by: lfrichar | Mar 16, 2011 5:36:10 PM
What service are we doing our allies by passing off a missile system which doesn't really work very well as protecting them?
Posted by: Skip | Mar 16, 2011 5:27:13 PM
Skip | Mar 16, 2011 5:19:54 PM
And IF you were curious, everytime Obama talks about ridding the planet of nukes, please try not to get excited. It's like saying we will rid the planet of gunss. It's very close to impossible.
Posted by: lfrichar | Mar 16, 2011 5:26:40 PM
Skip | Mar 16, 2011 5:19:54 PM
The START treaty is a political game to appease the people from each country. We still have the capability to blow our earth up many, many times over. It obviously worked on you though. Did you expect it not to get signed and are you sighing in relief that we didn't get into another nuclear arms race? You guys are funny!
Posted by: lfrichar | Mar 16, 2011 5:25:00 PM
The key word there is "former". We want to keep it that way.
Posted by: Skip | Mar 16, 2011 5:24:19 PM
Skip | Mar 16, 2011 5:16:12 PM
Where I am from, that is called throwing 2 allies under the bus to appease a former enemy. You must be from somewhere else.
Posted by: lfrichar | Mar 16, 2011 5:21:18 PM
Appeasing Russia only to be slapped in the face by them
=========================
Our strategic nuclear weapons treaties with the Russians are of vital importance and beneficial to both sides as well as the rest of thew world, despite these allegations of some silly metaphorical slap.
Posted by: Skip | Mar 16, 2011 5:19:54 PM
missile shield scrapped and Poland and Czech unhappy with it
=========================
Luckily the Administration had the sense not to aggravate the Russians by imposing a missile shield of only dubious effectiveness regardless of how happy with it these other nations are.
Posted by: Skip | Mar 16, 2011 5:16:12 PM
don't let the door hit you trader...I knew you would try to put him down or turn on him at some point.How could you run against him,loose and stand with him.He gave you a chance to still make a difference and this is how you repay him.You would not have given him the same chance.So you should go somewhere and sit down.
Posted by: dino | Mar 16, 2011 5:13:33 PM
Slamming on Israel every chance we get
======================
-babying Israel every chance we get is a better description.
Posted by: Skip | Mar 16, 2011 5:12:10 PM
Martin | Mar 16, 2011 4:57:17 PM
Out of control? Then prove me wrong please. I noticed the moment I asked GOPakaGreedyOilParty a specific question he simply disappeared. So tell me, where in my post did I lie?
Posted by: lfrichar | Mar 16, 2011 5:11:38 PM
Doing absolutely nothing to Iran and even less to N Korea about their illegal nuclear ambitions
=====================
Yes we've all heard it before: in Righty World imposing sanctions counts as doing absolutely nothing, while real suggestions about what to do instead range from the nonexistent to absurd.
Posted by: Skip | Mar 16, 2011 5:08:42 PM
green.goddess | Mar 16, 2011 4:55:30 PM
So is your idea to take all the government contracted jobs and make them civil service jobs? That will certainly grow the government. Personally, I think your numbers are incorrect. I guess you have no CBO numbers or something other than a "select" committee?
Posted by: lfrichar | Mar 16, 2011 4:59:17 PM
Lfrichar: You must be back from playing golf. Please give us a break. Some of us are tired of your right wing ranting! Green Goddess, where are you when I need you, lfrichar is out of control.
Posted by: Martin | Mar 16, 2011 4:57:17 PM
Not an easy job - dealing with chaos outside in the world + a huge organization.
According to USAspending.gov, the State Department more than quadrupled its spending on "contractors" under the Bush administration ($1.3 billion to $5.6 billion).
Overall, the federal government more than doubled its expenditures on "outsourcing" from 2000-2008, and the DOD tripled its contractor spending ($133.2 billion in 2000 to $391.4 billion in 2008).
I find it stunning that tea soaked Republicans are hysterical about Teacher?s unions stealing tax payers? money, yet unquestioningly accept such massive, massive spending on privatized contractors.
For example, the CIA and NSA employees are banned from engaging in collective bargaining. Forming a company is one way a group of operatives can bargain for wages, health benefits or insurance.
In 2007 the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence reported that a government civilian employee costs on average $126,500 a year, but the annual cost of a privatized government ?contractor?, including overhead, is $250,000.
Posted by: green.goddess | Mar 16, 2011 4:55:30 PM
stupid is as stupid does....we elected him once and we are stupid enough to do it again....hope we are able to survive that given what we've been through these last 4 years
Posted by: Tom, Long Beach, California | Mar 16, 2011 4:52:59 PM
Let's see, missile shield scrapped and Poland and Czech unhappy with it. Slamming on Israel every chance we get. Doing absolutely nothing to Iran and even less to N Korea about their illegal nuclear ambitions. All but ordering Mubarak and Ghaddafi to step down with no authority to do so. Appeasing Russia only to be slapped in the face by them. Weak response to N Korea slaughtering S Koreans after they sank a ship and attacked the mainland putting 40000 US military in danger. Those are affairs for the SOS and we definitely have issues!
Posted by: lfrichar | Mar 16, 2011 4:50:55 PM
"Obama will get reelected and you Republicans will get flushed down the Toilet once again.." -
Posted by GOPakaGreedyOilParty
I really get a kick out of this. So, if Obama was to get elected to a 2nd term, to heck with the other half of the country right? Our government is almost always near 50/50 and the answer you have is to flush the other 50% down the toilet right? Brilliant, you guys are a riot!
Posted by: lfrichar | Mar 16, 2011 4:44:57 PM
"You know, I had a wonderful experience running and I am very proud of the support I had and very grateful for the opportunity, but I'm going to be, you know, moving on," - Hillary Clinton
Smart move.
When you haven't been successful after more than two years as Secretary of State you can't seriously run for President.
Posted by: Noz | Mar 16, 2011 4:44:24 PM
Obama will get reelected and you Republicans will get flushed down the Toilet once again..
Posted by: GOPakaGreedyOilParty
____________________
The latest Rasmussen poll shows that Obama's approval rating is now down to 23%. It seems you libs are arleady "down the toilet".
I suggest you pray for a miracle to happen between now and 2012.
Posted by: spike | Mar 16, 2011 4:43:08 PM
@ Billy Bob - disaster? Gopa above already refuted your "point". Please back up what you say, or keep it to yourself!
Posted by: Gerald | Mar 16, 2011 4:38:48 PM
Imagine if she had won the presidency. More than four years as SoS is "challenging," would she have given up the presidency already?
Posted by: Jon | Mar 16, 2011 4:34:25 PM
Mike - can you name one thing Hillary has done to demonstrate her "service" to America?
Posted by: Bill | Mar 16, 2011 4:30:15 PM
Thanks to Hillary for her years of service to our country. To those of you who bicker about this party and that and address out President and potential opposition candidates with moronic nicknames please stop. It is this lack of intelligent debate, the disrespectful tone, and constant need for "sound-bite" reassurance that you are right and "they" are wrong that will be the downfall of this country.
Posted by: Mike | Mar 16, 2011 4:24:57 PM
Post a comment
Source: http://feeds.abcnews.com/click.phdo?i=0e8aa3038a648e57113aecb763168ad9
Elizabeth Windsor Queen Elizabeth II Wu Yi Viktor Yushchenko Nancy Pelosi
No comments:
Post a Comment