Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Newsweek: How Hillary Found Her Groove With Obama

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU
 
Beacool Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-10 10:47 AM
Original message
Newsweek: How Hillary Found Her Groove With Obama
Edited on Sat Apr-24-10 10:49 AM by Beacool


Obama’s Bad Cop
Clinton's played the heavy with Iran, Russia, and even Israel—and her sometimes hawkish views are finding favor with the president.

By Michael Hirsh | NEWSWEEK
Published Apr 23, 2010

It was almost like one of those moments in a buddy-cop movie when the two partners who dislike each other at the beginning finally bond while taking on the bad guys. In mid-December Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton were in Copenhagen, where the leaders of more than 100 countries had gathered to negotiate a new agreement to combat global warming, and the summit was on the verge of collapse. Clinton later described it as the most disorganized meeting she'd seen since her eighth-grade student council. It "was just disintegrating right before everybody's eyes," she recalled to NEWSWEEK in an interview last week. Clinton and her former political rival, now the president, found themselves up against most of the rest of the world. At the last minute Obama sought a one-on-one meeting with the Chinese leader to rescue some kind of agreement, only to be told that Premier Wen Jiabao and his team still weren't ready to meet (after two years of prior procrastination). "No, we're going in now," Obama declared, looking at Clinton. "Absolutely," she said. "Let's go."

The former political rivals suddenly morphed into a diplomatic version of Starsky and Hutch. "I felt a particular responsibility since I had urged the president to come," Clinton said. "Because I knew nothing was going to happen unless we gave it our all." Striding down the hallway, with the Chinese protocol officer sputtering protests behind them, America's two best-known politicians barged into the meeting room. There they found Wen conferring secretly with the leaders of Brazil, India, and South Africa; behind the scenes, Beijing had been trying to block all efforts to impose standards for measuring, reporting, and verifying progress on carbon reduction. Smiling and shaking hands, Obama and Clinton worked the room together, as they had each done so many times before as contending politicians. Then the president sat down and started negotiating, with Clinton sliding position papers to him as needed. When the Chinese finally caved, both Obama and Clinton knew that it wasn't just because they had crashed the meeting. Two days before, the secretary of state had flown in to Copenhagen by surprise to deliver a sweetener to help win over developing countries. In essence, it was a global bribe: $100 billion a year from rich nations by 2020 to help poorer countries cope with climate controls. It was political hardball, Hillary style, and it had helped to isolate Beijing. Now Obama was closing the deal Clinton had set up.

The two came away from Copenhagen with a partial triumph and a new sense of maturity—both about their relationship and their sense of how to lead. Clinton later called it one of "the most extraordinary 48 hours she's spent in public life," said her global-warming negotiator, Todd Stern—which is saying something for a woman who's lived through political tumult for 18 years, including several presidential and senatorial campaigns. Clinton told NEWSWEEK that it was important for America to be seen taking the lead in tackling seemingly impossible problems, particularly in an era with rising new powers at the table, if only to show what the country stands for. "We can't just walk out of the arena and leave these important decisions to somebody else because it's messy, it's difficult, it requires compromise. That is what you have to do on the world stage today," she said. "We remain the strongest country in the world, but the way we exercise that leadership has changed dramatically."

Copenhagen also provided further evidence that the sharp differences between Obama and Clinton over foreign policy on the campaign trail were, as many on both sides now acknowledge, largely political theater. In fact, their views of American power had never been that far apart. "We're both, at bottom, problem solvers and practical, realistic people," Clinton says now. "As Mario Cuomo said, 'You campaign in poetry and you govern in prose.'?" Critics dismissed the climate targets as vague and voluntary, and the administration faces a separate onslaught from global-warming skeptics. But since the summit, 120 nations have signed on and 75 have submitted carbon-reduction plans, Stern says.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/236938?from=rss&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+newsweek%2FTopNews+%28UPDATED+-+Newsweek+Top+Stories%29

Their relationship appears to be evolving very nicely.

:-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
iamjoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-10 11:23 AM
Response to Original message
1. Ebony and Ovaries...
a ticket to our world harmony...

(credit - or blame - to Capitol Steps)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beacool Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-25-10 02:39 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. Ebony & Ovaries?
LOL!!! I hadn't thought it that way......

:D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hekate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-10 01:39 AM
Response to Reply #1
18. Funny! Love the Capitol Steps. Kick.
:kick:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jennicut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-10 11:34 AM
Response to Original message
2. Their ideas were not far apart at all. They had minor disagreements. Also, the debates with Hillary
only helped Obama in the long run. Watching those debates one could sense the two actually gained something from it. Two intelligent people. The debates with the Rethugs, which I watched, were abysmal in comparison.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beacool Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-25-10 02:44 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. Hi, Jenni!!!
How are thing in CT?

Yes, he became a better debater as time went on. Hillary was already an experienced debater. I remember one pundit saying that her responses could be timed with a chronometer, they hardly ever exceeded the allotted time.

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
msanthrope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-25-10 03:12 PM
Response to Reply #2
9. Those debates with Hillary honed him. He was smart enough to learn from his mistakes with her. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PBS Poll-435 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-10 11:36 AM
Response to Original message
3. K/R
:D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beacool Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-25-10 02:46 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. Thanks, my friend!!
:pals:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DevonRex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-25-10 02:58 PM
Response to Original message
7. I think they make each other stronger. They're a great team. Thanks bea! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beacool Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-25-10 04:55 PM
Response to Reply #7
11. You're welcome!!!
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clintonista2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-25-10 03:02 PM
Response to Original message
8. Too late to rec, but very good article
I like seeing them together, I think they make a great team
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beacool Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-25-10 04:58 PM
Response to Reply #8
12. That's OK, thanks for commenting.
Esquire also has an article on Hillary in their May issue.

:D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vattel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-25-10 04:16 PM
Response to Original message
10. I think they are both way too militaristic,
but they both got skills, and they are doing a lot that is good for the world.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dionysus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-26-10 12:09 PM
Response to Original message
13. got somethin for ya Bea...
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beacool Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-26-10 01:33 PM
Response to Reply #13
16. Banky for me????
:woohoo:

Thank you, I need it. Stressful day......

:hug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-26-10 01:20 PM
Response to Original message
14. This is revisionist history here
Today, the metamorphosis of bitter combatants into bona fide partners is not quite complete, but it is far along. Clinton herself says she and Obama quickly established a "collegial partnership," though she acknowledges that some of their aides "may have taken longer to shake off the vestiges of a very hard-fought campaign." Some friends marvel at the equanimity with which she accepted defeat and quickly allowed herself to be absorbed into the new administration. "If you look at defeated presidential candidates, the ones who thought they had a chance, a lot of them go into deep funks," says a former member of the Clinton administration who knows her well. "Kerry, John McCain. Al Gore took a while, too."

The truth is that Hillary Clinton stayed away from the Senate for slightly more than a month after the last primary - even though it was in session - that was a "funk".

Kerry returned the first day the Senate was back in session. Within the first month he sent a message via both his email and his snail mail list thanking people for what they did, but making a case for what we had to do going forward - speaking of winning seats in 2006 and a Democrat winning in 2008. In 2005 and 2006, while other Democrats were cowering, it was Kerry with a few others that led on trying to filibuster Alito and on Kerry/Feingold. The fact is that Kerry was the most resilient of the four of them. (Not to mention - the situation with Hillary was different. She lost the NOMINATION. It would be more accurate to compare her with primary losers though few have been as close. A major difference is that your agenda - as they were all close - was still going to be enacted. )

Now, BOTH of them were disappointed about their losses. Kerry had more reason to be - his loss meant Bush won - and it was closer - and Gore actually won! The difference was that, in public, Kerry continued on working - Hillary was the one who disappeared for a month. The fact is that in 2005, the Clinton wing of the party had a whisper campaign that Reid and the rest of the leadership were angry that Kerry considered himself a Democratic leader. Imagine, I guess he thought he was the last standard bearer!

I don't mind another in a long series of puff pieces, but I refuse to not comment on things that attempt to make lies the prevailing story - and this one is pervasive. There are some of us who actually followed what Kerry was doing in 2005.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beacool Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-26-10 01:29 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. The article is not about Kerry.
Edited on Mon Apr-26-10 01:29 PM by Beacool
Why do you always have to find a way to knock Hillary even when she's not the one who made the remark that you quote. Kerry would have been a good president and he's continuing to do a fine job in the Senate. How about once in a while giving Hillary her dues too?

She's at the moment the most popular politician in the country and the third most popular in the world (going by a recent French poll). She must be be doing something well.

:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-26-10 01:49 PM
Response to Reply #15
17. It's not about Kerry - but that paragraph
Edited on Mon Apr-26-10 01:57 PM by karynnj
attempts to make a comparison to benefit Hillary. The comparison ignores that Hillary did not experience the same thing as Kerry, McCain, and Gore. It then ignores all her actions of June and July 2008. The fact is "funk" describes her in those two months better than it did Kerry. The fact is that out of the four he was the one who handled defeat the best - even when he was treated poorly by his own party within months.

I have given Hillary credit when I think she deserves it. I would even ignored the puffery of her handling defeat so gracefully if the author did not unfairly use a negative characterization of Kerry. (It is fair to say that Gore and McCain went into funks - they did.)

In addition, she is no more the most popular politician in the country than Madelaine Albright, who had higher approval ratings than Bill Clinton did was. To my knowledge there is no poll that asks favorite politician done any time recently. Obama is very likely the most popular politician in the country. Now, I will concede that Hillary might beat Biden for second. I also will state that Kerry is likely nowhere in the running. Happy? I also think popularity polls follow positive media.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 02nd 2024, 05:54 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC