Would you guys like to see Joe as SOS?

[gateley]

Initially I was against it (like he asked my opinion :eyes:) because I felt he shouldn't be constrained by being part of an Administration.

Then, when Obama was asked what he would do on day one, he said he'd call in, among others, his SOS and begin to move toward a resolution for Iraq. I was thinking -- uh, what about the Chairman of the SFRC? Why wouldn't he be called in? So maybe Joe WOULD have more input if he had an office in the West Wing (or wherever).

On the other hand, then Joe wouldn't be able to do the good stuff he does in so many other areas -- grilling SCOTUS candidates, for example.

What do you think?

Since we can't have him as president, where he could do the MOST good, where do you think we could benefit from having him? (Awkwardly stated, but you know what I mean.)

[Muttocracy]

1. a really good question, and I'm undecided...

I can see pros to having him as VP, Sec of State, or just where he is.

As far as the Senate - if the majority is still tight we need him there. I think the Dems will increase their majority (more incumbent Repubs up for reelection than Dems) but it's hard to say. Delaware would probably be a safe Dem seat anyway though (Dem governor would appoint).

If not... maybe he could be most effective in the executive branch. It seems to me foreign policy is made primarily by the executive, and domestic policy is more of a balance between leg. and exec.

But I don't know. Eagerly listening for hints from him!!

[gateley]

10. I'm eagerly awaiting a hint, too.

I know he would be effective regardless of where he is, but if he were to accept a position in the exec branch, that leaves a gaping hole in all the other areas where he is contributing.

Hell, he sponsored legislation for funding into lithium battery research, for cripes sake -- the man is into everything!

But on the other hand, maybe it would be better to focus on Iraq since it is the 'boulder in the road', and he would be best suited to advise the next Prez on that, I think.

Such a quandary.

This is why we needed him for Prez - he could be overseer of ALL the fires.

[WheelWalker]

2. Would you like to see him as VPOTUS? Assuming, of course,

he consented to either, and recognizing that consenting to run for VPOTUS is only as a candidate, albeit a sure winner, I think.

Here's my answer to your question. Yes. And yes to my question, too, no doubt. While his influence as SOS would be more potent (than even as Chmn of the SFRC), he admittedly would have less influence on the broader range and scope of issues a US Senator of his stature and seniority draws within his sphere. However, there is no question that we must have the best people in each sphere of knowledge and experience in a cabinet, and I feel that's especially true in an Obama administration. And I think in the case of BO, he would have significant influence in formulating policy, not merely executing policy. As to VPOTUS, would you not want JB as the one who backs up the POTUS, from just a heartbeat away? I think BO has shown himself to be a consummate team player in this campaign, and that speaks positively for Joe's impact on policy from either of those positions, I wager.

[gateley]

11. Good points all, VI.

I think regardless of who becomes the Prez, s/he would certainly lend an ear to Joe's input regarding foreign affairs if he were VPOTUS or SOS.

I'm wondering if Hillary wins, though, if she has Clark or Joe Wilson penciled in for SOS...

He would be exemplary in either position, but as we all know, BEST for the job of POTUS.

It'll be exciting to see what -- if anything -- transpires.

[GardeningGal]

3. How does Delaware handle a senate replacment?

I would love to see Joe as SOS, but I'd like to understand Delaware's rules for replacing him.

[Muttocracy]

4. U.S. Constitution specifies that governors appoint replacements.

So in DE, it would a Dem governor (I'm blanking on her name) making the appointment.

edit for typo

[murbley40]

29. Her name is Ruth Anne Minner,but she is up also, but

it is % a given that the office will remain Democratic.

[KingOfLostSouls]

5. Vice President

if its obama he's going to need a strong vice presidential candidate who is really well versed in foreign affairs.

plus after darth fudd, joe would bring dignity and respect back to the VP's office

I think joe, with a strong SOS like tony zinni or someone else whos well travelled would do excellent there.


if its clinton, I doubt she'd pick joe as her running mate. she'll go for someone with more DLC credentials. she might pick him for SOS though.


but I don't see joe in anything but the VP position, just a cabinet position seems demeaning to him.

[gateley]

12. Even VP seems a bit demeaning to me since I'm still of the stalwart belief

that Joe is the best pick for POTUS.

Sigh. I just hope that whoever gets the job utilizes him because we need him in any capacity now.

Hell, even McCain and he have a respect for one another. I know Joe has been critical of McCain's recent Iraq comments, but he (Joe) is always up front about his disagreements and seems to be able to state them without making it a personal attack.

[Muttocracy]

6. also - Joe has mentioned Holbrooke and Lugar as good Sec of State

candidates - not sure how serious he was being either time...

[KingOfLostSouls]

7. Some repubs would be

free of the bush shackles and of their party, a republican SOS with some experience would be good

I mean, chuck hagel went to pakistan with joe and john kerry. Hagel might be a good pick.

[gateley]

9. Hagel is on the SFRC, too, I think -- isn't he?

I think he's THIS CLOSE to shedding his Republican shroud, and he's not going to run for re-election this time around. Wonder what he's up to.....

[Muttocracy]

13. yep, an amazing group on that committee - heck, I'd let them rule by committee

with Joe as chair of course! :D

Don't know a ton about some of them, but Biden, Dodd, Kerry, Feingold, Boxer, and I like Lugar and Hagel on the other side from what I know of them. Hope MN ditches Coleman, though. A lot of the members seem to rarely show up for hearings :(

Chairman
Joseph R. Biden

Ranking Member
Richard G. Lugar

Christopher J. Dodd
Connecticut

John F. Kerry
Massachusetts

Russell D. Feingold
Wisconsin

Barbara Boxer
California

Bill Nelson
Florida

Barack Obama
Illinois

Robert Menendez
New Jersey

Benjamin L. Cardin
Maryland

Robert P. Casey Jr.
Pennsylvania

Jim Webb
Virginia



Chuck Hagel
Nebraska

Norm Coleman
Minnesota

Bob Corker
Tennessee

George V. Voinovich
Ohio

Lisa Murkowski
Alaska

Jim DeMint
South Carolina

Johnny Isakson
Georgia

David Vitter
Louisiana

John Barrasso
Wyoming

[gateley]

8. Yeah - I heard him say that.

I had to look up Holbrooke. He's tight with the CFR which I automatically knee-jerk negatively react to.

Lugar is great, in my book but boy, I don't think he has too many years left in him, bless his heart.

[Muttocracy]

14. but Biden is a CFR member? He was teasing Holbrooke at a CFR speech

after they got back from Pakistan/Afghan/. Have also seen him praise Holbrooke at one of the SFRC hearings

[gateley]

15. For some reason,

I think I learned that he's not a CFR MEMBER, per se, but maybe visiting contributor. Or am I confusing that with the DLC? I'll go look.

EDIT: Found this on a blog entry -- we can tell how the OP feels! I'll go look some more -- for a VALID members list.

CRF / AIPAC Scumbag Traitors

Fred Thompson- CFR (R)
Rudy Giuliani- CFR (R)
John McCain- CFR (R)
Mitt Romney- CFR (R)
Hillary Clinton- CFR/AIPAC/Bilderberg (D)
Barack Obama- CFR/AIPAC (D)
John Edwards- CFR (D)
Joe Biden- CFR (D)
Chris Dodd- CFR (D)
Bill Richardson- CFR/AIPAC (D)

Note: Rudy Giuliani has campaign leaders closely associated with AIPAC.

Who Opposes the CFR and foreign lobbies?

Ron Paul (R)
Tom Tancredo (R)
Dennis Kucinich (D)
Mike Gravel (D)

Received equal, extensive and even LAVISH media coverage

Fred Thompson- CFR (R)
Rudy Giuliani- CFR (R)
John McCain- CFR (R)
Mitt Romney- CFR (R)
Hillary Clinton- CFR/AIPAC/Bilderberg (D)
Barack Obama- CFR/AIPAC (D)
John Edwards- CFR (D)
Joe Biden- CFR (D)
Chris Dodd- CFR (D)
Bill Richardson- CFR/AIPAC (D)

Has been ignored, misrepresented and SMEARED in the corporate, CFR media

Ron Paul (R)
Tom Tancredo (R)
Dennis Kucinich (D)
Mike Gravel (D)

[gateley]

16. No membership list on the CFR website,

but there are several divisions and I didn't check them all. There are currently around 4300 members, which might account for the fact that they DON'T have a roster available.

The only membership lists I can find are on conspiracy-type sites, and those include names like Al Gore, John Kerry, Joe, and zillions of others

From the site, Colin Powell and Tom Brokaw are currently on the Board of Directors, and there are 4,300 members. (wow!)

They keep about 50% of their meetings "secret" to enable members to speak freely about concerns without the worry of info being made public (like Bildenberg?)

Their main financing is from corporations, foundations and endowments.

I just get the feeling that it's kind of right-leaning. They do have speakers, and I recall that Joe has given speeches there, so maybe that's the connection?

[Muttocracy]

17. maybe he isn't a member, just speaks there and worked w/ Gelb on Iraq

Gelb as in Biden-Gelb Iraq plan - I think he is past-president of it or something, so I guess I assumed Joe was a member.

Found a neat speech there he gave just before 2004 election - sort of a plan for him as Sec. of State -
http://www.cfr.org/publication.html?id=7462

Nice summary of him on their campaign page:
http://www.cfr.org/bios/1451/joseph_r_biden_jr.html

[gateley]

19. Great links -- thanks!! nt

[Muttocracy]

18. Wikipedia link on CFR controversy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_on_Foreign_Relations#Controversy

[gateley]

20. Wow - I was RIVETED.

What started out as a feeling of unease progressed to finding it chilling.

That so few people have so much power is wrong, and they have the capacity to implement the changes they feel are for the better, regardless of what We The People feel.

I'm guessing that it's grown so large that much of it is innocuous, but I have no doubt there are groups within the group. Even when it had fewer than 700 members secret actions were being taken with only those members that were participants being aware. :scared:

No wonder it's viewed with suspicion and distrust.

Thanks for this link -- wow.

[Muttocracy]

21. I guess I just assume the wealthy are in control of the world

via politics or corporations -- and I'm not afraid of international governmental organizations the way some of the conspiracy groups are (I like the idea of a strong functional U.N.) But I still don't have a full handle on the CFR and it seems like they should publish a list of members.

[gateley]

22. It reminds me of the group that got together

at Jekyll Island years ago and formed the Federal Reserve. They were captains of industry (competitors) but came together to plan the future of our economic system to get it strong and keep them rich.

These groups, to me, have an agenda and they believe they know "what's right" for the country. They are motivated by self-interests, and they wield immense power.

I think Cheney summed up their attitude when told that the majority of Americans are against the Iraq occupation, he replied "so?". We don't count and I get that same feeling, to an extent, about this group. Or a sub-group within it anyway.

I like the idea of a strong UN, too. In theory, it's the right way to co-exist in the world. I'm very much of a "we are the world, we are the children" type.

[PatSeg]

23. It is like a futuristic movie

and it is chilling.

There are those who seek to run the world for money and power, but the scariest are those who really think the know what is best for the mere mortals of the world. They treat the world as if it is a game and people are just dispensable pawns.

[gateley]

24. We see this shit happening elsewhere in the world

and are outraged and gobsmacked that the populace ALLOWS it to happen. It's happening here and it has been for a long time. We The People are unaware.

I have a bumper sticker that reads

Stop Bitching
Start a Revolution

I think we're nearing the point where that might become a reality.

[PatSeg]

25. I'm reading right now about Vietnam

and I'm so depressed as I see the same shit happening yet again. It was traumatic enough the first time, but the rerun is devastating. I hope the younger generation has the will and energy to take this on. I'm flat out too tired.

[gateley]

26. When I was reading about the CFR,

there was something about someone proposing that Viet Nam was not an imminent Communist threat and that we could probably be successful in working with the government. It was nixed by the CFR "brains" -- and I wondered if that was the real genesis of our involvement there.

When we first went into Iraq I was discussing it with a friend at work, saying "it's gonna be another Viet Nam". He blew that off and said "well you're one to talk - people of your generation actually blamed the soldiers". I said yeah, some people did, but WE'VE learned.

Well, I'm not sure WE have learned because we put Bush back into office and there are those who still think we're right in being there.

It reminds me when I had my espresso business in Seattle in like '91. Kids would come by, who would be about the age of my kids if I'd had any, and they were RACIST. I couldn't understand how people of my generation raised kids like that.

Makes my head and heart hurt.

[PatSeg]

27. Actually that whole "blame the soldiers"

was Nixon propaganda. There were a few extremists who did, but most of us had friends and family who were in the military or eligible for the draft. The ridiculous stories that we heard were usually total BS and meant to portray anti-war people as also anti-soldier. The myths live on.

It is generally the military-industrial complex that fuels these wars and the propaganda. Gotta have perpetual enemies to keep the industry alive and well. We are the most self-destructive species on the planet.

[jillan]

28. Yes!

Very much so. He would be perfect. Even Kerry thought so in 2004.

[1corona4u]

30. No.

[Froward69]

31. YES