Hillary’s Hidden Hand

i feel like i was readying the national enquirer...most statements likely taken out of context and with no real validity... pure speculation! Shame on newsweek for printing this.. have some class..

OBAMA FOR president

"There is no doubt that Hillary's proximity to the Oval Office has given her a familiarity with the presidency that is unsurpassed by any of her rivals. She knows the mechanics of the White House and the demands of the job."
In fact, there is no doubt that Hillary's experience has taught her how to hector a president, the one at whose desk the buck actually stops, while maintaining her position in the shadows, the place where she leaves "no fingerprints". It is highly likely that this is the worst possible "training" for the genuine responsibilities of the presidency. It is one thing to be Rasputin, it is another to be Tsar. Who is Hillary going to call on the phone and swear at when she's the one who has to make the tough, final decisions? Worse, keeping in mind that she'd have probably vetoed the final welfare reform bill just as much as the first two versions, no matter how much the country was ready for it, this lady presents a very scary prospect. I admit, I would not have voted for Hillary, anyway, I'm not trying to fool anybody. But you know how, after an election, even if your favorite lost, you say to yourself, "Oh, well, that's that. Good luck to the winner and I guess things will work out more or less"? I was prepared to feel that way even if Hillary won the presidency. After reading this article, however, I am inclined to think I'll have nothing but a deep, quiet sense of foreboding and dread if she gets into the White House.
All the same, and paradoxically, I'd kind of like to see her get the Dem nomination. Because I believe she'll lose in November.
Ken Sears
Dallas, TX

With her intimate knowledge of the workings inside the white house, plus her 7 years in the Senate (Armed Services Committee), Hilary Clinton is by far the most uniquely qualified candidate to step into the whitehouse and begin the job of being President. I, for one, plan to vote for her - at this point in time we cannot afford to waste time on someone that does not understand the job and all it's complexities.

I would be interested to know what source Sally Smith in her article Hillary's Hidden Hand used to make a statement "he (Bill Clinton) had to defer to her (Hillary), in part because of their implicit marital bargain, in which Bill ceded her power as a trade-off for his history of infidelity." No source was mentioned and I wonder on what grounds does Smith have to include such a statement. Does Newsweek print anything a writer writes? Another dispute I have with Smith in this article is her personal concern to know all the details of the Clintons marital matters. Like that is any concern of hers or anyone else. Let her (Smith) disclose her marital discourse with the World. What a trivial and malicious journalism. Sally, Get a life!

After Bush ,I am not ready to vote for another well experienced liar like Hillary Clinton.These so-called "well experienced "candidates are conditioned to lying like the Pavlov dog.As far as I'm concerned ,political experience is about saving your skin and we dont need it in this century.We need a candidate who will save America,not his or her political career.A lot of experience means a lot of lying.

Hillary Clinton voting for the war, and a blank check for the war is against everything she stands for, unfortunately there are forces that control individuals in Washinton that is beyond our realm. Inotherwords if a politician is in trouble they will go against their own principles just to save themselves. This is why I say Hillary should be appointed to a health and childrens welfare committee under an Obama presidency. That way she will not be susceptible to scandal. The Clintons have shown time and time again that they are too political. Their decisions are based on what's best for them first and the people second. Hillary Clinton laughs at the fact that there are individuals who can tell her what kind of president to be. If going negative assists her she will do it, if going family helps her she will do it. These individuals in Washington have been programed to adhere to the will of special interst lobbyists. Why do you think we fund Israeli security forces. The politician is guided by their own narrow interests. This the conclusion I have come too over the holidays. The democrats that have been in the Senate and in the Congress for the last 6 years and have done nothing on a national scale. Edwards has done nothing as a Senator, his voting record indicates he has gone along with whatever the mainstream has wanted him to do, Clinton has done what ever the mainstream has wanted her to do, and pelosi has been playing games and is getting schooled everyday. I have no choice but to vote for OBAMA, what other hope is exist. We need someone who is not programmed and that can bring unity. Obama has not flip floped, he has run a steady and unified campaign even when he was down in the polls, his campaign has stayed focused and positive. Clinton went from negative, to bashing, to family . What is going it is like a script has been written everyday and Hillary is just the actor reading the lines. Like I said there are those that think they are far more experienced and knowledgable than us, but when you look at their individual record it is as if they never had experience. We are stupid and this is why our candidates act stupid. Remember our candidates are a reflection of our society, do what you half to do to get ahead even if it means going against your principles. Experience.

You do not control the Government the Government controsl you and this has to change. We are not talking race we are talking constitution. The Government is cleverly taking over our civil liberties, slowly, intelligently. Keeping us dumb. Romney is playing the same card Bush did. There stupid so do not play smart

I just skimmed all the comments. I can't believe that no one mentioned her little habit of using the personal files the IRS and FBI had on political rivals, ie. conservatves, as bed time stories in her White House bedroom. For all you liberals that complain about the Patriot Act stealiing all our personal freedoms, there isn't a peep about this.

It will be interesting to watch how Hillary explains her role as first lady because it???s a double edge sword. But no matter what, the discussion will highlight the fact that she is candidate only because she is married to Bill Clinton.

On the one hand, to emphasize experience, she wants to show that she had a lot of say in Bills administration. But that would make Bill look somewhat like a wussy. It will also point to undue influence and undermining other cabinet members. It also brings into question what recipricol influence Bill will have over the Hillary Administration.

On the other hand, if she says she merely played the appropriate role as a first lady, then it will take away from her claim of experience. Granted, living in the White House with her husband does give her experience. However, its not much more experience that Laura Bush has to become president.

Unfortunately, for her, no matter how she presents her role as first lady, it will highlight the fact that she is a Presidential candidate only because she is married to Bill Clinton. If not for Bill, she would not be Senator. If not for Bill, she would not have the special powers she enjoyed as being Bills wife. If not for Bill, she would definitely not be a presidential candidate. Bill Clinton really fought 95 percent of Hillarys battle to the White House. Her only major battle scar is from enduring Bill Clintons scandals.

In contrast, Obama, Edwards, and the other candidates are candidates on their own hard work, experience, and talent.

It will be interesting to watch how Hillary explains her role as first lady because it???s a double edge sword. But no matter what, the discussion will highlight the fact that she is candidate only because she is married to Bill Clinton.

On the one hand, to emphasize experience, she wants to show that she had a lot of say in Bills administration. But that would make Bill look somewhat like a wussy. It will also point to undue influence and undermining other cabinet members. It also brings into question what recipricol influence Bill will have over the Hillary Administration.

On the other hand, if she says she merely played the appropriate role as a first lady, then it will take away from her claim of experience. Granted, living in the White House with her husband does give her experience. However, its not much more experience that Laura Bush has to become president.

Unfortunately, for her, no matter how she presents her role as first lady, it will highlight the fact that she is a Presidential candidate only because she is married to Bill Clinton. If not for Bill, she would not be Senator. If not for Bill, she would not have the special powers she enjoyed as being Bills wife. If not for Bill, she would definitely not be a presidential candidate. Bill Clinton really fought 95 percent of Hillarys battle to the White House. Her only major battle scar is from enduring Bill Clintons scandals.

In contrast, Obama, Edwards, and the other candidates are candidates on their own hard work, experience, and talent.

I Think she will make a great President,like you said she lerarn,from her mistakes. She will be great.

Why doesn't Obama have to talk about his Religion, I would like to know if he is a Muslim and when does he think that God may send him on a mission to kill more Americans!