Bill Clinton would like Hillary Clinton considered as Barack Obama’s running mate, according to Clinton friends — though it is uncertain what Hillary or Obama thinks of the idea. Bill reportedly thinks that if Hillary doesn’t win the nomination this year, the vice presidency might be the best path for her to become president in 2016.
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- donndublin on Open thread 11/24
- Boxlock20 on Open thread 11/24
- SolDevVB on Open thread 11/24
- Phantom on Open thread 11/24
- sursum on Open thread 11/24
- SolDevVB on Open thread 11/24
- donndublin on Open thread 11/24
- DavidB on Open thread 11/24
- DavidB on Open thread 11/24
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/24
44 Comments
We Obamaniacs call Hillary as VP the “nightmare ticket.”
She ran. She lost.
Get over it.
“YES, WE CAN! (keep Hillary’s DLC wing out of the White House).”
I’m pretty sure Senator Clinton knows (and especially in light of Senator Kennedy’s recent diagnosis) that she’s best equipped to become a major force in the United States Senate for the rest of her political career. And the Washington Post’s suggestion that she get the next nomination to the Supreme Court has a lot going for it.
President Clinton might be floating a trial balloon but I don’t think Hillary’s gonna settle with the proverbial “pitcher of warm
pissspit.”Why would Hillary trade a job of import in the Senate, where she can be a player, for the VP position, a do nothing job with no import and no authority? She doesn’t need the money . . .
Further, the history of VPs ascending to the presidency isn’t good; GHWB was the first to do so since before the Civil War, IIRC. And Gore, following a popular president, failed to accomplish same.
Even further; Hillary doesn’t help Obama’s ticket. She doesn’t shore up where he is weak. Both are weak on experience and foreign policy grounds (picking out the china for state dinners and lieing about dodging bullets doesn’t count as foreign policy experience). She brings enormous negatives to a ticket seen as positive, and would be an agent of the status quo on a ticket who’s focus is “change” (as amorphous as that is).
And do you want Bill Clinton prowling around the White House, looking over your shoulder?
I don’t know if she’ll take the job or not. But it doesn’t make any sense, for any number of reasons.
Does it really matter what Bill wants?
Guess what?
You can’t always get what you want
You can’t always get what you want
You can’t always get what you want
But if you try sometimes you might find
You get what you need
(Thanks, Rolling Stones!)
“Further, the history of VPs ascending to the presidency isn’t good; GHWB was the first to do so since before the Civil War, IIRC.”
GMC, you are a little off base on that one.
There was Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford and Lyndon B. Johnson, all of them ascended into president after being V.P.
I agree with GMC – why would Obama want Bill Clinton prowling around the White House? Knowing Bill Clinton’s ego, he would be trying to throw his weight around (even though he would be nothing but the VP’s husband)
I heard an interesting thought from a friend of mine this morning. If Obama is the nominee – he should not pick Hillary for VP but he should pick Bill for some cabinet post in which Bill will be out of the country 365 days a year! Maybe Bill would throw Hillary to the wolves if he could be in the cabinet?
Wise –
Technically you’re correct, I could have been clearer.
But sitting VPs, which Hillary would be in 2012 or 2016, have had the poor record noted in ascending to the presidency – since before the Civil War. And an Obama presidency would have to be a disaster for HRC to challenge him for the nomination in 2012; NEVER has a sitting VP challenged the President for re-election. Imagine just how improbable that would be!
Further, it should be noted that of the three examples you cite, TWO ascended to the presidency after his predecessor’s leaving office, not by election; LBJ by JFK’s assassination; Ford by Nixon’s resignation. In fact, IIRC eight VP’s became president upon the death or resignation of their predecessor. I think we all very much hope that same would not befall an Obama administration.
Her being on the ticket and losing is further not likely to help her. Should an Obama/Clinton ticket lose in 2008, it is virtually certain that Hillary’s extending the nomination process, even when she has no hope of winning, and thus splitting the party would carry at least part of the blame. It’s unlikely that she would be a strong candidate in such a case; witness Edwards’ failure to generate any momentum this year after being on the losing ticket in 2004.
No, this marriage makes no sense at all, on any level.
BTW – Your case would be stronger if you noted that absent the Democratic machine’s shenanigans in Chicago in 1960, Nixon would have beaten JFK. But why would Democrats raise that?
http://www.nypost.com/seven/05232008/news/nationalnews/why_hill_wont_drop_out__bobby_kennedy_wa_112232.htm
QUOTE–
“My husband did not wrap up the nomination in 1992 until he won the California primary somewhere in the middle of June, right? We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California. I don’t understand it,” she said, dismissing calls to drop out.
UNQUOTE
So . . . Hillary says she’s staying in just in case Obama gets assassinated?
Unbelievable.
:lol:
If Obama were as Machiavellian as Karl Rove’s Augustus Stupidus, he’d quiet this “Hillary as VP” nonsense by whispering sweet nothings into her ear.
Like…how about a SCOTUS seat, baby?
Dollar to a donut says the Clintons would be settle on the spot for THAT legacy, the uber-chic POTUS/SCOTUS double whammy. THAT’d sure go down in history well: what’s left of the 60s liberals would hold the Clintons in the proper awe fo’shizzle.
‘Course, the white-trash wing of the GOP would likely go stark raving rabid at the thought…and ‘course that ain’t all bad neither. :D
I didn’t think even you would go there Capn.
FALSELY accusing Hillary Clinton of “going there” I mean.
But then I am learning there is an awful lot to not like about you. Right now I am deeply disappointed, even ashamed of you. I begin to repent our friendship. Shame on you.
Senator Clinton was only trying to explain why it was valuable to have two viable and well vetted candidates for as long as possible. And along come con apologists to do the rights dirty work.
Right now Capn, I don’t see a dimes worth of difference between you and people who are trying to twist this…
and Karl Rove. You do your candidate no good service here.
And I’ll remind you, this process is not over.
Senator Clinton already offered to give Obama his due and the VP if he wanted it. And I’ll be better than Obama supporters and say here and now that if Senator Clinton is the nominee, Obama has earned any position he wants.
But so has Senator Clinton if the situation is reversed. Disrespect Senator Clinton and you cut loose her supporters.
Can you get enough of the squishy middle to make that up? I don’t think so.
Wanna lose in 40 states with Obama? Keep it up.
“We Obamaniacs call Hillary as VP the “nightmare ticket.”
And what moniker do you put on her supporters there guy? I’d like to hear it.
I don’t damn all Obama supporters for your actions Capn. But the fact is clear that you are ITCHING for a party civil war if that be necessary to get your “man with the mojo hand”.
Well? Let’s get it on. That or you apologize for that post at 4:18 and moderate your first post on this thread.
I do not think the ‘dream ticket’ is a good idea for reasons I have given before. I think Clinton will have more power as a Senator and, sho knows, SCOTUS?
With the last vestiges of my respect for SOME Obama supporters slipping away.
I have some required viewing for you.
I want you to watch “Recount” Sunday night on HBO.
Maybe this will be our version of that con anthem “Have you Forgotten?”.
It tells the story of how the election was stolen lock, stock and barrel in Florida in 2000.
Some of you Obama supporters, I want you to watch that and go back to that time in your mind.
Remember the anger and the outgage? Myself, I was ready for blood in the streets.
You relive that and then see if you STILL feel like playing “yes we can” with the con goons.
BlueJay, my friend – and I hope we are friends. The Republicans Obama will work with are those labeled by Paul Rossell as “idiots” for rejecting such tactics from the right. Keep in mind – even with a goo election this fall we are unlikely to have 60 in the Senate.
I’ve no problems with you ben. You’ve been fair and unbiased. I DID try to specify where I was swinging. Rest assured it was not your way. But what Capn posted pissed me off. For his own sake even.
Other posters should know, ANOTHER poster pulled the same dirty knife Capn did at 4:18.
That would be fleetwood over on another thread.
You have you some great new friends there Capn.
I hear what you are saying ben. But at least on this blog? I don’t know who it is among the cons or what we could begin to agree on.
I’ll acknowledge it. Diplomacy is not my strong suit.
Given the fact that the MSM has tried all along to sabatoge BOTH Clinton AND Obama I would not be at all surprised that all these so-called trial baloons are being raised by the MSM to simply seek to cause more trouble.
I’m more interested in knowing who McCain would want to be White House pastor – Hagee or Parsley? Presumably one will be pastor and the other Secretary of State.
Obama/Hillary ticket….what a screwed up ‘Tail Wagging the Dog’ ticket that would be.
She’d beat him up. That’d be an absolute hoot to watch.
When I first heard Clinton’s comment about Bobby Kennedy my first thought “Oh great another mole hill to be made into a Mountain!”. I took it right off as she later explained it, just a point of reference as to campaigns going into the summer.
That is how I first took it, until I learned that back in March while commenting on those that compared Obama to JFK . “Remember that John Kennedy was assassinated after being elected and it was his Vice President Lyndon Johnson whom worked with the Republicans to pass all those civil right legislations”.
And sorry JR, if I say “JR you could be shot to death when you walk out your front door”/
That is a simple statement of a possibility. But if months later I say “You know JR you could have your head blown off after you walk out your front door!”.
That does not mean I am going to arrange it, but it does sound like wishful thinking.
I give her the benefit of the doubt, that Hillary is not consciously wanting it to happen.
But her comments do refer to a unconscious thought that has been in her mind.
Dog – I know what you mean. I don’t really think Hillary is planning anything, of course. Nor do I think she really wishes anything to happen.
But in her deep black little heart of hearts, in what she barely acknowledges consciously, I wonder . . . it seems just a bit too coincidental.
If nothing else, it is a monumental gaffe.
It would be some prime evidence in a case huh GMC?
“It would be some prime evidence in a case huh GMC?”
Motive? Hmmmm. Nah, that’s not motive . . .
See what you started Capn?
It’s not just you either. MSNBC is running with this vile smear as well. I’m watching them for one more week to take note of their sponsors.
Then I will write them and each of those sponsors that I am blocking MSNBC from my TV.
It was an innocent comment about why it is valuable to have more than one candidate remain in the race. That’s all.
I don’t expect any better from the cons. But the Obama supporters should know better.
They DO know better.
No but it would be combine with circumstanced evidence showing some intent. Its not enough to bring the case, but you have to admit it would be some tasty icing on a murder case. How many have you heard at a sentencing hearing where part of the evidence was a statement of the defendant claiming even in a joking manner. “ Yeah I off them!”, only to at sentencing tell the Judge “Your honor I was just kidding!”.
It was an innocent comment about why it is valuable to have more than one candidate remain in the race. That’s all.
BlueJay that sounds a lot more sinister then what she was explaining it as and as I said at first I took it as exactly as she later explained it. She has every right to stay in the race and does owe it to people like you whom have voted for her and defended her. I do not think she is wanting it, I would imagine if it did happen she would feel some guilt for even mentioning. MSNBC and particularly Oberman were brutal about it, talking about it in a very somber tone as if she had died. I have yet to see Fox even mention it at least the parts of O’Reilly and Hannity I watched.
But JR even the Obama supporter will feel some sorrow for Hillary for this. It is beyond dirty politics, more the sign of her being beaten down.
It is unbelievable that the evilll libeeeral media makes so much of what someone said and could be interpreted differently, what someone who someone knows said, BUT gives McCain a full pass on not having a clue about the difference between the sects in Iraq, admitting his lack of economic knowledge, his year long search to get an endorsement of Hagee, his agreement and admiration of Parsley. We have to hear days on end of coverage about nonsense if it might be a negative against a Democratic candidate, but find our own news about McCain.
Is the world on the Republican payroll?? Maybe we’ve discovered where all that unaccounted for money in Iraq is going!
Or you could play this game and say where you’d like the trillions $$$ to go…http://3trillion.org/
FORGET FOREX E-BOOKS! Get the software that tells you what to do and WHEN to do it and finally start earning the big bucks you truly deserve. Many People earn thousands of dollars each month useing the “Forex-Killer” Software and even quit their own day jobs! Why don`t you too? I urge you to take this chance ASAP! Besides what do you have to loose? They have a full 58 days refund policy in place supervised by clickbank: http://www.urlpire.com/?MALFY
As unforced errors go, this was The Big One. I’m hard pressed to think of anything on this order of magnitude since Ed Muskie broke down in tears in ‘72.
Good thing for Senator Clinton that it broke on a Friday afternoon rather than, say, midweek. But I’d say her bargaining position just weakened considerably.
I have to give her credit for apologizing:
SIOUX FALLS, S.D. — Hillary Rodham Clinton apologized Friday for remarks she made to a South Dakota newspaper in which she appeared to cite Robert F. Kennedy’s assassination in 1968 as an example of why she should stay in the Democratic presidential race.
She didn’t apologize Capn and CF.
She explained.
And she only had to do THAT because of the press love affair with Obama.
Do not pursue this.
Just now, on other threads, I have your six Capn.
What you did today is forgivable. But you have to earn it.
Otherwise?
I’LL be on your six.
If we HAVE to take her on the ticket in order to win then we will. I would rather have somebody else though.
BlueJay,
Spare me the threats. Clinton said what she said. And if she wasn’t “apologizing,” what is one to make of this?
SIOUX FALLS, S.D. – Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton quickly apologized Friday after citing the June 1968 assassination of Robert F. Kennedy in defending her decision to keep running for the Democratic presidential nomination despite increasingly long odds.
“I regret that if my referencing that moment of trauma for our entire nation and in particular the Kennedy family was in any way offensive. I certainly had no intention of that whatsoever,” the former first lady said.
news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080523/ap_on_el_pr/clinton
Given your concern-trolling over every little media-created blip with Obama’s candidacy (Reverend Wright, anyone?), you’re a fine one, BlueJay, to try to issue threats by saying “do not pursue this!”
Hillary Clinton said what she said. And considering the Democrat-unfriendly media environment, the fact that she said it could not have been a worse decision on her part.
Moreover, it isn’t the first time she’s used this comparison, either.
“Though she has now apologized for that very strange and tasteless comment to the Argus-Leader, this was not the first time she’s said it. This from her interview with TIME Managing Editor Richard Stengel, published March 6:
TIME: Can you envision a point at which–if the race stays this close–Democratic Party elders would step in and say, “This is now hurting the party and whoever will be the nominee in the fall”?
CLINTON: No, I really can’t. I think people have short memories. Primary contests used to last a lot longer. We all remember the great tragedy of Bobby Kennedy being assassinated in June in L.A. My husband didn’t wrap up the nomination in 1992 until June. Having a primary contest go through June is nothing particularly unusual.
Her excuse now is that the Kennedys have been “much on my mind these days” with the illness of Senator Edward Kennedy, but that doesn’t explain what brought it to mind more than two months ago.”
http://www.time-blog.com/swampland/2008/05/hillarys_bizarre_rfk_comment.html
Considering, BlueJay, that Hillary Clinton has admitted that the whole premise of her campaign is that she’s gotta hang in there in case Barack Obama does something to destroy himself, the rest of us now are supposed to pretend nothing happened?
If Obama had said this, BlueJay, I can only imagine what you would be saying. I can only imagine.
The Rude Pundit puts Hillary Clinton’s remark and “strategy” in the proper context. He will get the last word.
“And someone really ought to point out to the Clinton campaign that the presidential campaign of 1968 was not a two- or three-year long process. The New Hampshire primary, the first in the nation, wasn’t until March 12. Kennedy didn’t even get into the running until March 16, 1968. By June 4, 1968, the date of the California primary that Kennedy won, a date that’s four months later than this year’s California primary, there had only been 13 primaries. Indeed, running until the convention was the only choice, especially after Kennedy was killed on June 5. By June 5 this year, every state will have had its primaries or caucuses. It’s not that people were any more patient in 1968. They just didn’t have a choice but to wait and see.
So, like, even leaving out the morbid f*cktardery of the statement Clinton made and dealing with it on its alleged merits, it’s deceptive and idiotic and out of context.
To Clinton’s campaign and its supporters, who have been holding out for some gaffe by Obama that would take him down: How’s that working out for ya?”
rudepundit.blogspot.com
Oh, and just so there’s no confusion: if Hillary Clinton gets the Democratic Party’s Presidential nomination, she gets my vote.
“Considering, BlueJay, that Hillary Clinton has admitted that the whole premise of her campaign is that she’s gotta hang in there in case Barack Obama does something to destroy himself”
The premise of her campaign is that she feels she is the best nominee. Many people happen to agree with that premise and are grateful that she sticks the fight. Even with almost the entire right AND left media and lots of good but shortsighted Democrats against her.
“If Obama had said this, BlueJay, I can only imagine what you would be saying. I can only imagine.”
And I am sure what you come up with is just that. Your imagination.
I HAVE pointed out similar instances with Obama. I have also defended him on them. The difference here is that the media does or did almost NO digging on Obama.
I knew about the Pastor Wtight issue at least several weeks before it broke nation wide. I said nothing. When it was about to break, I hinted at it.
After it DID break, I lamented that the news came so late. It was not good for Obama or the party.
I am happy and comfortable with how I have treated MOST Obama supporters and their candidate here. I guess it is up to them to be comfortable with how they have treated Senator Clinton and her supporters. They don’t seem to have a problem disrespecting friends in hopes of working with the enemy.
“To Clinton’s campaign and its supporters, who have been holding out for some gaffe by Obama that would take him down: How’s that working out for ya?”
Latest polls? Clinton beats McCain in Florida and Ohio and Pennsylvania. Obama loses to McCain in two of the three. His margin on McCain in Pennsylvania is considerably less than Senator Clinton’s.
Speaking for Clinton supporters? We are just fine thanks.
SOME of you Obama supporters have FINALLY discovered what it is to fight. And right away you pulled a shiv.
GOOD!
Work on your enemy identification though. Because in THIS instance you can take your shiv and…
Save it for the cons. I try to.
Hillary Clinton does NOT need to be on the ticket with Barack Obama. After her recent, multiple, usage of the word “assassination” in referencing to getting into the White House (although she and her camp tried to explain it away), I think she just committed political suicide. She and her husband are destroying her chances at being nominated……for anything – yet she continues to blame her opponent’s camp, the media, and male-bashing for her demise! (And people still want to vote for her?! – God help us (and THEM!)
Actually, If Senator Clinton had only brought up the Robert Kennedy or “assasination” issue ONCE, I would have to agree with BJ on this one.
Hillary DOES have a right to stay in, and many candidates HAVE stayed in the race, late in the year, even up to the convention, in the past.
Yes, the Primary schedule got fast-forwarded, since those historical dates, but — what matters is, really, the time each Party has from Convention to General Election, right?
I think Hillary was making a historical, factual point, with no evil intent.
Still, it was a dumb thing to say, especially since she had touched on the subject, in the past.
By the way, if you are looking for “strong women” in history, I suggest you read Noonan’s piece:
http://online.wsj.com/article/declarations.html
The editors made a good call not to give air to this recent smear.
The Obama supporters who would “go there” with this?
It isn’t a killing blow.
And what doesn’t kill us makes us stronger.
Drawing a dirty shiv like this, you tend to cut yourself.
I know several people. Not posters here, but family and friends. They weren’t real big for Senator Clinton.
But some of the press playing on this non story and they are really pissed off.
After Olberman’s “special comment” last night, my mom and two of my aunts called me and they were madder than hell. This is part of a growing group of people who are fed up with the Obama love fest and are ready to not vote if he is the candidate.
Obama CAN recover from this. It’s a holiday weekend and by Tuesday this SHOULD be forgotten.
Downplaying Hillary’s recent comments and praising the media for not blowing it up like they did the Rev. Wright thing, just shows people are just looking for an excuse, ANY excuse, to keep from electing a black man in the White House. You guys can call Rev. Wright’s comments whatever you like, but you prove him right…..EVERYDAY!
I don’t recall seeing you post before “suttonba”.
Here is a hint. Racism is a serious thing. It shouldn’t be played at every opportunity. That’s cheap and diminishes the seriousness with which REAL racism is taken when and where it exists.
In fact YOUR comments could be seen as racist in reverse. But I won’t charge you with it, yet.
“just shows people are just looking for an excuse, ANY excuse, to keep from electing a black man in the White House. You guys can call Rev. Wright’s comments whatever you like, but you prove him right…..EVERYDAY!”
ya got me sutton. Me and every single one of the 18 million plus people who have voted for or support Senator Clinton. We’re ALL racists.
It’s a perfect excuse isn’t it?
Obama hasn’t been able to take the nomination by delegates yet. Yup racism. And if he doesn’t get the nomination? More racism.
And of course, if he DOES get the nomination and then LOSES to McCain. Why that will be racism as well!
But it doesn’t stop there. If he WINS the Presidency, EVERY time someone DARES to criticize or differ with Obama? Well folks like you will just keep crying racism.
Blue Jay,
Stepped on your toes, did I? At least some of the racists are being honest and coming out from their exit polls saying as much with such comments as: ” I could not, in good conscious, vote for a black man for president” and a caller yelled “hang that darkie from a tree” when called by Obama supporters. Calling me racist is just your retaliation for my comment. Don’t label me for pointing out a sad but true fact. But anyone who denies that this political race is based on race and not for the merits that should be considered, has their head buried in the sand and is in total denial. Those same folks wouhave said they will either not vote at all (which is a vote for McBush), or vote for McBush rather than help the Democratic party win back the White House if Hillary isn’t the nominee or on the ticket as VP.
You don’t seem coherent enough to step on my toes.
And you make this too easy.
” But anyone who denies that this political race is based on race and not for the merits ”
I’ll talk to that if you like.
Exit polls ALSO tell us that between 90 and 93% (depending on the state) of black voters vote for Obama.
That’s because ALL of them are familiar with his record and policy isn’t it? ALL those folks are voting for Obama because they’ve done the research and consider him the best candidate.
That about right?
Sorry. But that requires a willing suspension of disbelief.
Bigotry isn’t attractive in any form.
BlueJay, and insinuating that black people aren’t smart enough to do research or simply like the platform the man has run his campaign on OR the fact that his message of change and hope isn’t enough for them to like him as a viable candidate, you’d like to believe and think that blacks are supporting for him simply because he is black. While there may be a few who are supporting him only because he is black (the same is true for some Clinton supporters), the majority of his black supporters are supporting him for other reasons. On the other hand, there are black supporters of Hillary Clinton who are only supporting her because they liked Bill – not for her record or policies. Is that a strong enough reason to support a candidate? No. As wise as you perpetuate to be, you should know that people support a candidate for a variety of reasons. But when they come out and TELL YOU why they support or don’t support a candidate, there is no need to insinuate or guess, RIGHT?
I didn’t insinuate anything.
Insinuation is dishonest.
Let me put it more clearly.
There are no small number of black people who will vote for Obama for no other reason than that he is black. That’s bigotry. I give you it is softer bigotry than voting AGAINST Obama because he is black. But it is bigotry nonetheless. How the numbers add up between white and black on this I can’t say. And it also is not an insult or a sleight in any way. It is a human failing to go first with the person who looks most like you.
Neither do I mean to insult anyone as uninformed. It IS lamentable that politics and politicians in this country are so poorly understood and known. I guess we have to be grateful for the 50% of people who even bother to vote.
But you started pointing the fingers here not me.
“Downplaying Hillary’s recent comments and praising the media for not blowing it up like they did the Rev. Wright thing, just shows people are just looking for an excuse, ANY excuse, to keep from electing a black man in the White House.
”
Now you didn’t address that to me personally. But your reaction DOES follow a post of mine. It’s pretty clear that you were saying that me or anyone not for Obama has one and only one not nice reason. Namely, anyone not for Obama is a racist. Now I am sure your earlier told stories are true and that there are such folks.
I’m not one of them.
I am not for Obama because it is my perception from his remarks and from some of his supporters that Obama is not for me.
You called me out in a post, so I responded – but ok, BlueJay, let’s just agree to disagree on this one. I just hope those who are feeling and has felt the pain and the strain from the last eight years will, in good conscious, make the right choice come November.
4 Trackbacks
[...] hellakali wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerptBill Clinton would like Hillary Clinton considered as Barack Obama’s running mate, according to Clinton friends — though it is uncertain what Hillary or Obama thinks of the idea. Bill reportedly thinks that if Hillary doesn’t win the … Read the rest of this great post here [...]
[...] Progressive News Daily wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerptClinton considered as Barack Obama’s running mate, according to Clinton friends — though it is uncertain what Hillary or Obama thinks of… [...]
[...] hellakali wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerptBill Clinton would like Hillary Clinton considered as Barack Obama’s running mate, according to Clinton friends — though it is uncertain what Hillary or Obama thinks of the idea. Bill reportedly thinks that if Hillary doesn’t win the … [...]
[...] friends ?? though it is uncertain what hillary or Obama thinks of the idea. Bill reportedly thihttp://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/05/bill-wants-hillary-as-vice-president/Clinton backers talk up Hillary as VP The HillA growing number of Sen. hillary Rodham Clinton??s [...]