Clinton backs Blair as future UN chief

[StellaBlue]

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=2630&ncid=2630&e=13&u=/afp/20060113/wl_uk_afp/britainusunpolitics_060113234322



Clinton backs Blair as future UN chief

Fri Jan 13, 6:43 PM ET



LONDON (AFP) - Former US president Bill Clinton backed British Prime Minister Tony Blair as a future secretary general of the United Nations.

Clinton told BBC television Blair would make a "good" head for the international organisation when he leaves office, as he has indicated he will before the next general election, expected by 2010 at the latest.

The pair -- who became friends during Clinton's time at the White House between 1993 and 2001 -- had discussed Blair's future and Clinton had told him there was "a lot of good you can do in the world" after leaving Downing Street.

He also predicted Blair, 52, would find "immense rewards" when he stood down, particularly from lucrative speaking engagements, books and directorships.

(snip)

:puke: :nuke: :puke: :nuke: :puke: :nuke: :puke: :nuke: :puke: :nuke: :puke: :nuke: (couldn't decide which graphic was more appropriate to my psychological reaction)

[FloridaPat]

1. Blair's future is already set with the Carlyle Group.

Gag - war criminal as secretary general of the United Nations. Was Bill drinking when he said that?

[dflprincess]

2. Perhaps he suffered brain damage during his bypass surgery

n/t

[Wetzelbill]

3. Blair could've been great at one time

now history will record him as the lapdog to a Chimp.

[FreedomAngel82]

5. Yep

I give him props for the gay marriage thing and not coming down to fundamentalist's but him and Iraq is just sad and shameful. He'll always be remembered as Bush's poodle sadly.

[DemInDistress]

4. Does Poppy Bush have the goods on Bubba or

is Bubba a sellout? I used to like Bill but these past several yrs. he's been hanging out with Herbert poppy Bush. :wtf:

[MadisonProgressive]

6. WTF?

That's it - I've have it with the Clintons! Blair is a fucking war criminal!

[StellaBlue]

7. that was my reaction, too

last. straw. moment.

[bkcc]

8. Nice sentiment, but...

isn't there a rule in effect at the UN that does not allow the secretary general to be from one of the charter members? That's what kept Clinton from ascending to the post, as I recall.

[mcctatas]

11. Yep, I'm pretty sure that's the rule...

unless bolton tortured everyone else until they agreed to change it.;)

[SPKrazy]

9. Some think Blair is the antichrist.

of course some think Bart Simpson is the antichrist!

Seriously, I think Clinton should be the UN Secretary General, not Blair.

[1932]

12. I thought I heard Clinton say that there's a tradition or policy of not

having security council members' citizens serve as as Secretary General of the UN. He said that on NPR today or yesterday. And today he's saying Blair should be Secretary General???

[awoke_in_2003]

10. What is Bill thinking?

We already have Bushies bulldog (Bolton) up there, why would we want his lapdog there, too?

[madfloridian]

13. Have you read the Blair Democrats by Will Marshall?

I don't like this piece by him, but the Third Way/PPI group ARE Blair Democrats...they call themselves that.

http://www.ppionline.org/ppi_ci.cfm?contentid=251557&knlgAreaID=127&subsecid=171

I am skipping the first paragraph as I don't think one belongs there. Bill and Hill are Blair Democrats. I will see if I can find the original article. This one is from May 1, 2003, when Will still had that war glow.

Like Bush, these Democrats did not shrink from the use of force to end Hussein's reign of terror. Like Blair, they saw the Iraq crisis as a test of Western resolve and the United Nations' credibility as an effective instrument of collective security. Their "yes-but" position on Iraq irked the antiwar left and some political commentators, who prefer the parties to take starkly opposing stands on every issue, no matter how complicated. But the Blair Democrats faithfully reflected Americans' instinctive internationalism. While neoconservatives may yearn for a new Augustan age based on unfettered U.S. power, most Americans still see strategic advantages in international cooperation.

Just as the swift liberation of Iraq has strengthened the Blair Democrats, it has weakened the party's antiwar contingent, whose worst fears failed to materialize. The outcome deals a near-fatal blow to the presidential prospects of Howard Dean, whose staunch opposition to the war thrilled Iowa's left-leaning activists but is out of step with rank-and-file Democrats, about two-thirds of whom approve of the war. Moreover, because 75 percent of all voters back the war, the odds that Democrats will make Bush's day by serving up an antiwar nominee as his opponent in 2004 seem long indeed.

There is more, but this is enough. I have no respect for Tony Blair. He sold out his soul. I hate to see Clinton hanging around with the enemy. I know Blair was his good friend, but he should not be his good friend now. He needs to rise above this gang of thugs.

[madfloridian]

17. PPI: Blair Democrats vs Michael Moore Democrats...makes me furious.

http://www.ppionline.org/ppi_ci.cfm?contentid=253472&knlgAreaID=124&subsecid=307

"Intellectually, of course, it's possible to separate Iraq and the war on terror. But as University of Maryland professor William Galston observed after the 2004 election, "President Bush succeeded in transforming the war in Iraq and the fight against terrorism into questions of basic values and American national identity." And that, Galston wrote, exposed old fissures among Democrats:

"While Republicans stood united in their belief in American exceptionalism, Democrats were badly divided, as they have been since Vietnam. President Bush was able to rally his party by sounding the trumpet of American virtue on the global stage. By contrast, John Kerry struggled to bridge the gap between Tony Blair Democrats, who agreed with the president's principles but deplored his inept policies, and Michael Moore Democrats, who rejected, root and branch, the idea of a global fight against terrorism and for democracy."

..."Amnesty International likewise stumbled into the quagmire of moral equivalence in a report that absurdly analogized Guantanamo Bay, where 500 prisoners remain, to the Soviet gulags, where millions perished. The usually level-headed Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) was forced to apologize after falling into the same trap. Activists rationalize such witless hyperbole by saying it's the only way to get Americans to pay attention to what their government is doing wrong. But this is the political equivalent of a compound felony: insulting voters' intelligence while offending their patriotic sensibilities. "

This stuff makes me furious inside. Tony Blair is a failure, and they are still proud of being "Blair Democrats." Give me Michael Moore any day.

[Catrina]

25. I couldn't agree more. there's something very suspicious about the

alliances of the Clintons these days. I also saw a documentary on the History Channel several years ago about the Bildebergers and their secret annual meetings, and I was shocked to learn from that, that Clinton was a member, introduced by Bush Sr. I have not been able to locate it since and brushed it aside. But in light of all that I have seen lately, I think the Clintons have been seduced and gone over to the dark side, if they weren't there all along. They are globalists with all its dangerous inplications, imo, especially for the world's poor.

Sad to say, I no longer trust them ~ there's an old saying that you can judge people by the company they keep. And Bush Sr., Newt Gingrich, Tony Blair? War mongers, all of them, and neocons. This is not the kind of company I would want to keep.

Tony Blair is a war criminal along with his cohort in the WH here. They both lied, deliberately. The DSM have proven that if we didn't know already. Tens of thousands of people are dead as a result of those lies.

But looking back on the Clinton administration's policies (had the rightwing not introduced Monica to the debate we might have been paying closer attention to what they were actually doing, policy-wise, there were many issues I did not agree with Clinton on. However, he was allowed to throw a few bones to the 'liberals' who got him there every once in a while, and of course, the nasty, vile and disgusting campaign orchestrated by the right against, won him more friends than enemies, and I found myself more caught up in that, than issues. Maybe that was the plan??

Since those innocent days I am a lot more cynical and nothing at all would surprise me now.

'Fool me once, etc.' No Hillary, no war-mongers, or supporters of war-mongers anymore.

So disappointing ~ but Clinton would be an even greater asset to the neocons because he is able to charm people, while the current resident of the WH is too obvious about his nefarious intentions. I prefer the latter, to be honest. At least you know where you stand. I truly hate to be deceived, and more and more, I'm thinking I was very deceived by the Clintons.

[TahitiNut]

14. Well, that's the 2nd stupidest thing Clinton has done.

:shrug:

[seabeyond]

15. these "little" things the clintons do is what makes me NOT trust

them. and why i say i dont want hillary.

[OneBlueSky]

16. Clinton has his good points, but on some issues he's just as bad . . .

as the Republicans . . .

[fujiyama]

18. Clinton needs a good smack

across the forehead!

[ladjf]

19. It's time for Americans to stop paying attention to Clinton.

His agenda is personal. I don't think he cares what happens to America.

[The2ndWheel]

20. Blasphemer! nt

[ladjf]

21. I was a former Clinton fan. But, as history has unfolded I have

found myself increasingly angry at him, particularly the realization that his silly sexual escaped causes so much damage to the world. Gore would have won easily despite the crooked voting had Clinton stayed out of trouble. Those were some very expensive sex acts.

[The2ndWheel]

22. Fornicator! nt

[ladjf]

23. I have nothing against kinky sex. However, if it's going to cause

irreparable damage to the entire world, one could at least attempt to be discrete. There is not an adult male in America who doesn't know that if he has sex with a young girl, she's going to tell some one and if that male happens to be the President of the U.S. , it's a "lead pipe cinch" that she'll tell someone.

I have always suspected that Monica was a plant but wasn't aware of it herself. The Republicans knew that Clinton was a sex addict and therefore was probably likely to fall for her seduction.

[The2ndWheel]

24. Pinko commie!

I'm just messing with you. I'm no Clinton fan either, the least of it being because of his sexual appetite.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

26. DLC/New Labour - Neo-libs of a feather.

Blair can "do a lot of good" for the world if he steps down.

[upi402]

27. Clinton is a great Republican

:puke: