View Single Post
Old 09-25-2016, 03:55 PM   #12421
Gozer
Not the one...
 
Gozer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GGG View Post
It's also odd that you put Obama as an extension of Hillary. This seems like an arguememt of convenience. You'd need to demonstrate from a policy basis that this were true.
Policy basis for characterizing Obama's Presidential terms as extensions of Clinton's legacy.

*Hillary's would-be legacy was single-payer health care reform.
Obama triangulated that vision with the Republican desire for a market based system, and passed his the ACA.

*Hillary's foreign policy is neoconservative, in my opinion.
A neocon's foreign policy would be expected to protect Israel unconditionally, intervene in any/all foreign entanglements that could result in emergent powers, and project strength at all times.
This is consistent with the Obama administration.

Why is that Clinton's policy, instead of Obama's?
That is ultimately an opinion of mine, and not empirically provable.
I interpret this quote, from an excellent foreign-policy write-up, to support my claim:
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/...ctrine/471525/
Quote:
There’s a playbook in Washington that presidents are supposed to follow. It’s a playbook that comes out of the foreign-policy establishment. And the playbook prescribes responses to different events, and these responses tend to be militarized responses. Where America is directly threatened, the playbook works. But the playbook can also be a trap that can lead to bad decisions
* Hillary on the financial crisis
As Wall Street's personal Senator, you might expect her administration to bail out the banks, allow bonuses to be paid to executives, and past modest regulations in response that do not even rise to the level of Glass-Stegall

There are countless other endeavors that Obama's administration engaged in, and it is foolish to try to pick which ones can be "blamed" on the Clintons and which ones that can't. The Lilly Ledbetter act, for example, might have been Hillary's bill, and maybe not.
Ultimately, the answer is they were working as a team.
And that's all I'm arguing.

As New Era was gracious enough to explain;
Quote:
Just in case you were not aware, the President elect does not get to come into office and change policy over night. They seldom get to drive their own vision of policy forward and are told what the current state of policy is and how they are going to maintain that policy position
The policy team that was telling Obama what to do was Hillary's team - by virtue of hiring the most experienced and well-respected staff available to a President.
Gozer is offline