10.22.2004
Clinton Returns To News
My Mom pointed me to this story, so big-ups to the parental units. Anyway, Bill Clinton will be campaigning with JK next week. Since that's upcoming, stories have been breaking out stating that Clinton would like to become head of the UN:
Former US President Bill Clinton has set his sights on becoming UN secretary-general. A Clinton insider and a senior UN source have told United Press International the 56-year-old former president would like to be named leader of the world body when Kofi Annan’s term ends early in 2006.
“He definitely wants to do it,” the Clinton insider said this week. A Clinton candidacy is likely to receive overwhelming support from UN member states, particularly the Third World.
Diplomats in Washington say Clinton would galvanise the United Nations and give an enormous boost to its prestige. But the former president’s hopes hang on a crucial question that will not be addressed until after the presidential elections: can he get the support of the US government — a prerequisite for nomination?
The political wisdom is that a second George W Bush presidency would cut him off at the pass. The notion of Clinton looming large in the international arena from “the glass tower" in New York would be intolerable to the Bush White House.
If Democratic candidate, Sen John Kerry, D-Mass, wins on November 2 the prospect of Clinton as secretary-general won’t exactly be welcome either, but Kerry would find it much harder — if not impossible — to go against it.
After a Middle East UN Secretary General (Boutros Boutros Ghali) and an African (Kofi Annan) it is generally considered Asia’s turn to fill the post, UN experts say.
No announcement has been made, but behind the scenes China is already pushing the candidacy of Thai Foreign Minister Surakiart Sathirathai, who also seems to have US support. If Clinton does emerge as a candidate, however, China would most likely shift its support.
No American has ever been UN secretary-general, but the United States is both host country to the United Nations and the major contributor to its budget.
A hostile US Congress held up its dues for years — until the Clinton administration negotiated a payment plan for Washington’s arrears.
Clinton also revived US membership of UNESCO though the Americans did not actually move back to their offices at the Paris-based cultural UN agency until after the start of the Bush presidency.
Clinton is currently recovering from the heart bypass surgery he had to undergo last month. He has talked of his interest in taking over at the United Nations since the publication of his autobiography, which he recently said had sold 1.9 million copies.
Writing the book kept him busy after leaving office in 2000, but he is now ready to channel his considerable political skills and energy into another role in public life.
I like Clinton's policies, if anything, and this would only benefit America. As well, many speculate this could be more reason for the Democratic base to get the vote out for our man Kerry. Most of America, non-conservative America anyway, loves Bill Clinton or at least loves what he did for our country. It's obvious that President Bush wouldn't even considering nominating Clinton for the post when it becomes available so Kerry becomes the obvious choice, if you haven't made your mind up yet. Of course, it seems that hardcore-conservatives are up in arms about all this:
All the devil needs is for Kerry to be US President and Clinton to be UN Secretary-General.With that, do Christians see red? They should. And to toss this number out as a sideline issue is to be in denial major. No time for that. None. Clinton has let it be known that he salivates for the top UN post. It could be his. The anti-US nations of the globe would take to Clinton for he’s part of their global mindset anyway. Just as the anti-US nations of the planet take to Kerry. Both Clinton and Kerry would sell out America to the UN. That would simply expand their already massive ego circles. Embracing the nations of the Earth with their liberal arms would bring tingles up their spines 24 / 7.
On the other hand, for the moralists of the globe, it would spell hell-come-to-earth. Both Clinton and Kerry are amoralists to the nth degree. Read "amoralists" as "immoralists" for that’s truly who they are. They are not for moral neutrality as amoralists proclaim. They are for such evils as killing the unborn, euthanasia, and the homosexual lifestyle, among other abhorrent tangents. Therefore, for those into biblical morality, to tolerate a Kerry as President and Clinton as UN Secretary-General is enough to bring the End Times all the closer into in-your-face reality. Can anyone think of a more damning duo than those two hypocrites? If any two write their own ethics, their own morals, their own religion, it is Kerry and Clinton — supported of course by their spouses. This present-tense America is confronted with a spiritual war. Some call it a "culture war." Not. Culture has to do with finesse and refinement or lack of. Spiritual has to do with God and Satan, heaven and hell, righteousness and unrighteousness. UPI Roland Flamini reports that "former U.S. president Bill Clinton has set his sights on becoming U.N. secretary-general. A Clinton insider and senior U.N. source have told United Press International the 56-year-old former president would like to be named leader of the world body when Kofi Annan’s term ends early in 2006."
So there you have it.
MichNews.com gets my vote for worst website ever. Not only do they make it so you can't copy/paste from their stories, when you right-click on their page it says "copyright" in a javascript window. Well, geniuses, I KNOW how to get to page source without a fekking right-click menu. It's in the menu bar at the TOP OF THE SCREEN! Sorry if the story is a bit crooked as a result. I had to copy/paste from their source code and it had so many span and font-size tags in there I'm surprised it didn't kill Firefox.
Anyway, as to their comments, I can understand what these "moralists" as they call themselves, who are far superior to us, would have against Clinton. But what about Kerry? He fought for his country, he didn't run from duty. He's a devout Catholic. While he supports a woman's right to choose, he's also not endorsing abortions as a form of birth control, like any sane person. Oh, let's also forget that unlike Bush, he has not presided over the execution of 155 people, including several who were mentally retarded. Nor does there exist a list of people he had removed in a manner of your imagination's choosing. So what makes John Kerry so reprehensible? I guess the fact that he's just a normal beurocrat, one who fights for the little guy and who doesn't readily dote on the religious right, even if he doesn't hate them.
Oh, back to Clinton again, watch out. Not only does he like to get his rocks off in the White House, remember how much he sold our country out last time...
Former US President Bill Clinton has set his sights on becoming UN secretary-general. A Clinton insider and a senior UN source have told United Press International the 56-year-old former president would like to be named leader of the world body when Kofi Annan’s term ends early in 2006.
“He definitely wants to do it,” the Clinton insider said this week. A Clinton candidacy is likely to receive overwhelming support from UN member states, particularly the Third World.
Diplomats in Washington say Clinton would galvanise the United Nations and give an enormous boost to its prestige. But the former president’s hopes hang on a crucial question that will not be addressed until after the presidential elections: can he get the support of the US government — a prerequisite for nomination?
The political wisdom is that a second George W Bush presidency would cut him off at the pass. The notion of Clinton looming large in the international arena from “the glass tower" in New York would be intolerable to the Bush White House.
If Democratic candidate, Sen John Kerry, D-Mass, wins on November 2 the prospect of Clinton as secretary-general won’t exactly be welcome either, but Kerry would find it much harder — if not impossible — to go against it.
After a Middle East UN Secretary General (Boutros Boutros Ghali) and an African (Kofi Annan) it is generally considered Asia’s turn to fill the post, UN experts say.
No announcement has been made, but behind the scenes China is already pushing the candidacy of Thai Foreign Minister Surakiart Sathirathai, who also seems to have US support. If Clinton does emerge as a candidate, however, China would most likely shift its support.
No American has ever been UN secretary-general, but the United States is both host country to the United Nations and the major contributor to its budget.
A hostile US Congress held up its dues for years — until the Clinton administration negotiated a payment plan for Washington’s arrears.
Clinton also revived US membership of UNESCO though the Americans did not actually move back to their offices at the Paris-based cultural UN agency until after the start of the Bush presidency.
Clinton is currently recovering from the heart bypass surgery he had to undergo last month. He has talked of his interest in taking over at the United Nations since the publication of his autobiography, which he recently said had sold 1.9 million copies.
Writing the book kept him busy after leaving office in 2000, but he is now ready to channel his considerable political skills and energy into another role in public life.
I like Clinton's policies, if anything, and this would only benefit America. As well, many speculate this could be more reason for the Democratic base to get the vote out for our man Kerry. Most of America, non-conservative America anyway, loves Bill Clinton or at least loves what he did for our country. It's obvious that President Bush wouldn't even considering nominating Clinton for the post when it becomes available so Kerry becomes the obvious choice, if you haven't made your mind up yet. Of course, it seems that hardcore-conservatives are up in arms about all this:
All the devil needs is for Kerry to be US President and Clinton to be UN Secretary-General.With that, do Christians see red? They should. And to toss this number out as a sideline issue is to be in denial major. No time for that. None. Clinton has let it be known that he salivates for the top UN post. It could be his. The anti-US nations of the globe would take to Clinton for he’s part of their global mindset anyway. Just as the anti-US nations of the planet take to Kerry. Both Clinton and Kerry would sell out America to the UN. That would simply expand their already massive ego circles. Embracing the nations of the Earth with their liberal arms would bring tingles up their spines 24 / 7.
On the other hand, for the moralists of the globe, it would spell hell-come-to-earth. Both Clinton and Kerry are amoralists to the nth degree. Read "amoralists" as "immoralists" for that’s truly who they are. They are not for moral neutrality as amoralists proclaim. They are for such evils as killing the unborn, euthanasia, and the homosexual lifestyle, among other abhorrent tangents. Therefore, for those into biblical morality, to tolerate a Kerry as President and Clinton as UN Secretary-General is enough to bring the End Times all the closer into in-your-face reality. Can anyone think of a more damning duo than those two hypocrites? If any two write their own ethics, their own morals, their own religion, it is Kerry and Clinton — supported of course by their spouses. This present-tense America is confronted with a spiritual war. Some call it a "culture war." Not. Culture has to do with finesse and refinement or lack of. Spiritual has to do with God and Satan, heaven and hell, righteousness and unrighteousness. UPI Roland Flamini reports that "former U.S. president Bill Clinton has set his sights on becoming U.N. secretary-general. A Clinton insider and senior U.N. source have told United Press International the 56-year-old former president would like to be named leader of the world body when Kofi Annan’s term ends early in 2006."
So there you have it.
MichNews.com gets my vote for worst website ever. Not only do they make it so you can't copy/paste from their stories, when you right-click on their page it says "copyright" in a javascript window. Well, geniuses, I KNOW how to get to page source without a fekking right-click menu. It's in the menu bar at the TOP OF THE SCREEN! Sorry if the story is a bit crooked as a result. I had to copy/paste from their source code and it had so many span and font-size tags in there I'm surprised it didn't kill Firefox.
Anyway, as to their comments, I can understand what these "moralists" as they call themselves, who are far superior to us, would have against Clinton. But what about Kerry? He fought for his country, he didn't run from duty. He's a devout Catholic. While he supports a woman's right to choose, he's also not endorsing abortions as a form of birth control, like any sane person. Oh, let's also forget that unlike Bush, he has not presided over the execution of 155 people, including several who were mentally retarded. Nor does there exist a list of people he had removed in a manner of your imagination's choosing. So what makes John Kerry so reprehensible? I guess the fact that he's just a normal beurocrat, one who fights for the little guy and who doesn't readily dote on the religious right, even if he doesn't hate them.
Oh, back to Clinton again, watch out. Not only does he like to get his rocks off in the White House, remember how much he sold our country out last time...
