Skip to content

Monday May 16th Public Appointments for Secretary of State Hillary Clinton

May 16, 2011


9:15 a.m. Secretary Clinton meets with the Assistant Secretaries, at the Department of State.

10:15 a.m. Secretary Clinton meets with the participants in the May 2011 Ambassadorial Seminar, at the Department of State.

12:15 p.m. Secretary Clinton holds a bilateral meeting with Jordanian King Abdullah, at the Department of State.

2:45 p.m. Secretary Clinton delivers keynote remarks at the release of the Obama administration’s International Strategy for Cyberspace hosted by John Brennan, Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism, at the White House.

5:10 p.m. Secretary Clinton delivers remarks at the U.S.-Mexico Foundation’s Mexican American Leadership Initiative reception, at the Department of State.

15 Comments leave one →
  1. Vcal permalink
    May 16, 2011 10:29 am

    thank you for the photo bomb Stacyx and Toke! love it like always.

  2. Carolyn-Rodham permalink
    May 16, 2011 2:06 pm

    I’m curious what folks think about the fact that John Kerry seems to be taking the lead in diplomatic negotiations with Pakistan?
    Are we looking at our next SOS (come Jan 2013)?
    Oh Lord, please say no.

    • Carolyn-Rodham permalink
      May 16, 2011 2:11 pm

      OK, now I know this question is WAAYYY premature, but as I was typing that date “Jan 2013,” it suddenly occurred to me that on or about that date, stacy, since Hillary will be stepping down, you might be shutting up the shop here.

      Oh never mind, silly question, you’re entitled to do whatever’s best for you, but a little chill went through me at the prospect of losing Secretary Clinton and Freedom’s Challenge in one swell foop.

      • stacyx permalink*
        May 16, 2011 6:24 pm

        @Carolyn- as for shutting down- I’ve been a blogger for almost 10 years so I can’t imagine shutting up/shutting down totally. Having the domain address sort of limits me though once she is no longer SOS.

        I don’t really know what I’ll do- maybe transition this site to a general politics/foreign policy blog. Of course, if she stays in politics (like running for POTUS) I can always keep following what she’s up to- you know, but not in a stalkerish type of way 😉

    • rachel permalink
      May 16, 2011 2:12 pm

      I wouldn’t doubt it.

      • rachel permalink
        May 16, 2011 2:16 pm

        That reply was to the first part about John Kerry, not Stacy shutting down the shop, I hope she won’t

    • stacyx permalink*
      May 16, 2011 6:17 pm

      Yeah, could Kerry make it any more obvious he wants to be the next SOS? If Obama wins in 2012 (I’m really conflicted about that), I wish she would stay on as SOS but I totally understand why she would step down because doing it for 4 years is virtually unheard of because it’s a 24/7 job with non-stop travel. I really wish she’d be his VP in 2012 so she can then be POTUS in 2016. I’ve got it all mapped out. I know some people want her to run in 2012 and while I would like that, it’s not going to happen because she’s too loyal a democrat.

      If Kerry becomes the next SOS then I’ll lose another Senator here in MA, which leaves an opening for another Republican. If MA turns Red I am leaving 😉 I don’t think Barney Frank would run for the Senate.

      Hillary will be heading to Pakistan soon.

  3. Carolyn-Rodham permalink
    May 16, 2011 2:38 pm

    OT, but I found this historical tidbit interesting:

    According to my linguist son, the term “semitic” is not synonymous with “Jewish.” The term refers to a language family of largely Middle Eastern origin, now called the Semitic languages. This family includes the ancient and modern forms of Hebrew AND Arabic, but also Amharic (the official language of Ethiopia), Aramaic (still spoken in Iraq, Iran, Syria, Turkey and Armenia), Akkadian, Ge’ez, Maltese, Phoenician, Tigre and Tigrinya among others. “Semite” means a member of any of various ancient and modern Semitic-speaking peoples originating in southwestern Asia. For the ancient Hebrews, Semites were those peoples closest to them in culture and language, all deemed to be descended from the Hebrew forefather Shem.

    The Nazis argued that Jews were not a “real” or “pure” race precisely because of all the mixing of pre-existing Semitic races — an example of dilution of racial difference through miscegenation. The term “anti-Semite” then came to refer overwhelmingly to Jews.

    Or to put it another way (wink, wink — I know I’m being provocative here), Jews appropriated the term, cleansed its meaning thereby excluding the Arab peoples — friends with whom they miscegenated in ancient times — and made it their own.

    OK, now I’m shutting up for the day.

    • Thain permalink
      May 17, 2011 11:07 am

      Did you see Ethan Bronner’s new piece today in the NYT? Don’t bother, it’s a waste to even read it. Talk about propaganda- he makes it sound like Bibi is coming to the US with some great offer to “yield” some territory based on a speech to the Knesset he gave yesterday where he said he would NOT give even one inch of Jerusalem back to the Palestinians, would NOT give back all of the West Bank because he wanted to keep the large settlements and said the Palestinians had to be totally demilitarized with Israeli forces staying in the Jordan Valley. Yet according to Israel, the US and the media, it’s the Palestinians who are the problem?

      Oh, and even though the Palestinians have recognized Israel’s right to exist that’s now not enough- Bibi is obfuscating by saying they have to recognize it as the eternal state of the Jewish people. Why isn’t it enough that the Palestinians recognize Israel? Did the US or Jordan, Egypt or the UK have to sign something recognizing not only Israel’s right to exist but it’s status as solely a Jewish state? No, they/we didn’t.

      Israel doesn’t want peace and I’m tired of my tax dollars being used to fund the Occupation.

      Now we know why the US has enabled the settlement enterprise for decades- because we knew that it would mean Israel would not/could not be forced to give up that land. Thanks United States!

      One more thing- I read the State Dept. press briefing yesterday- they refused to condemn the killing of unarmed Palestinian protesters saying that Israel has a right to defend it’s borders. Whatever. So do the Palestinians have a right to kill the Israeli’s who illegally steal their land and bulldoze their houses and if not, why not? I’d like Secretary Clinton to address that double standard.

      • Carolyn-Rodham permalink
        May 17, 2011 12:58 pm

        After the State Dept’s wishy-washy response to the Nakba Day massacre (five people were killed at the Boston Tea party, and at least 12 unarmed Palestinians yesterday, so why not call it a massacre?), I was thinking back to how our country responded in the past when unarmed protesters within our own borders were killed — specifically the Kent State shootings in May 1970 when students protesting America’s invasion of Cambodia were fired on by the Ohio National Guard. What I’d forgotten is that in the four or five days leading up to the actual shootings, students started by burning draft cards and a copy of the Constitution; began throwing beer bottles, breaking downtown store fronts and bank windows, looting and vandalizing commercial establishments; threatening city officials and businessmen; set fire to the campus ROTC building; threw rocks and other objects at firemen and policemen attempting to put out the blaze; and on the day of the actual shootings, students lobbed rocks and tear gas cannisters at the National Guardsmen. It’s unclear if a Guardsman opened fired first, a student, or an armed FBI informant among the student demonstrators. In any case, there was a barrafe of bullets for 13 seconds leaving four students dead (two of whom had just been crossing campus to get to another class) and nine others wounded.

        Why am I bringing this up? Because of the NATIONAL outrage that greeted the news. A student strike closed 450 campuses across the country — the only nationwide student strike in US history. Five days after the shootings, 100,000 people demonstrated in Washington, D.C., against the war and the killing of unarmed student protesters — and it was not entirely peaceful; windows were smashed, tires were slashed, parked cars were dragged into intersections, and bedsprings were thrown off overpasses into the traffic down below. Ten days after the Kent State shootings, two students were killed (and 12 wounded) by police at Jackson State University under similar circumstances, but that event did not arouse the same nationwide attention as the Kent State shootings (Jackson State is a historically black institution, while the students killed at Kent State were all white, I think). President Nixon convened a Commission on Campus Unrest whose report conclused that the Guardsmen’s shots could not be justified. Guardsmen were indicted. The incident forced the National Guard to re-examine its methods of crowd control and develop less lethal means of dispersing demonstrators. Each May 4 since 1971, a day commemorating the tragedy has been held on the Kent State campus.

        Why am I going into all this detail? Because whatever else you might say about our country, when four unarmed students were shot down — and in their case, with considerably more provocation on their part than anything I witnessed on videotapes from the Nakba Day protests — it occasioned a national uproar and a protracted period of self-reflection about what had occurred, and why, and what could be done to prevent it from happening again.

        All I’m hearing from Israel is some version of, “They asked for it.”

        • May 17, 2011 1:59 pm

          It wasn’t even a wishy-washy response- it essentially gave a stamp of approval to the killings. This isn’t how you win hearts and minds in that region. The admin. is taking the line that it’s primarily Syria and Lebanon’s fault, which sidesteps the issue of whether disproportionate force was used- because it was- apparently the only crowd control methods the IDF knows is to use live ammo and steel-tipped rubber bullets. Unarmed demonstrators just shouldn’t be shot. If those that had been shot had been Israelis I bet there would have been an INSTANT condemnation from the State Dept.

          But remember, we’re an honest broker!

      • May 18, 2011 5:27 am

        That piece by Bronner was ripped apart on the blogs- it read more like a press release from AIPAC or the Prime Minister’s office. He bends over backwards to read into Bibi’s speech things that weren’t there. I consider it Bronner’s idea of foreplay- it laid the foundation for Bibi’s trip to Washington today. It was meant to send a message to Congress and the WH. It was nothing but unabashed propaganda masquerading as journalism.

  4. Terry permalink
    May 16, 2011 11:17 pm

    Just heard on CNN that Hillary is going to Pakistan soon. Seems like this will be a major drawing “of a line in the sand” for the administration. Last time she was there she challenged them to give up the terrorists that she knew were in their towns and countryside. Wonder how tough Obama will let her be this time?

  5. May 18, 2011 5:24 am

    Bibi arrives in the US today, armed with meaningless rhetoric and digging in with his bunker mentality:

    I’m going to have to ignore much of what he says and the rousing reception he gets from Congress, the WH and the State Dept. Talk about rewarding someone for doing the wrong thing- this guy has been nothing but an obstacle to US policy and yet we are rolling out the red carpet for him.

    The AIPAC speech and the speech before Congress will be a lot of fear-mongering and playing the victim. Israel has no partner for peace, Israel will defend it’s borders, the Palestinians are dedicated to the destruction of the Jewish state, etc. etc. There will be nothing hopeful, nothing positive, nothing courageous from the leader of Israel, because Israel doesn’t do hopeful or positive. His speech before the Knesset, which seems geared towards provoking the Palestinians was merely a hardening of his position and a message to his sheep in Congress that he expects them to do everything possible to help him drag his feet until 2012.

    It’s time to have an open discussion in this country about the role Israel plays in our foreign policy, economic policy and our national security.

  6. January 24, 2013 7:52 pm

    Obama did end up winning so.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: