First off, I don't really think that Clinton will be chosen as Secretary of State, though I could see it being a polite offer. I think that she has more power in the Senate and can do more good there. Obviously I could be wrong and the only way we'll know is when he announces a pick. I'd guess that Bill Richardson is a more likely pick for the job if he wants it. He certainly has the credentials.
Secondly, I'm not quite sure what is going to fit your definition of "change". Do all of his picks need to have never been part of the government before? The change that I'm looking for is a mix of conservative/liberal folks, some people with Washington experience, some from more outside the beltway. In other words a government meant to function and be inclusive of diverse viewpoints and experience rather than an ideologically-driven frat house. Judah On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 11:02 AM, Scott Stroz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > While I really have no issues with any of his appointees (including Hillary > as Secretary of State) it seems more like 'change back' rather than 'cange' > so far. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to date Get the Free Trial http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;207172674;29440083;f Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:280382 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
