From: lib@cbnews.cb.att.com (Lib)
Subject: Re: What can we expect from President Hillary Clinton?
Organization: AT&T
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 19:19:02 GMT

In article <25375@galaxy.ucr.edu> starbuck@galaxy.ucr.edu (starbuck) writes:
>
>Hillery will be a problem.  Not because she is a women but because she is
  
You really should learn how to spell her name before writing such a long
article.
  
>Hillery.  Many people don't like her, the find her offensive, and that is
>without much national attention to her personality and beliefs.  I believe
  
Perhaps when people get to know something about her they will like her.
  
>she will cause problems for Clinton where none would exist without her.
>The public is pissed and I for one do not feel the Clinton's have a clue
>as to why.  They listen to special interests of their choice and those
  
How do you know the public is pissed? Have people been writing letters?
And to whom? Perhapos you have Hillary confused with Zoe Baird.
  
>special interests are of the social engineering type.  With all the hype
>about being for the common person they will not listen to them. 
>
>Not being on the White House staff, Hillery will cause problem because she
>does not have an official position.  Will she butt in to other area's of
>operation that are headed by others?  If so will she have the right to
   
She didn't while he was governor.
  
>veto the suggestions and policy of others?  Where does she fit in the
   
That's up to Bill.
  
>chain of command?  Will Congress be able to call her to testitfy?  What if
  
Sure. She can't refuse a supeona anymore than you can.
  
>she breaks the law in her zeal?  What if she fails?  One would think that
  
Nixon broke the law, he was president and look what happened to him.
  
>this was not well thought out.  
>
>The press and feminist women have jacked her up with their expectations.
    
True.
  
>No one knows if she can live up to it.  Remember she was not elected
  
Nobody in the government except for Clinton and Gore were elected.
  
>nor appointed, she has her job only because she is Mrs. Bill Clinton,
>no more no less.  She did not get it of her own volition unless it was
>through private talks with Bill.  They took a big risk that they did not
>have to.  
   
Some call that leadership.
  
>The press and the feminst have made Hillery to be the first "First Lady"
>to ever do anything of value.  (Much like the whine they make about when
>will a women be on the National Ticket.  Like they don't remember Mondale's
>running mate.  Her idenity seems to have been forgotton). I have two words 
>for those of that belief. Eleanor Roosevelt.  Hillery may have done much
>in her life but she is pale to Eleanor Roosevelt.  Of course selective 
>reading of history is the forte of the feminist, Yuppie and PC devotee.
   
Not really. Like you pointed out Hillary has a job where she CAN fail.
What did Mrs. Roosevelt ever do that was difficult.
  
>Well the deed is done and their is not much anyone can do to stop it.
>Clinton would not have got elected had he made public that Hillery was
>going to be Co-President.  Their will be much resentment about this
  
She isn't. Read the papers. She's in charge of a new health care proposal.
 
>and it may be one of the many things to bring down his administration
>and those associated with him and Hillery.
>
>I just wonder if Hillery will be anything but a rock around Bill's neck.
   
85 lines later you still can't spell her name. 
    
Personally I think Chelsea's the coolest one in the family.


Newsgroups: soc.women