- Joined
- Mar 21, 2005
- Messages
- 25,893
- Reaction score
- 12,484
- Location
- New York, NY
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Slightly Conservative
Today I had the chance to talk with Strobe Talbott, the current President of the Brookings Institute and Bill Clinton's Deputy Secretary of State. He had some interesting stories to tell that I thought might interest some people, and offered his predictions for 2008.
First off, he's had a pretty interesting life. He and Bill Clinton first met when they were Rhodes Scholars together at Oxford, and they've been very close ever since Strobe let Clinton live on his couch for a while after he had lost the lease on his apartment. He became pretty famous when as a 23 year old, he managed to smuggle Khruschev's memoirs out of Russia and translate them, and from then went on to be a reporter before Clinton brought him in to the State Dept.
He was here to give an address on US Foreign Policy in Iraq, (which he thinks is an absolute debacle) but in the meeting before the speech we talked about a wide range of things, such as 2008 and his thoughts on Global Governance.
He explained that he's a Hillary supporter, which might color his views, but he said that he doesn't think Edwards will be the force people are predicting, and that Obama will offer a good race, but not make it in the end. He predicted that if Hillary can win a good, strong, clean primary over Obama, it will identify her as enough of her own person that it will position her well for the general.
On the Rep side, he said that Giuliani, while he's got a lot of surface love from people, will not be able to go all the way. He said that one good day isn't going to be enough to win an election. He said that he thinks McCain has tied himself so much up into the war that he's seriously damaged his chances, and that he will find himself a popular target of the publics anger if things don't get better. He said that he thinks Romney will end up being the nominee, because as Clinton apparently told him, "Democrats fall in love, Republicans fall in line." The reasoning there was that things like the mormonism etc might be an issue for some republicans now, but that once hes the nominee, the wagons will close and there will be a unified front.
He said he doesn't know confidently how it will turn out, but that he believes it will be Hillary. And as a side note to the election predictions, apparently during a meeting with the Chinese Premier a week before the 2006 elections, the Premier asked what the results of the elections would be. He conferred with the resident Brookings political guru Thomas Mann, and Mann ended up predicting the results, down to the chair, for both houses. The week after the election, they got a call from the Premier inviting them back any time they wanted.:lol:
One of his stances that I took issue with was his belief in Global Governance. He's long been a huge proponent of the idea that there must eventually be a global government in charge of managing the world, and that the US should immediately become party to the ICC, Kyoto, and all sorts of other international protocols. I asked him if he had tempered his past views in light of things such as the Italian decision to indict 13 CIA agents. (The reason I asked this is because the CIA acknowledges that it commits 100,000 "serious crimes" around the world each year. If we begin allowing our agents to submit to international law, it would absolutely destroy our intelligence at a time when faulty intelligence was responsible for the failure to prevent 9/11 and for the intelligence flaws that led us into Iraq).
He said that it was governmental decisions like that of the Italians or the Germans (who are "prosecuting" Rumsfeld for war crimes) that continues to set back the cause of global governance, and that it's not productive. He then acknowledged (which really surprised me, as I thought he was too much of an ideologue to believe this) that if the US ever joins the ICC and helps develop a set of international legal standards, there will have to be carve outs for US agencies, because as the worlds leading nation, "we have to have good guys in bad places doing bad things."
All in all, it was pretty interesting. Hope some of you think so too.:2wave:
First off, he's had a pretty interesting life. He and Bill Clinton first met when they were Rhodes Scholars together at Oxford, and they've been very close ever since Strobe let Clinton live on his couch for a while after he had lost the lease on his apartment. He became pretty famous when as a 23 year old, he managed to smuggle Khruschev's memoirs out of Russia and translate them, and from then went on to be a reporter before Clinton brought him in to the State Dept.
He was here to give an address on US Foreign Policy in Iraq, (which he thinks is an absolute debacle) but in the meeting before the speech we talked about a wide range of things, such as 2008 and his thoughts on Global Governance.
He explained that he's a Hillary supporter, which might color his views, but he said that he doesn't think Edwards will be the force people are predicting, and that Obama will offer a good race, but not make it in the end. He predicted that if Hillary can win a good, strong, clean primary over Obama, it will identify her as enough of her own person that it will position her well for the general.
On the Rep side, he said that Giuliani, while he's got a lot of surface love from people, will not be able to go all the way. He said that one good day isn't going to be enough to win an election. He said that he thinks McCain has tied himself so much up into the war that he's seriously damaged his chances, and that he will find himself a popular target of the publics anger if things don't get better. He said that he thinks Romney will end up being the nominee, because as Clinton apparently told him, "Democrats fall in love, Republicans fall in line." The reasoning there was that things like the mormonism etc might be an issue for some republicans now, but that once hes the nominee, the wagons will close and there will be a unified front.
He said he doesn't know confidently how it will turn out, but that he believes it will be Hillary. And as a side note to the election predictions, apparently during a meeting with the Chinese Premier a week before the 2006 elections, the Premier asked what the results of the elections would be. He conferred with the resident Brookings political guru Thomas Mann, and Mann ended up predicting the results, down to the chair, for both houses. The week after the election, they got a call from the Premier inviting them back any time they wanted.:lol:
One of his stances that I took issue with was his belief in Global Governance. He's long been a huge proponent of the idea that there must eventually be a global government in charge of managing the world, and that the US should immediately become party to the ICC, Kyoto, and all sorts of other international protocols. I asked him if he had tempered his past views in light of things such as the Italian decision to indict 13 CIA agents. (The reason I asked this is because the CIA acknowledges that it commits 100,000 "serious crimes" around the world each year. If we begin allowing our agents to submit to international law, it would absolutely destroy our intelligence at a time when faulty intelligence was responsible for the failure to prevent 9/11 and for the intelligence flaws that led us into Iraq).
He said that it was governmental decisions like that of the Italians or the Germans (who are "prosecuting" Rumsfeld for war crimes) that continues to set back the cause of global governance, and that it's not productive. He then acknowledged (which really surprised me, as I thought he was too much of an ideologue to believe this) that if the US ever joins the ICC and helps develop a set of international legal standards, there will have to be carve outs for US agencies, because as the worlds leading nation, "we have to have good guys in bad places doing bad things."
All in all, it was pretty interesting. Hope some of you think so too.:2wave:
