Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

What are your thoughts on the lawsuit filed against Clinton claiming she cannot legally be Secretary of State?

Here's the video explanation:

Answer Question

Asked by sgalsmommy at 12:20 PM on Jan. 30, 2009 in Politics & Current Events

Level 1 (0 Credits)
Answers (17)
  • I think their IS a conflict of interest. Of course that depends on one's definition of the word "IS!!!"

    (sorry, I couldn't help myself...sometimes the jokes, they just write themselves!) LOL

    Answer by LoriKeet at 12:23 PM on Jan. 30, 2009

  • OMG...her husband was such a cheat and a liar. My grandmother used to say that the country was going to go to hell in a hand basket when he left because of all of the back alley deals he made! And what do you know things tarted falling apart. No she is not her husband bu we tend to marry people of similar morals. And her morals DO matter!


    Answer by momof030404 at 12:30 PM on Jan. 30, 2009

  • here's some more info:

    Answer by heatherama at 12:33 PM on Jan. 30, 2009

  • Of course that depends on one's definition of the word "IS!!!"

    ROFLMAO! Clintons are a power hungry duo that many liberals think can do wrong.


    Answer by grlygrlz2 at 12:33 PM on Jan. 30, 2009

  • DO NO WRONG...

    Conservative slip up.. LOL

    Answer by grlygrlz2 at 12:33 PM on Jan. 30, 2009

  • As far as the question. This has happened before. I forget with whom, but they resloved it in the past. I don't think it will stop her.

    Answer by grlygrlz2 at 12:37 PM on Jan. 30, 2009

    More updated newslink

    Answer by Anonymous at 12:38 PM on Jan. 30, 2009

  • While I don't like her, think she is the worst person for this job, and think her husband's activities pose a large conflict of interest....
    this lawsuit has no basis. Yes, the Constitiution does ban Congressmen from holding appointed offices that they voted pay raises for. There is a simple way around it - they roll the pay of that office back to what it was before any votes by that person. That's what they've done in the past, that's what they did this time.

    Answer by kaycee14 at 12:51 PM on Jan. 30, 2009

  • Designating her was a bone thrown to the dogs - a move to garner the support of people who supported her presidential candidacy. However, a Secretary of State needs to understand tact, and it's been obvious for years she lacks that quality.

    Answer by divinity80921 at 1:27 PM on Jan. 30, 2009

  • She bargained for that job as a condition of dropping out of the election - you know there' s no way they'll kick her out. Hell hath no fury like a Clinton scorned.

    Answer by NotPanicking at 1:38 PM on Jan. 30, 2009

Join CafeMom now to contribute your answer and become part of our community. It's free and takes just a minute.
close Cafemom Join now to connect to other members! Connect with Facebook or Sign Up Using Email

Already Joined? LOG IN