- ‹ previous
- 2106 of 2722
- next ›
Striped Pants-Suit Update
STRIPED PANTS-SUIT UPDATE....Martha Raddatz of ABC News reports that Barack Obama really does want Hillary Clinton to be his Secretary of State:
A source with knowledge of the transition process describes the meeting as not a hard offer. Obama is more cautious than that....He said that he knew how much she cared about health care but said there are other challenges, and wanted to reach out to her about secretary of state.
....Obama does not want to be seen as being rejected by her, but it is "hers to turn down," one source put it.
If this is really true, I'm astonished. Since when do sitting senators give up their seats to become Secretary of State? Muskie did it at the tail end of his career, but I can't think of anyone else. It's crazy. Hillary can basically be senator for life if she wants, and we're supposed to believe that she'd give that up for a cabinet post that probably won't last more than four or five years?
And why would Obama feel like this was a great idea? I don't believe for a second this business about him being afraid that Hillary will sabotage his legislative agenda. She wouldn't. And anyway, presidents have to deal with powerful interest groups all the time, including senators with agendas of their own. The Obama-Hillary relationship wouldn't be anything new or unusual.
As for Hillary allegedly seeing this as a steppingstone toward another run in 2016, I can only say: huh? I mean, who was the last person to use Foggy Bottom as a springboard to the presidency? Thomas Jefferson? John Quincy Adams? Give me a break. No Secretary of State for over a century has used it as a way to move up the political ladder.
Plus you'd have Bill and all his globetrotting to contend with too. The whole thing is crazy. I guess that doesn't mean it's impossible, but I'll eat my hat¹ if it turns out to be true.
¹Note to the literal: I don't own a hat. However, if I turn out to be wrong, I'll eat a chocolate cake shaped like a hat. If you provide the cake.
For all the reasons given here, many of which I find compelling, for Hon. Sen. Clinton to accept, the fact is that the secretary needs?above all?to manage the department, and delve into the nuts and bolts of the bureaucracy of the diplomatic corps. The flash and the big plane should not be why someone is nominated or wants to become SoS.
"Richardson? He is so silly even the angels would interfere with his plans to change the world."
There's a lot of myopia here with regard to Richardson. Strictly speaking, the SoS doesn't and shouldn't make policy. Yeah, we all have hoped that in this current administration the SoS would be a policymaker; but in an Obama administration, the policymaker will be Obama and his staff, collectively. So this policymaking thing is overblown.
SoS's "change the world" by being diplomats. And Richardson is a singularly successful diplomat. He made a bad presidential candidate. But he has, in spades, that politician's one-on-one dealmaking skill. That's exactly what you want in an SoS. Someone who can meet with world-leaders and antagonistic world actors and get a deal done. Richardson has proven that he is talented at this. The SoS isn't responsible for determining the specific wording of treaties and agreements...that's what the SoS's staff does. The SoS sits down with powerful people and negotiates with them on behalf of the President and the US government as a whole.
Would Clinton be good in this role? I'm not sure. I don't think she's shown any particular talent at this sort of thing, however. All the things that people above are saying are Clinton's strengths are those of an executive in charge of strategy and planning, not negotiating. If it weren't for the fact that she'd probably have a rocky relationship with the Pentagon, hers are the skills for a SoD, not SoS.
All in all, I think that both Kevin and most of his commenters are very off-base, here. I don't think that Clinton is well-suited to the Secretary of State position?especially compared to Richardson?but I disagree with Kevin and I do agree with the commenters that Clinton would prefer a higher profile than being a junior Senator and will probably accept the position if she's actually offered it.
For all the reasons given here, many of which I find compelling, for Hon. Sen. Clinton to accept, the fact is that the secretary needs?above all?to manage the department, and delve into the nuts and bolts of the bureaucracy of the diplomatic corps. The flash and the big plane should not be why someone is nominated or wants to become SoS.
"Richardson? He is so silly even the angels would interfere with his plans to change the world."
There's a lot of myopia here with regard to Richardson. Strictly speaking, the SoS doesn't and shouldn't make policy. Yeah, we all have hoped that in this current administration the SoS would be a policymaker; but in an Obama administration, the policymaker will be Obama and his staff, collectively. So this policymaking thing is overblown.
SoS's "change the world" by being diplomats. And Richardson is a singularly successful diplomat. He made a bad presidential candidate. But he has, in spades, that politician's one-on-one dealmaking skill. That's exactly what you want in an SoS. Someone who can meet with world-leaders and antagonistic world actors and get a deal done. Richardson has proven that he is talented at this. The SoS isn't responsible for determining the specific wording of treaties and agreements...that's what the SoS's staff does. The SoS sits down with powerful people and negotiates with them on behalf of the President and the US government as a whole.
Would Clinton be good in this role? I'm not sure. I don't think she's shown any particular talent at this sort of thing, however. All the things that people above are saying are Clinton's strengths are those of an executive in charge of strategy and planning, not negotiating. If it weren't for the fact that she'd probably have a rocky relationship with the Pentagon, hers are the skills for a SoD, not SoS.
All in all, I think that both Kevin and most of his commenters are very off-base, here. I don't think that Clinton is well-suited to the Secretary of State position?especially compared to Richardson?but I disagree with Kevin and I do agree with the commenters that Clinton would prefer a higher profile than being a junior Senator and will probably accept the position if she's actually offered it.
I'm of the opinion that it's a preemptive strike to mollify the same people who complained that he didn't pick her for VP. She's not going to take it, but it's high profile and prestigious enough that he can point it out if anyone says he still harbours a grudge from the primary.
I'm with you Kevin. This seems to me to be a big media circle jerk/rub.
This is awesome. Everyone comes out looking great. Except for maybe John Kerry. Obama gets to be gracious, Hillary gets the ego boost that the media will provide as they frantically whip this story, and everyone wins. There is nothing to be lost by extending an offer that will never be accepted. Genius!
You'd have to go back to Philander C. Knox, of Pennsylvania, in 1909, to find the last sitting Senator other than Muskie to be named Secretary of State
Philander C. Knox
There's a Bill Clinton joke somewhere in that name...
There is nothing to be lost by extending an offer that will never be accepted.
When you give someone an offer that clearly won't be accepted, you risk looking like a jerk.
In this case, if everyone can see there is no upside to Clinton becoming Sec'y of State, Obama looks either like a) n00b or b) jerk.
Am I the only one who saw the sense of this last night when it was first reported, and then again this morning when Kevin was mocking the idea?
1. Hillary pounded Obama again and again in the Primaries about his lack of foreign policy experience. Naming Biden as his VP and Clinton as America's head diplomat addresses that issue effectively.
2. Obama couldn't offer Hillary the VP spot because Bill would be part of that "package".
3. SOS is the third most powerful position in the Executive Branch, which should go a long way to placating Hillary supporters.
4. SOS is #4 in the line of succession after the VP, Speaker of the House, and President pro tempore of the Senate.
5. As Lyndon B. Johnson said, it's better to have someone inside the tent pissing out than the other way around.
You watch, Hillary will take that Secretary of State job in a micro minute.
The Clintons will re-negotiate those failed oil contracts in Iraq and then, we'll have a permanent military bases in Iraq to guard our "economic security" too.
You watch, because Bill Clinton was in lockstep with Bush on this war in Iraq. Those DLC guys put corporation before all else too, just like the GOP.
I don't think the "senator for life" incentive is as overwhelming as you're making it out to be. She's 61. Will she want to run for a fourth term in ten years? Maybe. The US senate is the only place I can think of where 71 isn't considered particularly old. But maybe not.
Meanwhile, SoS has the potential to be a really big position, and there's no reason to think she couldn't keep the job for eight years if she wanted it.
As to the 2016 idea--I doubt it's in the forefront of her mind, but I'm having trouble seeing how eight more years in the senate would serve her better than eight years heading State. The argument against is silly--the universe of past presidential contenders is tiny and the ground shifts constantly. Remember when senators "couldn't win?"
On Obama's side, I can see the reasons for hesitation, but there are plenty of reasons to offer her the job. She's a world celebrity; meeting with her would be a big deal. That in and of itself shifts the diplomatic playing field at least a little bit. Plus, team of rivals and all that.
I agree with Howard. Hillary would be good at it. She could have the limelight at times and argue her policies directly with Obama, thereby being more influential, though Obama will still get the final say. Also, Hillary doesn't strike me as the type to think that a Senator for life is all it's cracked up to be. Especially when she's already in her 60's and lived 8 years at the White House.
6 of our 43 Presidents served as Secretary of State en route to the White House, including, most recently, James Buchanan. Several other Presidential nominees were former Secretaries of State, including Daniel Webster and James Blaine. And there are also a few other Secretaries of State who, like Muskie, took the job after a failed run at the presidency, including William Jennings Bryan, William Henry Seward, and James Blaine again.
FWIW, James Madison , James Monroe and John Quincy Adams were sitting Secretaries of State when first elected president. Don't think anyone has done it since, but maybe. Madison was elected in 1808 and re-elected in 1812; Monroe in 1816 and 1820. J.Q. Adams in 1824 only. tks rich
Vince, who did I miss? r
Since when do sitting senators give up their seats to become Secretary of State?
Hillary wants the job. Fuck being a Senator. The only reason she ever wanted to be Senator was so she could be President. It's a shit job.
How does she want to spend 2009? Sucking canal water in the Senate. Or traveling the world sculpting a legacy?
Plus she gets to really fuck two traitors: Kerry and Richardson. Priceless.
No Secretary of State for over a century has used it as a way to move up the political ladder.
And no senator had been elected president for over half a century. And no Melanic-American had been elected president in half an ever.
Since when is history a constraint? At least since last week, it ain't.
If the story is true, Hillary Clinton is an inspired choice as Secretary of State. Our foreign policy is nothing short of a complete mess, and the State Dept. needs someone with the gravitas of Mrs. Clinton.
Correction: "no senator had been elected president for almost half a century."
And I think I misspelled "Melanic-American."
Why wouldn't Hillary want to be Secretary of State? Obama is obviously looking for a strong and active one, because his domestic plate is going to be extremely full. And Hillary can have far more impact as his Dean Acheson than as one of 57+ Dem senators.
Man, I was hoping Obama would pick somebody else just to see Larry Johnson's head explode (again).
And Hillary can have far more impact as his Dean Acheson than as one of 57+ Dem senators.
I first read that as Dean Anderson....
Secretary of State MacGuyver, a woman, would make for a nice reboot of that series.
1-- She likes to travel.
2-- She'll get big crowds in Istanbul and Beijing and wherever.
3-- the Cabinet can certainly be used as a steppingstone to the Presidency. Look at Cheney.
Mmmmm ... chocolate cake hat! Don't count on getting one -- you're going to win the bet. Obamaland is very gifted at press management and knows how to give pieces of chewing gum to the MSM to keep them busy.
Hey, Kevin -- I live in the Bay Area and I've got 50-yard-line seats tomorrow to watch the Trojans exact their revenge on the Cardinal.
Fight On!
Bush has made a mess out of our relations with other countries-we stand alone and that is not a stance that a diplomat likes! Obama is a diplomat, Obama is smart! Hillary and Bill could patch up our relationships with allies and alter polarized positions with those who are not our friends-The question Hillary needs to answer is whether she wants to be remembered as a Senator or a world changer? Be interesting to see her choice!
Let me add my voice to the chorus of those asking 'Senator for life --- so what?' SoS is way more influential than even a senior Senator, and even if she only serves through Obama's first term, she'll have accomplished a great deal by the age of 65.
Will she be ready to retire then and effectively become an elder statesperson? Or continue as SoS, or in some other cabinet position in the Obama administration? Who knows? But I can see how it might be more appealing than an indefinite tenure in the Senate.
remember she is 62 or 63. She may realize her shot at president is over and she can do more as SOS than as aSenator. Give her credit for possibly just wanting to do good.
Actually, James Buchanan (15th President) was Secretary of State to James K. Polk (1845-1849). Polk's Diary (edited by Allan Nevins) has lots of entries indicating what an ambitious pain in the butt that Buchanan was to Polk.
Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, Quincy Adams, Van Buren, and Buchanan all had the job, but only Madison, Monroe, and Quincy Adams made the transition directly.
Why would Ms. Clinton want the job?
Gee I dunno. To make history maybe? The Middle East is ripe for a breakthrough.
Thanks, Vince! rich
Maybe Hillary thinks she'd be good at the job and Obama agrees.
Why focus on her ego? Richardson, Kerry, and Hagel have egos too. Each ran or almost ran from President the last cycle.
How about a cake shaped hat. I have a marmot skin hat somewhere around here that might pass as an ugly chocolate cake.
And maybe State would be a great position for her to inhabit while she waited for an opening on the Supreme Court.
Kevin, can you explain why you think being a senator is so much more desirable than being SoS? And what, again, is the problem Bill would present?
Unrelated: hatred and suspicion of Hillary by Obamatons during the primaries was misplaced and ugly then, and it is now. She would make a fine president and a superb SoS. Obama could not do better than gain her acceptance here. The other contenders are foolish babies in comparison.
Hillary can be of much greater service to this country as a senator. She can be the driving force behind adoption of a universal, single-payer health care program. She can also provide much-needed leadership in Congress, an area that currently reeks of inadequacy both in the House and the Senate. I think she would be a powerful and effective majority leader -- and an indispensable legislative asset to the new president.
I think Clinton, Richardson or Kerry would be big mistakes for SOS. If Obama really wants or needs a Republican in his cabinet, then he should pick Colin Powell. He is light years ahead of these 3 in temperament and experience.
I would replace Gates with Wesley Clark. We all know that during the campaign Obama threw Clark under the bus, when he should have thrown Schieffer instead. He can make up for this making Clark SOD.
This would then allow him to make the best American available for SOS; Colin Powell, his appointment for this cabinet post.
If Clinton wants to set herself up for 2016, SOS might be the way to do it. Remember, Biden's going to be 74 when 2016 rolls around, so he's probably out for a presidential run. If Clinton establishes herself as SOS, she can set herself up as a sort of deputy vice president, someone who has all the inevitability of a vice president without all the lack of doing anything useful.
Clinton may decide staying in the senate offers her a better platform for 2016 -- if things go bad for Obama, it would let her distance herself -- but it's not a crazy idea for her, and as for Obama, he'd get a smart, well-respected SOS. What's not to like?
watch k drum make a big volte-face on this in a few days. only he'll never admit it -- simply change his tune to Hillary's unsurpassed qualifications for the job.
keep in mind that it was henry the k who got the nobel peace prize, not tricky dick.
it took mr. drum quite a while to catch on that the economic crisis was only very tenuously & tangentially related to mortgage defaults.
orange county is a peculiar place. what passes for conventional wisdom there looks like poppycock in the more educated zip codes of america. eventually drum reads enough of what other people are saying to back-peddle on his provincialism.
Hey Kevin,
Maybe, just maybe, you don't know or understand Hillary Clinton as well as you think you do.
For all the reasons given here, many of which I find compelling, for Hon. Sen. Clinton to accept, the fact is that the secretary needsabove allto manage the department, and delve into the nuts and bolts of the bureaucracy of the diplomatic corps. The flash and the big plane should not be why someone is nominated or wants to become SoS.
It makes perfect sense to me. First, she has no seniority in the Senate, and no prospect of seniority for years. Second, she'd be good as SecState. Third, Obama has said that he likes to surround himself with people who will give him diverse opinions. She would do that.
Remember that one of the many problems with the Bush presidency was that he tended to surround himself with people who did not like to disagree with him. That changed during his second term, but it did affect his presidency profoundly; and not in a good way. Obama does not want to go there.
I haven't read all the other comments, so maybe someone is of the same opinion as me...
Obama DOES want Hillary to turn down the VP job. Then he can offer it to Richardson, who, above all others, has earned the enmity of Hillary supporters by his untimely EFF.U. to the Clintons: "I don't owe her anything."
BUT, while Richardson is qualified for SOS, Obama should be wary about how little loyalty Richardson really holds to those who have done him favors. He's a real Sarah Palin in that regard.
So rather than offering to eat your hat, you're offering to eat my cake.
I think its a great idea and shows Obama is way ahead of most people in his thinking about a centrist national unity government. People expecting a left agenda will be sorely disappointed. That was never his style.
DING DING DING! We hava a winner! Clara, come on down!
The next two justices of the Supreme Court will be Hillary and ... wait for it ... Bill Clinton.
I was surprised to say the least, but I do think it is a brillant move. I actually think she would be a good SOS. And if she could broker a peace deal in the middle East, which Bill almost pulled off... that would be something to go down in history for.
Another factor is that the State portfolio, while traditionally the most senior in the Cabinet, hasn't placed recent Secretaries at the center of policy-making. It's not inevitable, but several recent SoSs (Rogers, Haig, Shultz, Powell) have been frustrated at seeing so much policy-making being done at the White House or at DoD or by the NSC or in Oliver North's garage or somewhere. Having said that, Democratic SoSs, and actually Rice as well, seem to have done better at retaining influence.
1. Hil/Bil wants the job
2. Job has not been offered
3. Its just a medial circle jerk spawned by so called pro Hillary folks
4. If these folks don't shut up soon they are going to make her look stupid when the position turns up being someone else;s -- which it will.
5. Hil/Bil -- the infamous team who can't manage and who can't keep their mouths shut two minutes or avoid melodrama are/is the last person who would be SOS in this administration and at this critical point in our history. And let us not forget Bill's 4 carts of baggage. Just what Obama would LOVE --- NOT
They continue to be legends in their own minds only...