Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State

Nunzio's picture

It looks more and more likely that Hillary Clinton will be named Secretary of State. I must say, I'm kind of surprised. I don't see foreign affairs as her strong suit.

However, after thinking about it some more, I think it gives the U.S. an opportunity to become a strong advocate for ensuring the rights and freedoms of women around the world, given Hillary's strength in that area. If there is one group of people who face discrimination and injustice, regardless of where you are in the world, what color skin you have, what you've accomplished, or how much money you make, it is women. So, if the world is ever to achieve peace, it must first achieve equality and freedom and justice for all. Maybe that's what Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State is all about.

What do you all think?

2014 susquehanna's picture

I think Condi Rice and

I think Condi Rice and Madelyn Albright have already established that a woman is no more uniquely qualified than a man at being Secretary of State. I doubt Hillary will have any more impact than they did on the rights of women throughout the world. I do however think that she is well qualified for the job and already has the respect of many foriegn leaders.

michaellouis's picture

2014 susquehanna wrote:I do

2014 susquehanna wrote:

I do however think that she is well qualified for the job and already has the respect of many foreign leaders.

I'll second that.

She is one of the hardest working members of the senate.

dan's picture

She certainly has the

She certainly has the respect of many foreign leaders, and despite the campaign rhetoric, she is known as someone who reaches across the aisle to get things done in the Senate.

lauraska's picture

Well, before and during her

Well, before and during her husband's run as the big prez, the focus of her career was on women's and children's rights issues. I think there's a good chance that she might fight for those things as secretary of state, but I agree with the commenters who say she's just plain qualified and has the respect of foreign leaders. I'm glad she gets to be a part of this administration, even if it's in a different role than what she had planned.

stock's picture

oops

oops

stock's picture

Nunzio wrote:I think it

Nunzio wrote:

I think it gives the U.S. an opportunity to become a strong advocate for ensuring the rights and freedoms of women around the world, given Hillary's strength in that area.

What about Condi and Albright?

An other thing, Obama campaigned on "Change". Which is great, we need to shake things up and clean house, but his cabinet thus far is all inside the beltway people!

NPR had a show on how Obama is pissing off the "liberal" side of the Democratic party by picking all these center to right, middle of the road cabinet positions.

lauraska's picture

Obama's been pretty up front

Obama's been pretty up front about wanting a cabinet that represents the spectrum of political ideals. He even said he might put a couple Repubs in his cabinet. I don't think he's gone against his campaign promise at all. He said he wanted to cross party lines, and unlike GW (who made the same promise), he might actually make good on it.

stein's picture

Quote:An other thing, Obama

Quote:

An other thing, Obama campaigned on "Change". Which is great, we need to shake things up and clean house, but his cabinet thus far is all inside the beltway people!

thing is, if you actually want people who know how to get things done in washington you need people with experience. obama clearly doesn't feel as if he has the luxury of waiting a few months while some outside of the beltway types figure out what the heck they are doing.

at the moment there isn't much we can do except sit around and hope that all these appointees serve obama's agenda faithfully.

Quote:

NPR had a show on how Obama is [hency]ing off the "liberal" side of the Democratic party by picking all these center to right, middle of the road cabinet positions.

which is funny because he ran a clearly centrist campaign.

luckily for those of us who wanted to see more of a liberal bent, the situation he is inheriting is dire enough that he is going to need to work in bold strokes and not safe, middling proposals.

dan's picture

stock wrote:Obama campaigned

stock wrote:

Obama campaigned on "Change". Which is great, we need to shake things up and clean house, but his cabinet thus far is all inside the beltway people!

NPR had a show on how Obama is pissing off the "liberal" side of the Democratic party by picking all these center to right, middle of the road cabinet positions.

Obama ran a two-faced campaign (not picking on him - McCain did too, that's just not who we're talking about at the moment).

He made two conflicting promises:
One was to push forward a progressive/liberal agenda.
One was to 'govern from the center'.

Plus, there's always the pressure to find capable people willing to work for the low (by corporate standards) pay the government gives.

Jimmy Carter made similar promises during his campaign - in fact, he mentioned two specific names of "inside the beltway" people and said that if you saw those people in his cabinet, it would mean he had failed in changing government. Guess what? Both of those people ended up in his cabinet.

Bush chose some new people, some insiders, and folks seem to like/despise both equally.

stein's picture

Quote:He made two

Quote:

He made two conflicting promises:
One was to push forward a progressive/liberal agenda.
One was to 'govern from the center'.

I disagree that the two are conflicting. I know the media (particularly along the right wing of the media) liked to constantly claim that this is a 'center-right' country, but the polls bear out the notion that much of that 'progressive/liberal' agenda obama wants to push is supported by majorities in this country. I propose that governing from the center means to push forward the 'progressive/liberal' agenda he campaigned on (in as much as it is actually progressive/liberal)

dan's picture

stein wrote:I disagree that

stein wrote:

I disagree that the two are conflicting. I know the media (particularly along the right wing of the media) liked to constantly claim that this is a 'center-right' country, but the polls bear out the notion that much of that 'progressive/liberal' agenda obama wants to push is supported by majorities in this country. I propose that governing from the center means to push forward the 'progressive/liberal' agenda he campaigned on (in as much as it is actually progressive/liberal)

I disagree with your disagreement. :)

I think it reflects the classic bias each person has to consider his/her own views to be moderate and normative.

Was George W. Bush in the 2000 campaign moderate, conservative, or far-right?
Was Barack Obama in the 2008 campaign moderate, liberal, or far-left?

I suggest that someone's answer says a whole lot more about the person who answers the question than it does about the politician being discussed.

PattiMey's picture

The whole world will be

The whole world will be watching US in the next 4 years to see if we can get ourselves out of this mess. I trust that Obama will make all the right choices for his cabinet and pick them because he knows they will be dedicated and knowledgible not because of some secret promises made during the campaign. I am happy he offered Hilary the position.

stein's picture

Quote:Was George W. Bush in

Quote:

Was George W. Bush in the 2000 campaign moderate, conservative, or far-right?
Was Barack Obama in the 2008 campaign moderate, liberal, or far-left?

both ran moderate campaigns. I don't have the data to know for sure, but I assume that most (if not all) non-incumbent winning presidential candidate run moderate campaigns, and probably the same can be said about most losing candidates as well.

Ftown66's picture

I think shes a pretty good

I think shes a pretty good choice. Besides she has Bills years of experience to help guide her.

lauraska's picture

Oof, Ftown, I hope that

Oof, Ftown, I hope that thing about having Bill to "help" her was one of your good-natured jokes!

Ftown66's picture

lauraska wrote:Oof, Ftown, I

lauraska wrote:

Oof, Ftown, I hope that thing about having Bill to "help" her was one of your good-natured jokes!

Sorry it wasn't a joke. No one said anything about her having bill to help her. I said she has Bills years of experience to help guide her. Do you honestlly believe she won't ever ask Bill his opinion on a matter?

lauraska's picture

Ftown66 wrote:lauraska

Ftown66 wrote:
lauraska wrote:

Oof, Ftown, I hope that thing about having Bill to "help" her was one of your good-natured jokes!

Sorry it wasn't a joke. No one said anything about her having bill to help her. I said she has Bills years of experience to help guide her. Do you honestlly believe she won't ever ask Bill his opinion on a matter?

I'm not trying to argue with you. I guess it just sounded kind of patronizing. She might ask him for advice, yes. But the fact that she has a husband who was president should not be a qualification for her. It implied, to me, that you were saying she would be otherwise less qualified, without having Bill as her husband. That's all I was saying.

PattiMey's picture

http://volokh.com/posts/12275

Nunzio's picture

stock wrote:Nunzio wrote:I

stock wrote:
Nunzio wrote:

I think it gives the U.S. an opportunity to become a strong advocate for ensuring the rights and freedoms of women around the world, given Hillary's strength in that area.

What about Condi and Albright?

Well, as lauraska pointed out and as I was alluding to in the original post, Hillary has been a global champion of women's rights for many, many years. I don't remember Madeline Albright or Condoleeza Rice having a similar record, nor do I remember either of them making it a key element of their foreign policy agenda. I was hoping that Hillary would.

stock wrote:

An other thing, Obama campaigned on "Change". Which is great, we need to shake things up and clean house, but his cabinet thus far is all inside the beltway people!

Yup, mostly Clinton's people. We should consider ourselves lucky to have people with common sense and intelligence back in power.

stock wrote:

NPR had a show on how Obama is pissing off the "liberal" side of the Democratic party by picking all these center to right, middle of the road cabinet positions.

Thank goodness for that.