A Striped Pants-Suit for Hillary?
| Fri Nov. 14, 2008 8:32 AM PST
A STRIPED PANTS-SUIT FOR HILLARY?....Al Kamen reports today on "increasing chatter" that maybe Barack Obama will offer the position of Secretary of State to Hillary Clinton. In fairness, chatter is what Kamen's column is all about, but still, you have to wonder: what the hell is that supposed to mean? Is this chatter from people who might actually have Obama's ear? Chatter from bored think tankers at cocktail parties? Chatter from the blogosphere? What?
This is really ridiculous. There's exactly zero evidence for Kamen's contention that "healing remaining divisions" is any kind of issue at all within the Democratic Party. As near as I can tell, the party is virtually rapturous these days, Clinton supporters are fully on board with Obama as president, and there's no reason to think Hillary Clinton would want to be Secretary of State even if Obama offered her the job. The whole thing is crazy.
But — psst. You know what I heard? It's not Hillary Clinton he's thinking of at all. It's Bill! Actually, Obama is thinking of co-Secretaries of State: Bill Clinton and Tony Blair! Wouldn't that be great? It would be like teaming up Superman and Spiderman! And you heard it here first. My sources, by the way, are extremely well connected. Honest.
Continues Below
Continued From Above
Comments
Submitted by J.W. Hamner (not verified) on Fri Nov. 14, 2008 8:32 AM PST.
Uhm... Andrea Mitchell reported that two Obama advisers said she was under consideration. Granted, I guess they could be advising him on his new dog or something, but it seems like pretty well sourced speculation to me.
Submitted by Howard (not verified) on Fri Nov. 14, 2008 8:49 AM PST.
A leak like this from two very reliable Obama advisers, as Andrea Mitchell described them, is more than a trial balloon, done to test reaction to a far-fetched idea. No, I think this is an idea under serious consideration. Plus, as many have pointed out, you don't "leak" an idea like this only to pull the rug out from under Hillary Clinton once again. No, if Hillary wants the job, she's gonna get it.
I think it's brilliant. But what do I know?
you don't "leak" an idea like this only to pull the rug out from under Hillary Clinton once again
1) I don't think they've ever provided a rug for her to stand on before.
2) It could just be a respectful gesture which she will respectfully decline.
3) And yes, maybe they want her there.
BTW, Who's well placed on the democratic side for the NY senate seat?
you hear that Clintonites who are in DC are trying to sabotage Obama
I wish the paranoid folks would look over their other shoulder from time to time. I think there are a few thousand well-placed Republicans trying to stick shivs in your side.
Submitted by Chris Brown (not verified) on Fri Nov. 14, 2008 9:10 AM PST.
"This is really ridiculous."
You got that right.
Just further evidence that there isn't enough news to fill up all of the publishing space so folks just make stuff up.
Even Nate Silver, for whom and whose work I have great respect, yesterday did a piece on what if Clinton had been the nominee. Even TPM has entered the useless speculation follies.
It's all just so silly.
I'm really not sure about Kevin's instincts on this. The story didn't originate with Novak or Drudge or Wonkette. It was rolled out as an intentional leak and has been followed up with stories about a face-to-face meeting. It doesn't necessarily mean they want her but they do want the story out there.
I think it's brilliant. But what do I know?
Who's your candidate to pick up the torch that Ted Kennedy is going to drop (too)soon? Those are some big fucking shoes to fill.
HRC is one of the few I can think of whose feet might fit, or grow to fit.
Submitted by fester (not verified) on Fri Nov. 14, 2008 9:27 AM PST.
but where will Batman work as it would be a slap in the face if Spiderman and Superman each have high level jobs in the Obama administration. To not even be considered is an unforgivable insult of the Caped Crusader....
The problem with Hillary as SecState is that she doesn't seem to be much of an administrator or manager. DOS, like DOJ or DOD is a pretty gigantic organization. But judging by the frenetic, disorderly campaign she ran for the Democratic nomination, she doesn't strike me as being the type to do well as either Secretary of State or even Attorney General.
I think a seat on the Supreme Court when Justice Stevens steps down would be a much better deal for her!
Just sayin...
Tks rich
It's starting to look real. And I can't say I like it. But then I think of this quote from Johnson:
"I'd rather have my enemies inside the tent pissing out than outside the tent pissing in."
Lyndon certainly had a way with words, didn't he? But he had a point. Maybe this isn't so bad.
If he's as smart as y'all think, he should put her where she can do the most good. That would be where SHE thinks she should be, since she knows best. Sec. of State would be good. She's smart as a whip, tough, loyal. It's busy and intense. Supreme Court - nah, too isolating. She's gregarious, wrong personality. Senate leadership? If she chose to stay, she could be the greatest ever, work 'til she's ninety, keeping all the ducks in a row. I just hope Obama's that smart and not a damn fool.
Submitted by BaxterJ (not verified) on Fri Nov. 14, 2008 1:00 PM PST.
I wonder who leaked this to the press?
Obama and Hillary sparred over whether the US should "talk to its enemies" and their respective positions hardened during the primaries.
It would increase a lot of people's cynicism about politicians (and about these two in particular) if she ends up being his Secretary of State.
Pick someone else. Hillary is going to be trouble. She can do much more good in the Senate, on domestic policy -- which is what she knows more about. Having had lunch with the wives of lots of heads of state does not make a foreign policy expert.
I think it is wanting to reverse the image of her being less than stellar as an administrator, plus the rush of being the country's lead diplomat, that would make Hillary consider the job.
For me, however, her number one qualification is that she is not John Kerry.
"Hillary is going to be trouble."
She sure is going to be trouble. The question is this: Where will she be the least trouble? As much as I don't like the pick, I think Johnson had the right approach. Keep your enemies on your side. It's easier that way.
1. I meant to say "wrists and ankles" earlier. No wonder no one got the Firesign Theater-Nick Danger reference.
2. I think that in terms of skill set, Hillary's good for this job. Bill's baggage is another matter, but I'm guessing that they think they can handle it.
3. contra what Kevin says, I think it makes perfect sense for her politically. Running for President (I'm thinking 2016, not 2012)is hard from the Senate-too many votes that get turned into negative soundbites regardless of their actual context.
while she could stay in the Senate til 2016 easily, i doubt that she wants to depend on the Republicans running a senator against her in 2016. And, I don't see her looking at 2012. I think that as both a matter of political preference and party loyalty she wants to see Obama serve two terms.
fostert, I meant trouble for the country, not for Obama. Hillary's own idea of the perfect Secretary of State was Holbrooke -- a Wolfowitz clone who never thought of a war he didn't like, and who thought Bush was paying too much attention to what the UN thought about Iraq. If Hillary is appointed, Holbrooke will probably end up running her show one way or another. We might as well have Wolfowitz in the job. That's what I meant by "trouble".
Casey--
Actually we need some gregarious types on the Supreme Court. That was Brennan's strength, and his astute political sense enabled him to build majorities that a more solitary type (Breyer, Souter, Ginsburg, Blackmun) never could. Scalia might have more influence if he were not such a sarcastic know-it-all.
But I don't know that HRC has Brennan's gifts. Yes she shared shots with McCain and a podium with Gingrich, but did she ever bring them over to her way of thinking?
And just what is her way of thinking anyway? Politicians generally are forced to strip their comments on judicial matters down to some lowest common denominator that can (1) be explained to a lay audience and (2) fit their immediate political goals. Which is to say I don't know if we have any idea where she would go on unexpected issues, such as those the Bush Administration thrust on us in the last seven and a half years.
Henry -
I just can't envision Hillary arguing the fine points of constitutional law with Scalia and Thomas. Neither reason nor force of character will move them. Likewise McCain and Gingrich - if they jumped to a liberal idea, one would suspect drugs or a brain tumor. She should be out and about with people who need her help and a direct connection to the Obama administration.
I trust completely that she would take her guidance on "unexpected issues" from her boss, President Obama. The question is, from whom will he take HIS guidance? I expect that he, Hillary, and the rest of the administration would whack it around until solutions presented themselves. No unilateral shenanigans from THIS crew.
