one of the + would be that it would draw the party together. she is way qualified. i would want her to work for me. smart, driven, etc. downside is lose of a seat.

Plus…

1. She has experience dealing with petulant and self-absorbed, but clever and powerful world leaders, seeing as she’s married to one.

2. She can conveniently be sent on a monthlong tour of Asian capitals when Obama wants to hash out a health-care plan without her interference.

Also, she can see Canada from New York.

i would be surprised if she did it.

Selecting from among sitting US Senators is interesting. Do the Governors pick the replacements? I would be interested in how this process happens. Do they tell the nominee and before anything happens get a fix in with the Gov. on the replacement?

I note that there is an R Governor in CT, for example.

Let’s face it, she can’t be worse than the current Secretary of State. Or the previous one. Or, as a matter of fact, the one before that.

Come to think of it, SecState’s a fairly low bar. Why not put Hillary at Defense and let her really shake things up? Or maybe State is a holding pattern until Obama tires of Gates?

Now, who will David Paterson appoint to take her place as Senator?

And she already has serviceable wardrobe.

“disingenuous”

govs do the picking.

One advantage that no one has mentioned anywhere yet is that she is a powerful advocate for women and children internationally. Fixing the birth control, AIDS, education and representing our position as far as women and rights of women can be very powerful. Her tours with Chelsea and her speeches have built incredible goodwill.
I read her autobiography last fall – and while she may prefer domestic issues, she will be far more successful, effective, and visible in a SoS role.
I hope it was offered and that she will accept.

Princess Sparkle Pony would do a super job of critiqueing it.

Ding
Ding

yep, no one has to lay out cash for the outfits.

As Rachel Maddow pointed out yesterday, does Hillary really have to fill out the entire vetting application? Including the section about members of her family that have been involved in embarrassing public escapades?

And what about Bill’s Kazakhstan money? How does that fit into a Secretary of State’s portfolio? Are any of his Clinton Global Initiative contacts problematical?

she would be the most powerful sec in my lifetime but I don’t know if she can swallow that huge ego/pride to do so. mind you, i still hold a campaign grudge. just bein practical. for the contry, ya know.

So far as her voting record in the Senate, I would suggest than many, if not most of her votes were made in careful consideration of her Presidential aspirations.
That those votes actually were to her detriment indicates an electoral political miscalculation.
TO look at those votes as predictors of a policy level position would be , IMHO, a mistake.
I actually expect she will be a strong, and possibly brilliant SoS.

Obama’s “team of rivals”

rivals in ego and ambition – although, so far looking like a pretty narrow bandwidth on ideology.

i’m still waiting to see some big name progressives to be added to the mix of neoliberals and hawks.

The bar is low for most all Presidential appointments.

Digg it!

I’d be OK with it; it might even be brilliant. Al Giordano (The Field) feels otherwise.

where would be the best place for them do you think?

During the campaign there was some talk of Bill Clinton’s ties with a Canadian investor and His toughting a foreign regime that was not very highly regarded at the State Dept. Ultimately his canadian pal got a good deal in said country. Seems like something of this nature could be a detriment to HRC.

Very well said. I expect to be continually frustrated by his centrism his whole term. I still regret that we couldn’t put a liberal in the White House.

I love this choice. For all the “plus” reasons stated above, and because then Bill Richardson will still be my governor. He be doin a good job here in the land of enchantment.

while barak has yet to confer with me .. i would much prefer clinton stay in the senate ..

I thought he was term limited?

i think he is gone anyway. he is needed elsewhere.

Ian,
The obvious plus left out is the fact that the rumor has stopped the press from talking, nonstop, about the Wasilla Half Wit.

Any senator who fell for the SoS Powell WMD bullshit (literally or due to political expediency).. should be kept as far away from so much as the janitorial closet of State, imo.

*Sigh* At least she doesn’t have an R or I by her name. Everyone from old Mad Albright and Joe Lieberman must be thrilled with this pick.

foreign policy is the area in which a POTUS is afforded by the Constitution the most latitude for personal prerogative(especially after a declaration of WAR)

hrc has no “experience” at taking orders or direction and arguably represents the ‘politics of the past’ incarnate

she belongs on the Supreme Court (of which there should be a vacancy soon and she would easily attain confirmation with such a large DEM majority)

Yeah, I don’t really care why she voted for the Iraq War and to call the Qods Force terrorists, the fact is that she did. Not sure how that gets us any closer to successful diplomacy.

Interesting parallel in that Lincoln from Illinois picked William Seward from New York as his SoS and who had been expected to get the Republican nomination in 1860. Great book Team of Rivals.

My take is that Hillary Clinton is a supremely talented person who would make a great SoS. Why she would take it is something of a mystery to me. However, Obama’s offering it to her is no surprise. As a more conservative person than Obama, she is perfect to push the more liberal foreign policy views of Obama. It’s the old Nixon recognizes China tactic.

Surely there must be a better choice Mrs Bill , R-Lite, NY. Richardson would be better qualified and have a hell of a lot less baggage than the queen of the DLC. Frankly it would be hard to think of a worse choice.

where would be the best place for them do you think?

i’d like to see progressives in key economic and environmental cabinet positions. mostly because 1) i think those as the most pressing critical problems to be addressed and 2) they are, imo, positions well suited to progressives. i may be flaming anti-war but even i see that putting someone like kucinich in at sec of def would be a disaster. one has to match the person with the organization they will lead to maximize the effectiveness of both.

my 2 cents.

Maybe Paterson would appoint Spitzer to her Senate seat, since he’s been cleared of the prostie charges! I’d sure like to see him overseeing this bailout bustout.

agreed. good judgement ought to count for something. if a position must be found, i much prefer supreme court.

Clinton as Secretary of State, then, is either a brilliant move or a dunderheaded one, and only time will tell which it is

last time I heard that we were talking abouta governor from alaska

anyway, I think clinton is an excellant choice, as you say, she has all the clinton clout, her competance will be a welcome contrast to condi

on an ot

obama is meeting with mccain, I am predicting obama offers mccain some post as well.

obama I believe is doing his best to start his presidency like lincoln, surrounded by those who opose him

she has a legal mind of that caliber? too tame for her. she is a politician.

I wonder if a woman Sec. of State is a hindrance in dealing with the more conservative Muslim nations? Hard to tell from where I sit, since the record for male secretaries in that regard isn’t exactly great.

If Obama offered her the job and she accepts, I’m willing to give her the benefit of any doubt for the time being.

SC Justices with ‘real world’ experience, especially “political” can often have a better perspective than lifetime legal wonks.

plus, being 1 of 9 is better than 1 of 100

and best of all, ’tis a lifetime job that removes her from electoral politics.

I think the best choice for Secretary of State would be Christopher Hill, a real diplomat, or Bill Richardson. Clinton seems a strange choice to me. She is already 61 so a run for the Presidency in 8 years isn’t in the cards. I thought the Democratic system in the Senate was not entirely determined by seniority as the Republican one is. I would rather see her in Harry Reid’s position. She certainly couldn’t be worse than he is.

And as for State, I don’t see her moving the big policy issues much. The Clintons are tied to the idiot Dennis Ross so I would not expect to see a resolution on Israel-Palestine. She is a hawk on Iran. I don’t know that she has much experience with China. Again Pakistan? I’m drawing a blank. Humanitarian interventions, economic development, and AIDS relief in Africa? I don’t see a lot there.

it would be a slap in the face to have to be seen with a women in some countries. that is a problem for the us. so, we could just say “take it or leave it”. ya know, just like this admin. worked so far, ain’t it?

Well, either Obama is deucedly clever, or, with his ‘choices’ is setting himself (and the rest of us, incidentally) ‘up’ for a bunch of woe.

Isn’t this all fascinating?

Especially given that what we think doesn’t matter.

We’ve done our duty and exercised our franchise.

Now, we have to wait until the ‘choices’ are complete and Obama assumes the ‘mantle’ before we can really begin to ‘help’ him.

Just an idle, stray, vagrant thought: What post do you suppose Clinton would have offered Obama, had she won in his stead?

I too fear that Obama will offer McCain a job. I wonder what job it would be?

sure, but it is too dull for her. she won’t go for it, imo.

you bring up the contrast between the two. perhaps one could call it change?

geez, what could you trust that guy to do? nah,it’s over for him.

I should hasten to add that my suggestion of Clinton as Senate Majority Leader would be a way to give her prominence in the Senate. Dick Durbin too would be a better choice than Harry Reid.

Don’t forget that, in recent years, the Secretary of State usually hasn’t run foreign policy, and gets outflanked by the national security advisor or other senior officials.

Under Nixon, William Rogers was the secretary of state and was completely powerless; NSC advisor Kissinger ran Nixon’s foreign policy. Under Carter, the dovish Cyrus Vance lost influence to the hawkish Zbigniew Brzezinski, again the NSC advisor. Under W, it was Dick Cheney who ran the show, winning out over both Colin Powell and Condi Rice.

Furthermore they tend not to last long. When the Secretary of State has a falling out with the administration, the Secretary of State is replaced.

This leads me to think that the offer of State to Hillary is a gesture, and the intent is that, knowing this history, she turns it down and decides to stay in the Senate.

Anyone attempting to conduct diplomacy for Bush fails out of the gate, so we can’t really make any assumptions based on Condi’s record. From what I can recall, Madeleine Albright wasn’t particularly active in Middle East diplomacy.

It will be interesting to see if she takes the job, assuming she actually was offered it.
(If she does, it opens a spot for a more progressive D to be appointed. Look on the bright side here.)

Supreme court or continued work in the senate would isolate her work ethic, judgement, and ability.

This is the only reason I think she might want state, to escape from the opportunity to actually do something. The question of whether or not she will play ball with Obama as SoS, seems to be more than likely yes, imo. They appear to be more and more alike with every passing hour. neither of them seem like they would ever push for real peace in re Israel and Palestine. Not with Rahm working between them and the Senate clinging to Lieberman for dear life.

I say give it to her, get her out of the Senate now.. Both D’s and R’s requirement for SoS seems to be how much needless blood is already on their hands and just how willing they are to add more. Hillary fits the bill.

Keep MIC and AIPAC happy. Obama is out of change.

I thought McCain was hoping for a greeter job at the Bush Library/Amusement Park.

Hillary’s much too old for SCOTUS. Gotta be in your 50s so prez can have long term influence on court.

Gad, he isn’t qualified for anything, aside from providing Joe and Lindsey a crevasse to nest in.

well, obama could always use his VP as a backup to SOS for a different perspective on those issues. oh, wait… never mind.

Oops. Thanks.

No matter who Obama picks, I think there will be no doubt that Obama is in charge and calling the shots. He won’t be a presidential puppet like Bush has always been.

Well at least we know she can duck and cover while running from enemy fire in all those hot-spots Obama might send her.

I think Hillary would be a great choice for sos and the Clintons are really liked/respected in the real world..
Talking about choices, the whispers are saying that soon to be President Obama is talking to this guy for AG..I don’t anything about him. Could some one fill me in? please :)

‘Obama’s Transition Team Contacts Doyle’
http://www.channel3000.com/pol…..etail.html

Clinton already had a female secretary of state, and many Islamic countries have had female leaders already (Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indonesia in particular). It really isn’t a big deal.

There are a few arch-conservative states where a man isn’t supposed to touch a grown woman who isn’t his wife. The Japanese have a protocol that avoids such issues: bow to each other rather than shaking hands if either side prefers that.

I’m not afraid of a job for mccain, I just don’t want it to be influential

mccain is at the end of his career, he does not want to do much work, the position offered will be more to unite the country then for any performance consideration

it will also split the republican party if mccain takes the job and that can’t be bad at all

excellent point.

by the way, we keep hearing about scotus appointments, who is going to retire with barack in office?

She sure couldn’t be any worse than Harry Reid. (Although to be fair, at least Reid wants to punish Joe.)

oops, ‘I don’t know anything about this guy’

How certain is it that this leak is accurate? I didn’t see any links in the post? Are we still just speculating & hypothesizing?

the Clintons are really liked/respected in the real world..

is that true in latin america? i’d be surprised if that were the case outside the elite circles.

2-3 possibilities.

Well at least we know she can duck and cover while running from enemy fire in all those hot-spots Obama might send her.

Ouch!

it will also split the republican party if mccain takes the job and that can’t be bad at all

That is why I think he is unlikely to take a position if offered. Anyway, he has the ultimate do-nothing job already.

sure, but the point is that some leaders will not negotiate with a woman. why do you think bush goes to hold hands with the saudis? it is a sensitive position bc the rest of the world is not 1)christian, 2) democratic. present admin doesn’t get it. i believe bama knows better. so, i guess what i have convinced myself of is that a woman is not right. but, hey, what do i know.

She’s perfect, for all the experience/familiarity reasons cited in the post. She’ll work her ass off, too.

She hit Obama hard on Foreign Policy experience during the Primaries, what better than to get her to be the figurehead of his team….

Imagine the plum, if she can bring home Middle East peace accords, and ease the Palestinian problems…

Stevens (88), Ginsberg (75), possibly Kennedy (72), probably not Scalia (72).

HuffPo reports the offer has been made and she is considering… IF you want to accept the word of unnamed sources.

It’s the Party of Palin now. They have their new star and don’t care about Grampy anymore.

I know in Europe and England that both Hillary and Bill are very well-liked. She would have no trouble working with the world leaders over there.
As far as Latin America goes, I don’t know too much about how they would feel.

Personally, I can think of no reason that a woman like Hillary who has been on the national political stage for so long would want an appointment as boring as one to the Supreme Court.

Let’s face it this is a dead end position created for people who aspire to nothing higher. You go there and serve until you get very old, or die. That’s not Hillary. Come to think of it, I think it takes a very special person to be interested in the SC.

Don’t misread what I say, it is a very important position. I just think it takes someone uniquely suited to being a Supreme Court Judge.

Dennis Ross (aka Israel’s lawyer) was Clinton’s negotiator. No ME peace on his watch. He’s a D neocon.

i’m just talkin about the arabs, i guess. in the short term there has to be some real close (eye ball to eye ball) discussions to avoid a war there. don’t think a woman can do it as a practical matter.

Thanks. The big “if.”

Thank you for the link.

Re SCOTUS, Stevens is 88 and Ginsburg is 75.

testing ground for economic shock doctrine. if i lived there, i’d seriously hate the bill clinton.

I believe Latin America would be more concerned with the substance of U.S. policies than the individual in the post.

i agree. it’s not her. she wouldn’t take it anyway.

You are very welcome :)

As I said before, Hillary’s too old for SCOTUS appt. Have to be in your 50s these days so prez can have a long term influence on court. Rs caught on to this with Thomas (who, after 17 years on the court is still only 60 and has another 20-30 years to go.

In Saudi, the Secretary of State is simply designated as a man for purposes of protocol. They have had no problems dealing with female US Secretaries of State.

Truthfully, I think the whole world are more concerned with ‘the substance of U.S. policies than the individual in the post’ :)

Bill made a lot of Columbian money by promoting Columbian free trade in recent years.

Wow, I forgotten Thomas was only 43 when he joined the court. Seems like he has always been a grumpy old man. As it turns out, he is only grumpy.

Come to think of it, Hillary would likely be an excellent choice for Secretary of State.

Anyone but me thinking this was pre-planned in advance after Barack won the nomination? There was much pow wowing going on between the two of them after he became the nominee. Hillary did deliver to support him in spades. IMHO, she could have at that time had her pick of postions. Was this the one she chose?

We should have a thread for who not to put into the Cabinet, like Britney Spears for Health, and Human Services for instance.

Great thread, thanks to all. FWIW, As First Lady: “Hillary Clinton says Palestinians deserve an independent state.”

I am hopeful that her move to the right on foreign policy was a fact of being a Senator from the state that suffered most grievously during 9/11.

Hope springs eternal.

Completely OT, but Yeah!! for ‘Hippy’ chicks :)

‘ Intelligent humans developed because our female ancestors had wide hips which allowed them to give birth to babies with big brains,’
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sci…..stors.html

sure, and i wouldn’t trust that “protocol” as far as i could throw it. i don’t retract. thanks.

Yup and they are all looking forward to a new administration, since any deviation from Bush policies can only be an improvement.

Judging by his memoir (didn’t read it but saw him on TV discussing it a couple of times), he’s a grumpy black man. Contrast him with Obama!

Hillary’s “shift to the right” (assuming that it was such) was because she had to prove she’s an alpha female in order to run for prez.

oops, ‘are’ should have been ‘is’

I saw those interviews too. You’d think he would be over it by now. Imagine how pissed he would have been if he HADN’T gotten the job.

I think he’s pissed because he got it. He knows it was affirmative action writ large and he can’t live with it.

As I said before, Hillary’s too old for SCOTUS appt. Have to be in your 50s these days so prez can have a long term influence on court. Rs caught on to this with Thomas (who, after 17 years on the court is still only 60 and has another 20-30 years to go.

Agree with your point about age. My point was that there is no way that a person like Hillary is going to be interested, set aside age. Serving in a dead end role on the Supreme Court just isn’t in her personality. She would probably say not only no, but hxxl no. Ain’t going to happen.

And why did you have to remind me of Thomas! Ugg! *g* Worse SCJ evah.

i still don’t trust her. i never did and she proved that instinct in spades in the primaries.
i’d rather he leave the senate alone. we already have problems there and she’s needed.
but, ya know,
no one asked me.
and i been OFF the phone all day……………

Hillary has pluses and minuses, but I think putting her at State would indicate that Obama is:

a) really not going to do much about torture and extraordinary renditions, or
b) he thinks he is going to dig in on the torture and rendition front, but is really, truly unaware and clueless of which Dems fit into the torture equation and how.

In the event of real investigations, the Clinton era renditions are going to have to come up. Not so much the renditions where people were brought to the US to stand trial, but the renditions where the CIA grabbed people and handed them off for torture and execution. In particular, any real digging would dig into the Clinton era Albanian operation extraordinary renditions.

How do you square that coming out in an ongoing investigation, including review of the Torture Conventions and our obligations and also including the purported ties of the African Embassy bombings as being retaliation against the rendtions of the Albanian captures to death, with having your SOSm who is going around the world selling the US as being an honest broker and respecter of laws, etc. being the husband of the man who was at the center of those renditions?

OTOH, if the aren’t really planning on doing anything about torture renditions, which seems more likely, then she’s a nice pick.

Nicely turned (as in spade-work) truth regarding historical fact.

Which, as you suggest, would require some effort to ‘overlook’.

So, I’ll go with your last sentence, Mary.

You’ve nailed it or, ‘that’s a wrap!’

DW

I’m not surprised that Hilary and Obama will most likely end up working on the same team in the white house, Obama as President and Hill-dawg as Secretary of State. Do you know what one major mutual thing they shared in common was?

They both have shared a vision to lead American. Hilary didn’t win the presidential election but isn’t it ironic that she will probably end up in one of the most important leadership positions in the Government. Her vision to lead was so strong that she could taste it – and now a senior leadership position has attracted her to the white house – unbelievable.

Any goal or desired outcome starts with a vision. There’s a great video and download here that describes how to realize your dream by creating a Vision Board, a device that entrepreneurs, government officials, and highly successful people are all now doing.

Go to http://www.TheVisionBoardKit.com

Meh. She should be Secretary of Defense…or stay in the Senate. OTOH, a lot of Secretaries of State have later become President…and it would put her closely in line under the current Succession Act of 1947.

Succession. Who will follow Obama? Obama’s probably thinking about that. It’s probably not Biden. If Clinton, the she’ll be rotated through a number of cabinet spots, State, Treasury, Justice, and Defense among them.