Secretary of State: A Cautionary Tale

Let's hope Obama's skills live up to his confidence in them.

edit - I assume [beg?] you will cross-post to DKos?

Greetings Al,

As a regular reader of your blog  I definitely trust your insight to the PEAKS and TROUGHS of the campaign, the election and now the transition phase of President Elect Obama.

I guess I am unable to fully comment about Mrs. Clinton because I do NOT clearly understand why she is better for the job in comparison to John Kerry and/or Bill Richardson.  I have no specific opinion about Mrs. Clinton, but I do know that the press/media seems to focus on her more than any other politician I have ever known of in my life.  I must explain that I am a younger blogger and ALL I have ever known is a Bush and/or a Clinton in the White House.  Needless to say, I am happy for a President Obama.  

I will take a wait and see attitude regarding if she will become the Secretary of State.  I DO know that our country has a lot of problems and we will need a lot of help.  I think the Democrats should listen to President and focus upon saving the country and the economy.  My worry is long term (the U.S. Economy) and not short term (Mrs. Clinton).

Just my humble opinion.           

something like this would concern Obama if it happened on his watch.  (I was also alarmed to read that Obama was willing to take the word of Colombia's president regarding protection of labor rights if the Colombian Trade Agreement goes through.  Doesn't he know the history there?  And wasn't this trade agreement something that both Bill Clinton and Rahm were pushing?)

Aaah, here's the permalink.

http://narcosphere.narconews.com/notebook/al-giordano/2008/11/us-secreta...

Here.

(And I'll fix the link to the full story momentarily.)

Don't forget to check Narco News for news from Latin America. There is also a link there to the story...

Repeating what Fai reported in the earlier thread:

I just called the Obama-Biden Transition office at (202) 540-3000, and made my opposition to the potential HRC pick heard, loud and clear.  If you haven't called already, and you object as well, please call now.

I remember watching as my mother—an former enlisted woman in the air force for two decades—pushed shopping carts and sold perfume on commission to support her family. At a time when my family needed government assistance the most, the Clinton administration's answer was to make that impossible, all while extolling the virtues of a job creation with the NAFTA and WTO. Those new jobs didn't pay shit and there was no recourse to go for help from the government. And I know for a fact that I'm not the only one with these stories.

Please note this is in no way meant to draw a parallel to the numerous human rights atrocities or struggles in Mexico. It's an anecdote. But if I could pick my main reason for not to supporting Clinton as Secretary of State, it would be, admittedly and perhaps irrationally, for this personal reason. The Clintons live in their own little bubble and have proven time and time again that they're not interested in listening. Not to people like me, and certainly not to the communities residing outside of United States borders.

What an election joy buster this whole thing is.  I can see 6 months from now Pres. Obama having to call a press conference to denounce some screw-up she made and ultimately having to replace her.  I see her forcing him to deliver a "more perfect union" speech about some mess she created in the world and then a few weeks later, when she does something else more dangerous for all of us,  the denouncement of her --similiar to how he had to deal with Rev. Wright. Geez didn't she almost cause World War III with her Iran comments? 

I've been trying to understand why Obama did this and can only believe that he thinks he can control her.  Which he well may be able to but who has the time and energy for that?? I think this officially ends the No Drama Obama part of his presidency as she will upstage him in the news every day for the next 8 years.

Al, I read the Narco News links to the story and I'm sure this must be devastating for you to see the consequences of her actions firsthand. 

I  called and spoke to the gentlemen at Obama Biden transition and voiced my extreme displeasure with this choice.  I also replied to a donation appeal email that I received minutes ago that this choice of SoS is disgraceful both in choice as well as how it is being handled by the Obama team.  

God have mercy, is right.  After reading this piece from Al, I called the transition office for the second time today. This time I specifically mentioned that I had just read Al's piece and said I was now horrified at the idea of Hillary as SOS.

I started to write that I hoped someone would send a link to Keith O. and Rachel Maddow, in the hopes that they would cover this on their shows tonight. But then I paused, hit backspace several times, and sent the messages to their respective email accounts myself.  

countdown@msnbc.com

rachel@msnbc.com

Al - very smart to tell this story now - very concrete and specific - to help focus the conversations about SOS. I guess this is what you meant when you said that if you escalated to fight back about Hillary as SOS it would look very different than we might expect.  I hope this story has the legs it deserves.

(My first post with an actual login - previously Nancy M.)

Al, this an extremely powerful statement--and as many of us commit publicly to spreading the word (and hard evidence of Clinton's incompatibility with the concept of human rights) amongst all our contacts (especially those who organized, volunteered for, and paid for Obama's victory)--this should be considered a serious shot across the bow of an Obama foreign policy agenda AND domestic agenda.  Will community organizers--ostensibly valued in this campaign (or was it all spin?)--be respected by a Clinton State Department? by an Obama Presidency?

After HRC's callous refusal to support a constituent and in light of Bill's crocodile tears from the the Kigali airport tarmac where he "apologized" for not intervening in what his Secretary of State called "acts of genocide" in Rwanda, does anyone have any confidence at all that Mrs. Clinton as Secretary of State will do anything to defend the most basic of rights for those trying to organize and report on efforts to improve the lots of the most impoverished and marginalized people of our continent or other continents? 

It is time for Obama to drop the pretense of Lincolnesque metaphors (that start to smack of hubris anyway) and reenter the 21st century and our battles for the most basic social justice at home and everywhere else.

This absurd dance with a euphemism for death that is the ongoing Obama-Clinton courtship is grotesque. Enough already.

before I decide he ain't no agent of change and walk away from this all. I am still hoping that this is all some unseen (by the masses like us) chess move to check-mate the clintons forever.

amk

Obama in the last debate with McCain:

Actually, I understand it pretty well. The history in Colombia right now is that labor leaders have been targeted for assassination on a fairly consistent basis and there have not been prosecutions.

And what I have said, because the free trade — the trade agreement itself does have labor and environmental protections, but we have to stand for human rights and we have to make sure that violence isn’t being perpetrated against workers who are just trying to organize for their rights, which is why, for example, I supported the Peruvian Free Trade Agreement which was a well-structured agreement

I very much doubt at this point that Clinton will be offered SOS. I think the idea might have been floated as a test by the Obama administration specifically to see if she and her people could be more disciplined when not in campaign mode. A test I suspect that they failed.

Obama and his people seem to take the no-drama mantra pretty damned seriously yet the Clinton's hangers on gosip worse than the national enquirer. I doubt Carvile and that crew could keep their mouths shut if their lives depended on it.

I'm still pretty sure that the reason that Clinton didn't get the VP nod is mostly due to the efforts of her supporters who tried to apply pressure to the Obama camp.

I actually don't think Hillary would be that bad as SOS I've always thought she was further to the left in her views than her rhetoric. The problem I've had with her was always her alliance with the DLC and the right wing of the Democratic Party.

Afrer all in such a position she'd be tasked with fulfilling Obama's foriegn policy objectives not making up her own and she'd be easier to control than as a senator with her own power base.

Unfortunantly for her I think those camp followers who don't know when to keep their friggin mouths shut are probably going to blow this spot for her as well.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/al-giordano/us-secretary-of-state-a-c_b_145539.html

I feel very depressed about the prospect that this will come to pass and I really do feel it doesn't make any sense. But walking away is not an option. There is so much to do in other areas like healthcare, energy and the enviroment, civil liberties and civil rights, government reform, and many more areas. It would be folly in my opinion to ignore or devalue so much else that is good because of a bad judgment in one area (if that is indeed what it is).

At the end of the day, each of us needs to do whatever we can to make our communities, this country, and the world a better place and we will keep doing that whoever the president is and whatever we think of him. But I wouldn't give up hope at this point!

We can and must do all the things you list while speaking up and speaking back to the Obama administration with our opinions about this rumored choice.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/11/21/john-brennan-torture-tain_n_145517.html

before I decide he ain't no agent of change and walk away from this all. I am still hoping that this is all some unseen (by the masses like us) chess move to check-mate the clintons forever.

I have been utterly unimpressed by Obama on Latin America so far. I know there are bigger foreign policy challenges, like Iraq and Afghanistan, but appointing Clinton and keeping up the talk about "adversaries" and the Cuba embargo is almost a guarantee that he won't have a Latin America policy at all and human rights activists better prepare for another 8 years in the trenches. I know Al disagrees, but I see Holder's appointment as part of this bigger reality of "war on drugs" and profiteering of corporate human rights violations.

For much of the rest of the world, Obama's proposed policies are not progressive, but centrist at best. Where I come from he would be a right-winger. To make credible changes in US foreign policy and put human rights at the center of it he needs to reach out to the left instead of to the US center or the Republican side, but he doesn't seem to get that.

From day one in my support for Obama I always knew he'd disappoint me at some point in terms of a decision - after all no one is perfect and there were policies I didn't totally agree with from the start - but boy I never thought it would happen before he even took the oath of office!!!

The reason for my introspection? Well with the NYT now claiming that Clinton will accept the SoS offer - IF it's true then as someone who isn't an American or in the US, I have to say that from that position outside the US, the idea that Clinton will be the international face of the Obama administration is depressing and as someone who hoped the whole Clinton drama was finally behind us all it seems like the change thing has gone right out the window!

I mean does anyone think that the leaky colander that is the Clinton sphere will suddenly behave itself and shut up when she's at Foggy Bottom??? Of course not and goodness only knows what that might mean for US foreign policy and the country's relationship with the rest of the world...

I keep hoping that this is all a bad dream and in the end the job will go to someone else, but I'm starting to brace myself for bad news and a period of never ending drama

And no this is not me being a chicken little, just a realist and I'm not stopping supporting Obama at all, just approaching the upcoming administration with a bit more of a weary sigh than I would otherwise do if the Clinton's weren't around

mainly from Bush's gun-slinging, disastrous FP prism. Once that prism breaks, the charm is lost.

Yes, I do understand there are equally pressing problems in US and rest of the world too. But the sole attraction to us, foreigners, was his lonely voice of opposition to Iraq war when most of the US was being pretty jingoistic about it and that crowd included vociferous HRC. Of course, after joining here, I have learnt of more US atrocities, either directly or covertly engaged.

Immediately after Nov 5th, I bade farewell here with good feeling of job-well-done. I jumped back in mainly after this sos mess because that position affects the rest of the world. 

I am still hoping this would turn out alright at the end, may be I drink too much of kool-aid ?

amk

and the young man was very nice.  He recommended also going to the www.change.gov website and leaving a comment (for any here who might want to do that).  I suspect you'd do that at the "Share your story" link, bottom left.

Since I just received a request from the campaign for a donation, I unsubscribed and gave HRC as SoC as my reason and explained how upsetting I find this possibility and why.  If the appointment doesn't happen, or if Obama proves to me that he's the man I thought I've been supporting, re-enlistment is always an option.

That was in reference to amk, the same passage as quoted by Okke. Sorry that wasn't clear!

...away from the Clinton circus, the Dow is shooting up on the news that Obama's choice for Treasury is Timouth Geithner.

Interesting pick and one that excites me if no other reason then it's finally someone new!

He was interviewed by Arianna the other night when she filled for Maddow.  He said he has learned, at least for now, to stop second guessing Obama.  Richardson is my first choice at SOS and I certainly appreciate Al's position on this.  But I'm not ready to get worked up in to a lather over this after all the good decisions Obama and team have made.  Maher indicated that history shows that anyone who doubts Obama at this point will likely be proven wrong.  I don't like Clinton...don't trust either one of them...but I'm happy to say I voted for and we elected someone a hell of a lot smarter than I am and, for now, I'm just going to trust his judgement.

If this happens, I will believe some kind of a 'deal' was cut.  I agree, to a degree, with Tara(above), haven't heard Bill Maher.

I respect President-elect Obama, and I also respect Abner Mikva, and many others who do not think Clinton should be named SOS. Everyone gets to make mistakes, but this one is so huge, makes a difference to most of the world, and I hope the actions of thousands of us calling the transition office, will make a difference.

How can the euphoria of this election, be dulled so quickly.  Probably only by the Clintons pushing themselves into the spotlight as quickly as they could.

God have mercy, indeed.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/22/us/politics/22obama.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

I feel like I've stepped through the Looking Glass.

Easy does it. Please don't go anywhere.

Clinton, if appointed, will be working for Obama, not against him. This isn't a campaign. Furthermore, if she emerges as a massive screw-up, she's gone. And not just from the SoS post but from government altogether (she will have already given up her senate seat to take SoS). And if she indeed harbors presidential aspirations for '16, how does she benefit by screwing up State?

Finally, due most likely to a post-election news doldrum, conflating Obama's cabinet appointments with his overall message of change is flat-footed and wrong (and wrong while playing conveniently into rightwing talking points). Obama never once suggested that change to him had anything to do with the people working for him. Instead, change was about policy and practice. In that sense, selecting Clinton actually is change because it bucks conventional wisdom.

Al's case against Clinton in the position is strong, but none of us have any idea if she becomes SoS what her approach to the position will look like. Maybe she's learned a few lessons from her failed campaign. Check out her FISA vote.

As if the idea of Clinton as SoS isn't bad enough, the chatter is that her deputy will be Richard Holbrooke!

I know Obama is all about bringing people together but after some of the stuff Holbrooke came out with in the primaries there could be an argument  made that this is taking it a step too far...

If all these concessions Bill will supposedly have to make are true in order for Hillary to be SoS, Obama might be doing a brilliant job to contain him. Bill can't raise money on his own. He can't run his own foundation. His foreign speeches must be pre-approved. Someone is putting a big sock on him: he can't run around being the alternate President-on-a-Plane.

He's Commerce Secretary.

Early ---before the Iowa primaries, I saw the Youtube  video of the CodePink women in her Senate office (or in the lobby since she wouldn't invite them into her office).  The video is devastating in capturing Hillary's complete disdain for anyone who disagreed with her Iraq War position.  It is unsettling to witness her reaction to dissent and you get the sense that she would have been very happy to have had them all arrested for disagreeing with her. 

This was the moment that I knew I did not LIKE her, did not RESPECT her and would volunteer my time and money to see that she LOST her political power.  Fortunately, as I learned more about Obama, my volunteerism turned into more of an effort FOR Obama than an effort AGAINST Hillary. 

I will continue to do that as she has shown her true colors repeatedly throughout the primaries and general election that power over principle means everything to her.  Why else would someone continue to take millions of dollars of donations from struggling Americans KNOWING the math clearly showed she had no conceivable way to win the nomination after Wisconsin, let alone PA and TX or after NC/IN???  This obsession with power is her first and second nature and no one will dispute that.

In contrast, throughout his career, Obama has spoken out forcefully time and again about abuse of power and so it is so unsettling to me to see her rewarded with the potential to continue to abuse her political power over the people of many other countries.  

I have complete confidence that Obama is smarter than most of us but this appointment would not only require him to change her policies but also change her nature.  We did vote for CHANGE for that's CHANGE that is HARD to believe in.

NPR News confirms that the posts of treasury secretary and commerce secretary have been offered to Geithner and Richardson and that Clinton has accepted the offer of secretary of state.

KD

When Obama said he would bomb Pakistan and continue the war in Afghanistan, I told my friends, it isn't as important as the overall change he represents - change the world needed.  Ending the war in Iraq, action on climate change, healthcare - that's real change, so let's embrace it.

When Obama bent over backwards to appease AIPAC and said Jerusalem should be the undivided capital of Israel, I told my friends, well, what do you expect, he's running to be US President, and he's black - add to that all those Muslim rumours, the guy has to say nonsense like that to win.

When Obama capitulated over FISA, I told my friends that you can't win them all, and he has to be seen to be moderate and centrist - live to fight another day, as it were, and he could always reverse it when he won power.

When Obama rewarded Lieberman's treachery with continued responsibility over American domestic safety and nominated Clinton to be in charge of foreign policy at a time of two wars and increasing international tensions, I have nothing to say to my friends except: perhaps you were right.

All I can hope is that a deal was cut between Obama and Clinton, because this makes no sense from a political point of view.  If there was no deal, and Obama thinks this is a good idea, then either he is becoming weak and listening to his new Clintonite advisors, or he is losing his political touch.  From a moral point of view, this is a woman who said she would "obliterate Iran", who approved the "3am ad", and who cannot do a simple thing like concede or accept a nomination for a position without taking a week to consider her own selfish interests, negotiate with her slimy husband, and draw out this boring, pathetic psychodrama associated with her and her family.

Enough is enough.  I am not American, so I did not vote for change: however, 67 million Americans did, and I didn't follow Obama's campaign for a year, believing in the man, defending him against ANY criticism, and investing my hope in his ability to be a great president, to get the Clintons back in the White House.

He hasn't taken over yet.  Maybe I'm jumping the gun.  But this will only end in tears.  Barack, what have you done?  To come so far, only to throw it away with this egotistical, spiteful, childish pair of morons in charge of American foreign policy.  You yourself pointed out this trainwreck lacked the judgement to oppose the Iraq war.  What's changed in a few months?

Bit late, but I caught the end of the morning session of Politico's event at USC where a panel from Politico and members of both campaigns (inc the wonderful Steve Hildebrand) have been discussing various issue from the campaign.

They're on lunch break at the moment, but if anyone is interested in watching any of the afternoon sessions from Election 2008: Obama vs McCain: What happened and what comes next? here's the link:

http://capture.usc.edu/college/Viewer/Viewers/ViewerVideoOnly.aspx?mode=Default&peid=5e1df0d7-f1f6-4366-ae04-bfd5a792e07c&pid=6de8c992-5613-4fd8-bb49-bbb70693fffa&playerType=WM7#

One of the few things that still get Republicans in a lather is her involvement in an issue. If she's out of the Senate, that's gone. Any bill and anything Hillary advocates draws irrational Republican fire.

That irrational hatred killed Hillary Care and a lot of other things domestic she wanted to get done. We will finally get health care and some other things with her gone.

Hillary and Bill were people who had to be dealt with. They are too young to just go off and live the lives of retired Presidents who give advice and just do charity work. In the State Department they will at least be busy traveling the world-she and her noisy crew will stay out of domestic politics.

Says who? Anonymous aides? Clandestine confidants?

The tendency for these journalists to solely depend on reports from a small bloc of anonymous sources who could be ill-informed or have ulterior motives just reeks of unprofessionalism.

...doesn't make it true.

Now, I don't claim to know if the New York Times is correct (although I get a chuckle out of its use of two alleged "confidantes" as its sources about HRC supposedly accepting the SoS position, because confidantes, by definition, wouldn't be talking to third parties!), or if this pushback by Clinton's own spokesman is true:

A spokesman for Hillary Rodham Clinton says the New York senator is still in discussion over whether to accept the secretary of state's job, though the talks are ''very much on track.''

Spokesman Philippe Reines and other Clinton officials flatly denied reports Friday that she had accepted the job offer.

Clearly, they at least want the perception out there that something(s) are still to be negotiated.

If that's the case, it's not a done deal, no matter how many media organizations try to get out in front of the others and declare it.

I'm not saying it's true or untrue. I'm just saying that it makes sense to wait until the Obama organization itself announces its choice for Secretary of State, which it has not done.

The "inevitability game" is about creating the impression of something in order to make it so. But we already have a very good example of how that didn't happen for the last two jobs Senator Clinton allegedly had locked up: President and Vice President.

Don't talk about things as a fait accompli until they're, well, accomplished!

I have no doubt that the reports on the expected appts. for Treasury, Commerce and State are accurate.  These are being widely reported by NBC, NYT, the AP and other traditionally reliable sources with no push back from one person inside the Obama campaign. 

wouldn't want me in your reporter's pool!  I hear you but I'm one of those thinking that if Commerce and Treasury are to be  believed, why not State?

I guess we'll see. I certainly don't claim to know one way or the other. But just because the Obama team isn't "pushing back" doesn't provide any evidence that Hillary is in fact the pick.

There's a very good article at Huffpo by Jamie Alter Lynton about the role that CA volunteers played in the 2008 election.  As many Fieldhands took part in this effort, I encourage you to read and celebrate what we accomplished.

There's a good chance that the role California played in Barack Obama's victory will go unnoticed by even by the more astute political observers. After all, California was never in serious play -- it's been twenty years since it went for a Republican in a presidential election. The Obama campaign's directive to the California operation was simple: keep up a presence but don't spend money. Fewer than 20 paid staff members were hired in September (compared with 100s in battleground states), a handful of offices opened and a minuscule budget approved. So it may come as a surprise that the California team actually pulled off what can only be called a field operation coup: on election day, California volunteers got on their own phones and managed to make an astonishing 2 million calls into battleground states -- a number that outstripped the calls made by all other Obama phone banks in all other states, combined. They called from coffee shops, from houses, from parks. They called from baby groups, from pajama parties, from book clubs. In the end, the state logged a total of 10 million calls between Obama's nomination speech and his victory speech. It was a milestone achieved with very little drama, and one that is noteworthy not only because it is unprecedented, but because it nearly took the national campaign by surprise. How it was done may also provide some insight into what lies on the horizon, on the grassroots front, going forward.

Read the full article here.

Thank you, Al.  Appreciate your post.

Interestingly, this is what CNN Politics has posted on it's site right now... 

Sources: Richardson a 'serious contender' for Commerce Job:

Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico is a serious contender for commerce secretary, but he could be tapped for another senior post, two sources close to the transition told CNN Friday...

Richardson is also considered to be a possibility for the secretary of state post.

Friday, Sen. Hillary Clinton's camp shot down media reports saying that she had already agreed to accept the secretary of state position.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/11/21/transition.wrap/index.html

I am still waiting to hear from the horse's mouth, a sensible horse at that, before I go and drown myself.

amk

The ink is dry.

I'm not getting pissy till I have a reason to.

The NYT story just doesn't sound really legit to me.

Still waiting....

your offer to fob us off with the Clintons. :)

amk

Catherine - Why can one reasonably think that reports about other cabinet posts are more likely than not to be true but those about another could be suspect?

Because of who it is about, and the fury of that person's spin-and-drama machine!

That her own spokesman is saying "wait a sec" and things are still being negotiating is an indication that one or both sides isn't in agreement yet.

Give it the weekend, at least. We may have to give it until after Thanksgiving weekend. And the longer it ticks on, the less you can trust what was reported, based on anonymous sources, today.

"A Senior Obama aide told CNN there has been no development on a possible Clinton appointment since they informed CNN yesterday she is "on track" to be nominated for secretary of state. "

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/11/21/transition.wrap/index.html

amk