Politics, Foreign Policy, Current Events and Occasional Outbursts Lacking Couth

While Bill Richardson looks better on paper the Hillary choice makes more sense on a few levels.

First: It's quite in line with both Obama's campaign rhetoric of "change" and his current Lincoln-esque (if there can be such a word) Cabinet of Rivals methodology.

Second: I'm not much of a fan of Rush Limbaugh but I have to agree with his Al Capone inspired tactic of "keeping one's enemies closer." Clinton as Sec State minimizes her 2012 presidential ambitions.
This past summer I'd opined Clinton would not seek the democratic VP candidacy because it would inexorably tie her to an Obama Presidency and restrict her ability to run in 2012. In a similar sense, her acceptance of Sec State nearly assures her potential run at the presidency will occur no earlier than 2016 whether Obama runs his legal tenure as commander in chief or is defeated in 2012. Politically speaking, Obama has eliminated one high profile opponent for re-election in 2012.

Third: Recognition. Many Americans know who Bill Richardson is. Most of the planet does not. Every American knows who Hillary Clinton is. Most of the planet does as well. Clinton's exposure as first lady, senator and then presidential candidate provides a foundation of political "imperium" that Richardson or another might not evince on the geo-political scene.

Those in addition to the woman's sheer political tenacity (pit bull wearing lipstick? I've got a C-note on Hillary waging a campaign in '16 against Palin in '12) lead me to recognize (despite my personal opinions) her as a qualified candidate for Secretary of State under the Obama administration.


Ottavio (Otto) Marasco said...

Good points, it's just that sometimes I wonder how two as ambitious as both are, could lay to rest so many competing stands and political disparities and reach accord with the seamlessness required for good governance. I also cannot but help recall the fierce nature of Hillary’s berating her rival Obama on questions of foreign policy and now here she is subordinating herself to him.

Anonymous said...

Al, would you agree that Obama's well-publicized attempts at working across the aisle forces Hilary's hand to exhibit the same behavior?

While subordination is a technical term for the working relationship, I really don't see that as being the atmosphere for this administration. It appears Obama is purposefully choosing many people who will stick to their guns and not roll over at the first command.

I also see this as an opportunity for Hilary to grow and would love nothing more than seeing two women duke it out for the presidency in 2016 should it come to that.

Purpleslog said...

Bill Richardson has the right resume.

Howver, in the Dem primary debates he came across to me as confused and uninformed about national security issues.

I think he is just a ticket puncher. He would have been a bad SecState. He can't do any real damage at Commerce though.

Jay@Soob said...

AI, I think a combination of moving beyond the rhetoric of the capaign into the reality of action will stem their differences to a degree. Additionally, by taking the job Hillary belays her political ambition either temporarily or permanently (I suspect the former.) No doubt there will be differences between the two but if Obama's pre-inaugural message is for real, he is the focal point of leadership. I suspect Obama is a micro-manager at heart and less inclined to delegating important matters beyond a symbolic nature.

Jay@Soob said...

Girl Spy, are you envisioning a Palin/Clinton showdown for 2016?

Jay@Soob said...

P-Slog, yeah I had my own issues with Gov Richardson along the same lines.

Anonymous said...

Dog, I hope not! I truly hope Palin disappears from the national scene. And while I have a great deal of respect for Clinton, she's just to divisive a figure for the Democratic party due to her husband's legacy.

Honestly, there's women in both parties I'd rather see step forward.