Hillary Clinton as diplomat: Obama's bold choice shows the two can be partners on the world stage.

[DeepModem Mom]

L.A. Times editorial: Hillary Clinton as diplomat
Obama's bold choice for his secretary of State shows the two can be partners on the world stage.
November 28, 2008

In selecting his erstwhile opponent, Hillary Rodham Clinton, to be secretary of State, Barack Obama has gone boldly where no recent president has gone before. Unlike the lawyers, academics and generals who have dominated the office since World War II, Clinton combines substance and essential qualities for the job with celebrity and a political constituency.

For those who followed the 2008 Democratic primary campaign, this appointment might seem head-scratchingly incongruous. Wasn't it Clinton who impugned Obama's readiness to be commander in chief with her now-infamous ad about a 3 a.m. call to the White House? Will she now insist on being patched in to that call?

Apparently not. Both Clinton and Obama insist that, partly as a result of her tireless campaigning for him in the general election, they have made their peace and then some. It's also true that their foreign policy differences were exaggerated in the fun-house mirror of the primary campaign. Like Obama, Clinton is willing to engage this country's adversaries afresh, but without foreclosing military action when necessary to defend U.S. interests.

Not even her detractors would deny that Clinton is smart, well-versed in foreign and defense issues and single-minded in pursuing her goals. Her perseverance even after Obama seemed almost certain of victory augurs well for her ability to press for diplomatic breakthroughs -- in the Arab-Israeli conflict, for example -- when persistence seems futile. So too does her renown as a first lady turned senator turned diplomat....

Although history suggests it is difficult for rivals to collaborate on foreign policy, Clinton may be particularly well-suited for the challenge. Her high profile could help energize U.S. foreign policy while her background as a lawyer serves her in tough negotiations. She has proved to be flexible and pragmatic, as has Obama. His appointment of Clinton, whatever its complexities, shows the president-elect's sense of confidence in her and in the administration they now will share.

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-ed-clinton28-2008nov28,0,1636292.story

[JDPriestly]

1. OK, call me a curmudgeon, but this view is too positive for me.

To inject a bit of balance, one of Hillary's faults is that she fears being viewed as a wimpy woman, as a nervous Nelly, as a coward. She wants to be accepted as one of the boys (without, of course, abandoning her femininity). She likes to down hard liquor with the rest of the guys and when it comes to saber-rattling and war-mongering, at least in the past, she has tried very hard to develop the image of a tough guy.

Combining Hillary and her horror of being viewed as a wimp with Gates, who is not the worst of the Republicans, but still an active supporter of Bush's military schemes, I do not see a peaceful future for us. I cannot forget Hilary's rude brush-off of the Code Pink delegation when they came to warn her about going into Iraq.

I will give Hillary credit for one thing, however, she is well-known and respected around the world simply because she is Bill Clinton's wife and because of her work on behalf of women and children. So, that's the positive side for me, but the negative side looms, and it should not be ignored in my view.

[Captain Hilts]

3. But both R's and D's on the Hill have told me they really like working with her....

evidently she's got 'plays well with others' qualities we're just not aware of.

She has a learning curve.

It has been the failing of Democratic administrations to have many SoS's perceived as "wimpy": Cyrus Vance, Warren Christopher, and Dean Rusk, who just fell for everything McNamara told him. William Rogers suffered the same critique, actually.

[TheWraith]

6. Agreed. She overcompensates and comes off as a raging warmonger.

Either that or she genuinely believed in the Iraq War, torture, attacking Iran, et al... which is actually worse.

[madrchsod]

2. barack would be hillary`s boss

they would not "partners". she would have to carry out barack`s polices not her`s


this drama over clinton needs to go away

[Captain Hilts]

4. 80% of Dems support this appointment and it is being well-received globally...

so, who cares about most of this crap?

The cabinet appointments are all good. They're all smart folks that believe in government. They're 'process' people. Put their names in a jar and pull them out and put them randomly in cabinet posts and I wouldn't care.

[TheWraith]

7. I'll say. A lot of people here and in the media act like Barack needs her.

Like this is a coalition government or something. It's not. Frankly I would consider that alone a good enough reason to avoid choosing her: after eight years of an administration where everybody and their brother had their own agendas, there should be not even a whiff of a "co-presidency" or anyone believing that there is. We need loyal soldiers.

[Demeter]

5. Show Me How It Works, And Then I'll Tell You If You've Made a Sale

Color me skeptical.