Tuesday
Nov182008
It's That Clinton Woman...
Tuesday, November 18, 2008 at 15:19
On another thread, Simon T has picked up on Ewen MacAskill's headline in The Guardian of London: "Clinton to Accept Offer of Secretary of State Job". So, in the spirit of proving that I'm only 2-3 steps behind the news:
MacAskill has apparently got an inside source but little else: the Clinton lead is only the first four paragraphs --- only the first two of which offer any signficant information --- of a much longer article focusing on Obama's meeting on Monday with John McCain.
That's not to say that the story isn't possible, even likely: the spur for the coverage in The New York Times is Bill Clinton's weekend declaration, “If [Obama] decided to ask [Hillary] and they did it together, I think she’ll be really great as a secretary of state,” and confirmation that Obama advisors are reviewing Bill Clinton's finances and international activities (for possible conflict of interest issues, not illegalities, immoralities, etc.).
The story, however, is still in the realm of speculation, built around whispers and winks. The lack of public statement gets turned into yet another confirmation that the appointment must be happening. As James Carville, Bill Clinton's former spin-meister, spins it this time, "A silent phone’s sometimes as much of an indication as a ringing phone."
Yes, there is drama in the possibilities but, for now, they are overshadowing significant developments. Say, for example, the rest of that Guardian story. The Obama meeting with McCain is a singificant and shrewd move by the President-elect to work for both the symbolism and substance of Republican support for his foreign policy. The McCain who existed before the Presidential campaign --- the one who pushed for limitations on Government "enhanced interrogation", for example, and who has called for the closure of Guantanamo --- would be a big asset for the Obama Administration. As the Republican Party goes through its self-critique, the GOP's key players will be in the Congress, and any bulwark against the red-meat Republicans who still want to inflict punishment on Democrats (and Russians and Chinese and Iranians and "terrorists") will be useful.
Speculate on what might happen? Sure. But one eye on what has happened is even more useful.
MacAskill has apparently got an inside source but little else: the Clinton lead is only the first four paragraphs --- only the first two of which offer any signficant information --- of a much longer article focusing on Obama's meeting on Monday with John McCain.
That's not to say that the story isn't possible, even likely: the spur for the coverage in The New York Times is Bill Clinton's weekend declaration, “If [Obama] decided to ask [Hillary] and they did it together, I think she’ll be really great as a secretary of state,” and confirmation that Obama advisors are reviewing Bill Clinton's finances and international activities (for possible conflict of interest issues, not illegalities, immoralities, etc.).
The story, however, is still in the realm of speculation, built around whispers and winks. The lack of public statement gets turned into yet another confirmation that the appointment must be happening. As James Carville, Bill Clinton's former spin-meister, spins it this time, "A silent phone’s sometimes as much of an indication as a ringing phone."
Yes, there is drama in the possibilities but, for now, they are overshadowing significant developments. Say, for example, the rest of that Guardian story. The Obama meeting with McCain is a singificant and shrewd move by the President-elect to work for both the symbolism and substance of Republican support for his foreign policy. The McCain who existed before the Presidential campaign --- the one who pushed for limitations on Government "enhanced interrogation", for example, and who has called for the closure of Guantanamo --- would be a big asset for the Obama Administration. As the Republican Party goes through its self-critique, the GOP's key players will be in the Congress, and any bulwark against the red-meat Republicans who still want to inflict punishment on Democrats (and Russians and Chinese and Iranians and "terrorists") will be useful.
Speculate on what might happen? Sure. But one eye on what has happened is even more useful.
Reader Comments (1)
If it is true, I'm pretty disappointed. I wonder what it means for Susan Rice and Samantha Power if they end up at State? After their unkind (and perfectly justified) words during the primaries they are hardly going to have a great working relationship with Sec Clinton. Which in turn would be bad news for anyone like me who would like to see greater US engagement with the Darfur crisis