Do The Right Thing: Hillary for Secretary of State
President-elect Barack Obama is doing the right thing by strongly considering Hillary Clinton to be the next U.S. Secretary of State. Hillary Clinton will be the most effective Secretary of State and the best choice for the Obama team.
I know that there are many opinions circulating on this important subject. I am just one more informed individual who wants the new administration to be successful. I have had the experience of working with Senator Clinton with the Hip-Hop Summit Action Network on issues involving prison reform, more funding for public education and ending poverty. I believe she would do an exceptional job.
In addition, Hillary could further help to heal any divide that still exists within the Democratic Party. As we try to reach across the aisle to the Republicans to be bipartisan, it is important to also reach across the Democratic Party to build unity for the tough policy fights ahead facing our nation.
The agenda that we voted for needs all the support it can get. We can't expect to reach across the aisle unless we first prove we can reach across our party.
Plus Hillary garnered over 18 million votes during the primary elections earlier this year but then gracefully pledged her full support for the Obama-Biden ticket.
Beyond endorsing Barack, Hillary actively campaigned effectively for Obama in many key swing states like PA, OH, VA and FL. Of course there are some who prefer that Obama make selections of people who are only at first stage completely loyal to his agenda for change.
The truth is political change in the White House is not reduced to merely changing the names or personalities of those who will serve in an Obama administration. Obama received a huge mandate from millions of voters to "change America." Real change in the direction and public policies of the American government will necessitate that Obama assemble the greatest, most experienced team possible.
Some in mainstream media today refer to Obama's "team of rivals." But at GlobalGrind.com, we do not see Hillary Clinton as a rival to Barack Obama. We see Hillary as an Obama supporter and a champion for the change that Obama embodies. If chosen she would be one of Obama's most loyal advocates and team players.
Obama was victorious in the presidential election with the avid support of the Clintons and many others. The right thing here is not to miss a chance in putting together a dream team that will become the Obama Change Team (OCT).
I named our site Global Grind, because our movement, our language, and our politics are all truly global. While we fight to restore the American economy, what better message to send to the world than to appoint as our secretary of state a woman who is already known throughout the world as a principled and gifted fighter for freedom and equality.
Hillary is like a 21st Century "Rocky." She refuses to stop being a public servant. She is tough and is not a quitter. Hillary is not only resilient, but also she is insightful and creative. It would be a mistake to overlook her again.
The Obama Change Team will be global on day one with Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State. We trust Obama's instincts and leadership and at the end of the day, we believe he will make the right decision.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
I have a lot of respect for Sen. Clinton, but I have to disagree with Simmons on this one. I think that Gov. Bill Richardson would be better suited for the position.
Bill Richardsons loyalties are for sale. Cant have that for SOS.
Simmons,
You are not looking at the BIG PICTURE. We need all of the Senators to stay put! Not to mention all of the reasons you cited are not good reasons for Hill to be head of State Dept. She did far more damage than good in the primary fight. I was ready to put her over into the Republican column along with Lieberman. Her willingness to do anything to win is a detriment, not an asset. We need honesty and like-mindedness with Obama's ideals, not Hillary's wrong-minded Forign Policy. I think Obama is making a huge mistake and opening the door to a political fight with Hillary as Sec. of State. Another reason is that Hillary is a Woman. The powers in the Middle East do not respect women!! We saw this with Rice. BAD MOVE!!!!
He was doing so good......up to this point!!
In a political campaign, you run against your opponent by pointing out disagreements and deficiencies, not by campaigning in support of your opponent and, I believe, there was enough negative from both sides during the campaign and plenty from the media. All of that was set aside for the general election and any "animosity" is in the eyes and perception of everyone except Obama and Hillary. This man does not need to "cater" to Hillary; if he is considering her for SoS it is because he believes she can help with his mission in foreign policy. It should be perfectly clear that Hillary is supportive of Obama's agenda and will do everything she can to promote it and help his presidency be successful. Whether she is in the Senate or in State, if he is not successful it will reflect on her, the Congress, and impact our country which is in dire straits. Whatever you may think of Hillary, she does want what is best for us. With Biden, Obama, and Hillary, it is NOT her foreign policy; it is the policy of this Administration and that is a great team! Rice's gender was not the drawback in the Middle East; it was the policy and person she represented that was not respected. Have some faith in Obama.
If you don't think that Hillary had a positive effect on the general election, then you obviously weren't seeing the way that the issues she brought up against Obama fell extremely flat when the GOP tried to recycle them. Obama emerged as a slightly better candidate because of his primary campaign against Clinton. John McCain, meanwhile, who cleaned out the GOP field relatively quickly, spent a long time putzing around, getting nothing done, and having no platform for his voice while the historically significant Democratic primary raged on. The length of the primary is a large part of why and how Obama came to get the amount of media coverage that he did.
You may not agree with the methods of her campaign (some of which, no matter what you think, were outside her control and in the hands of the campaign managers), but you cannot deny that she had a more positive effect on Obama than a negative one. Not one negative attack that Clinton brought up against Obama was ever useful to the GOP. She essentially took all the arrows out of their quiver, and for that, we all should be thankful.
It is intriguing how people can forget her behaviour during the primaries and the lengths to which she would go to win, including stoking intolerance in many forms.
Oh PLEZZZZZZ!!!!! Man I cant believe you still live in the Primaries. Must be awful cold there. Did you happen to see the lenghts to which she got him elected. The only intolorance I saw was comming from the Rev. Wright. Something you seem to have forgotten back threre in the Primaries.
Mr. Simmons: although you advocate Hillary for Secretary of State, you never say why she is the most qualified? I don't see how her receiving 18 million votes makes her right for the job. You say she will be the most effective Secretary of State -- to whom are you comparing her? You say she could bridge the divide between the Democrats, but is that the job description for Secretary of State. Also, didn't she create some of the divide by voting for the Iraq War and running a nasty campaign against Obama? You further mention her campaigning efforts for Obama, are you suggesting there should be a quid pro quo for her support?
I am just asking these questions because there seems to be a lot of support behind Hillary, but I just cannot understand why... particularly with people like Gov. Bill Richardson and Sen. Chuck Hagel for example.
I hope there is a more substantive debate our Obama's Cabinet choices, because so far it seems he is picking re-treads from the Clinton White House of the 90's and I cannot see how that constitutes change we can believe in...
I am completely in agreement. Hiliary has shown herself to be a capable leader however the Democrats and the country has already selected one. A woman of such capacity would be a very competent Secretary of State however there is a very real possibility that her ability to lead could undermine the Obama presidency. There are too many important matters at hand and the last thing Obama should entertain is this possibility.
To be honest, Russell no offence but I don't think you've really brought anything to the table to validate your case for Hiliary as Secretary of State.
The fact of the matter is, that no journalist, no blogger, none of us needs to "make the case" for any of Obama's appointees. We do not know what he knows; we do not know what he is looking for and what he expects. He does not "owe" anyone anything, for sure, so, when he chooses someone, we really should trust that he knows what he is doing and why.
There is a lingering doubt that I have of his motive and that is to place her in a position in which she can be eventually dispensed with, out of elective office, out of appointed office, and, effecatively eliminated for good. I choose not to believe that he is this kind of person and I only came to his support in July after studying, listening, and watching him. So, if I can believe in him, I suppose the rest of you can, too. I am convinced in whatever capacity she serves, she will do a great job for him and people will still resent her because she is a strong, smart, capable woman in her own right and because her last name is Clinton. I do not know how that name came to be such an anthema but I do know that the Republicans and Gingrich made a profession 24/7 of rejecting and smearing them for 8 years and it appears to have worked.
Well said. I agree 100%
Clinton was a damn fool who voted for the Iraq War and has never apologized.
Can we get past that. They voted based on the information they were given at the time. Have you never done anything in life based on faulty information? Why not be pissed at the President for lying to his staff (Congress). At the time they thought they were voting to protect us. Let's move on.
She was given access to the National Intelligence Estimate. She chose not to read it. Most of those who read it did not support the invasion. Do we want a S of S who won't even read vital information before making life or death decisions?
~~Cheryl
Get "past that?" Abosolutely NOT. Ask the thousands upon thousands of people who've lost family members if they can just "get over it." Our nation has lost financial treasure, reputation, respect, you name it on this damn war and you think we should just "get past it?" Seriously? Wow
"Progressives" hate the Clintons and will stab the Obamas in the back too.
I agree with you and the more Clinton vets the better.
Experience and competence to clean up another bush mess.
Yes we can.
The only ones stabing the Obamas in the back are his supposed suporters and the media. I told you a long time ago that the media would turn on him in a heartbeat cuz they think that they are King makers. Look at Chris mathews , allready jumping on Obama. Remember how much they loved Bush on the carrier? Gee How much coverage of the war protesters did the media give? I couldnt find a channel that had it. But the build up to the war was on every channel. Obama supporters say all the time how briliant he is and the minute he makes a dicision on SOS the knives come out. He will never get anyware as long as his suporters keep reliving the primaries. Hes gotten over it, shes gotten over it. MOVE ON!
Great post! Finally someone who gets that women should be held to the same standard as men.
No man who has run for POTUS and not got the nomination has been crucified for pointing out their opponents weaknesses like HRC has been and still is. If a man gets a pass on this (as they should since it was a fight and you should point out your opponents weaknesses), then so should a woman.
It's time to think about what's best for this country. HRC is an incredibly brilliant person who has fought hard her entire life (try learning a bit about her life before she was first lady) for the poor, women and children. She is in my opinion by far better than Richardson. Kerry would be good too, but I hope she takes the job!
And for all you who hate her...just think...if she takes the job she can't run in 2012 as you all are terrified she will.
Why is she better than Richardson?
Why isn't she?
Or... why is BO better for the boss position the SOS reports too, than Richardson?
Right on abbiexhoffman! She also worked harder for him than any man has in history.
Capable. Sure. More than capable. But "principled"? LOL
BTW
Obama paid Hillary's debts and appearance fees of both Clintons to gain the appearance of unbridled support.
DO YOUR RESEARCH
Susan Rice or Samanth Power would better serve as Secretary of State and as for being respected around the world you need to get out and talk to some of the people you speak of Hillary is not as respected as you unjustifiably state
DUDE DO YOUR RESEARCH!
How is she a better choice than Richardson or Kerry? Fame?? Is that all that matters now? I don't really see her as a true supporter, she had reasons to support the ticket and now its over. Give her another cabinet position, or let her stay in the senate. She and Obama can collaborate on healthcare reform.
I was an avid Hillary supporter, volunteer and contributor -- but unlike others who treated the primaries as some exercise in junior high rivalry -- was ecstatic at Barack Obama's victory in the general election. The Iraq War issue is one thing, but -- REALLY? -- are there all that many differences in their views? (NO.) Are they not members of the same party and supposed to move forward together when Barack Obama won the general election and Democrats gained in both houses of Congress? (Yes.) As made obvious by the forgive-and-forget approach to Joe Lieberman today, the Senate has rules all its own -- and, despite her wins in the primaries -- Hillary is boxed out from doing anything of significance in the Senate given their byzantine rules of seniority and chairmanships. Barack Obama and his team ran a brilliant campaign and I trust his judgment on these matters -- "change" can be had without eliminating any and all from the Clinton years, right? All this media obsession on Hillary Clinton ignores two things: she went to New York state and ran in all those upstate areas demonstrating to rural folks and Republicans that she mastered their issues not just folks in Manhattan. Because it's too complicated to comprehend, all those Republican and Democratic folks in Congress and Washington circles are married to/parents to lobbyists and insiders, etc. I agree with Bill Maher that we all project on the Clintons are own drama -- more than theirs.
Russell THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU!!!
I wholeheartedly agree with you.
I wish these naysayers would take the time and understand WHAT is going on.
I would like to understand what is going on, I truly would. The woman publicly ridiculed Obama for wanting to use diplomacy -- now he wants to make her the nation's top diplomat??? I would REALLY like to understand this!
~~Cheryl
Russell, I have alot of respect for you, and on this I respectfully disagree with you. HRC should not be the SOS.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
