Has Hillary been bamboozled?

Pocono Joe

There was speculation that Hillary Clinton’s appointment to Secretary of State was a maneuver to keep her from running in 2012 against Barack Obama. It seems now that some of the traditional powers of her office are slipping away since here designation as SOS.

1. Vice President Joe Biden has moved vigorously to stake out foreign policy as his turf. His visit to Afghanistan, right before the inauguration, could not but send a signal to Clinton that he would conduct foreign policy in the new administration, leaving her in a backup role.

2. Richard Holbrooke, the former Balkan negotiator and U.N. ambassador, has been named special envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan. He insisted on direct access to the president, a privilege he was denied during much of the Clinton years.

3. Former Sen. George Mitchell, D-Maine, negotiator of the Irish Peace Accords, was appointed to be the administration’s point man on Arab-Israeli negotiations.

4. Samantha Powers, Obama’s former campaign aide, who once called Hillary Clinton a "monster," has been appointed to the National Security Council as director of "multilateral affairs."

5. Gen. James L. Jones, Obama’s new national security adviser, has announced an expansion of the membership and role of the security council. He pledges to eliminate "back channels" to the president and wants to grow the council’s role to accommodate the "dramatically different" challenges of the current world situation.

6. Susan Rice, Obama’s new United Nations ambassador, insisted upon and got Cabinet rank for her portfolio, and she presumably also will have the same kind of access to Obama that she had as his chief foreign policy adviser during the campaign.

So do you think this is a smart political move to diminish her (and Bill’s) effectivness and keep her out of the spotlight in crucial international areas, or Obama just making changes to his foreign policy outlook, or a maneuver to keep his friends close and enemies closer?

Personally, I chose the later. I can’t remember a successful maneuver in recent times where a challenger from a party outed a sitting president in a primary (although there was speculation that’s why LBJ chose not to run for a second term). I also think there might be some paranoia mixed in also, as I don't think Obama completely trusts the Clintons.

(can we keep republican’s history of spending during the Bush years out of this one?)

banquo

I don't think he's out to diminish her tbh. Hillary's chances at winning the presidency are over (imho), and Obama has little to fear from her.

Obama could dismiss her if she got out of line, and her bitch slapping him around won't get him any more votes to keep her in the job with.

I'd say Hillary is in favour of the responsibility for foreign policy being thinner spread - less blame on her if something goes wrong.

PJ wrote:

(can we keep republican’s history of spending during the Bush years out of this one?)

Yes. Wait...

Bob Z

Should she have got the job in the first place? how much experience does she actually have? Did she get the job to prove Obama doesnt hold grudges?

Overheal

I'd beleive it that she's in the dog house right now. After all she nearly brought down the entire Democratic campaign by splitting their party right down the middle. Not good for PR. She's grounded till she can re-establish where her loyalties lay

Black Swan

Obama didn't pick Hillary Clinton for her qualifications to be Sec of State, but rather to unite the Democratic party, given that she carried almost half their party during the primaries. Right or wrong, Obama is consolidating his majority party leadership.

As for Hillary Clinton challenging Obama in the next presidential, I doubt that there is any chance this would happen, or that it was a consideration of Obama when he chose her for Sec of State. The only real next presidential election threat that Hillary would pose by not joining Obama's cabinet, is that those Dems that voted for her in the last election may feel disaffected with Obama and might stay at home or swing vote Republican in 4 years. Bringing her into the cabinet reduces this risk.

Pocono Joe wrote: »

Vice President Joe Biden has moved vigorously to stake out foreign policy as his turf. His visit to Afghanistan, right before the inauguration, could not but send a signal to Clinton that he would conduct foreign policy in the new administration, leaving her in a backup role.

This is no surprise. Obama said he would rely quite a bit on Biden for foreign policy throughout his presidential campaign. Biden's foreign relations experience is superior to Hillary Clinton's.

I doubt anyone will have much of a "turf" to claim in the Obama administration. It would also appear that Obama does not like cabinet members building empires as in past administrations? He has repeatedly told the press that he prefers the team approach to problem solving, will consult with appointees, but reserves the final decision on major issues for himself?

And Biden well never be as powerful as Dick Cheney, who many claim was the president behind the president, and the most powerful VP in history.

banquo

Overheal wrote: »

After all she nearly brought down the entire Democratic campaign by splitting their party right down the middle.

They were both candidates in a close election - if Hillary had won then we'd be slating Obama for dividing the party.

(Though I agree with 90% of your other posts!)

Overheal

banquo wrote: »

They were both candidates in a close election - if Hillary had won then we'd be slating Obama for dividing the party.

(Though I agree with 90% of your other posts!)

I disagree, Obama had a substantial lead up to the nomination. Clinton though just kept dragging on to the slimming chance that she could pull out a majority. While McCain vs Huckabee had been decided, Obama was well ahead of Hilldog, but she just wouldnt let it go.

banquo

Yeah, I see what you're saying allright. I sorta agree.

I'm sure you know about the winner-takes-all victories of Reuplican primaries, and that's why they have a victor so soon.

I also agree that Hillary should have given up sooner than she did, but not that much sooner. Don't forget that they were still waiting to see what would happen with the Florida problem.

Anyway, back OT. I don't reckon that Hillary was bamboozled. She was made Sec of State for campaigning for Obama, simple as. And it doesn't do her any favours to slam Obama in the press since she'll lose her job if he loses the general election. Unless of course she challanges him in the primaries, which just wouldn't happen. I know that people will say ''It's Hillary, of course she would'', but I can't see it doing anything but damage to the democrats in 2012.