# Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 14, 2008, 4:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillary-clinton-as-secretary-of-state/472665 "2008-11-14T04:13:41Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![Onomatopoeia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/onomatopoeia/32/4145_2.png) [@Onomatopoeia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Onomatopoeia)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2008, 5:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillary-clinton-as-secretary-of-state/472665/101 "2008-11-17T17:53:19Z")
> [@Suse](#): > > Let’s see- you don’t like her, I do. You like him, I don’t. What’s the basis of your statement that he’s a unifying figure? Because he claims to be? **Let’s see him do something that’s actually unifying beyond making speeches first.** This is simply incorrect. Obama has spent his entire career working with opposing forces trying to achieve consensus, going all the way back to when he ran the Harvard Law Review, [Obama kept Law Review balanced](http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0608/11257.html), and quite a bit since then, working with local community groups in Illinois, as well as with opposing forces in the legislature. If you did just a litle research you’d see he’s done much more than simply give speeches. You don’t like him, fine. At least get the facts about the man straight. To the OP, I’m hopeful either Clinton turns the position down, or Obama finds a tactful way to offer it to someone else, as I believe it’s simply delusion to think anyone can control a Clinton. ETA: bolding ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2008, 6:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillary-clinton-as-secretary-of-state/472665/102 "2008-11-17T18:03:40Z")
> [@Airman\_Doors\_USAF](#): > > Oh dear God… > > I don’t think you realize what you’re saying. The military as an institution hates the Clintons with the fire of a thousand suns. You think the military is at the breaking point now? If Hillary becomes the SecDef you’ll get to see first-hand what happens when it shatters. . What do you mean by “breaking point?” What’s the military going to fucking do about it? Nothing, that’s what. The military will do what the fuck it’s told and shut the fuck up. The military’s ignorant-ass opinions about Hillary Clinton are of no significance, no value and no consequence. The military is a dictatorship, not a democracy. They know that when they sign. If they don’t want to do what they’re told, they can suck cock in Leavenworth. ETA, it won’t happen, but I would laugh my ass off if Hillary was made SoD. ---
**Author:** ![Airman\_Doors\_USAF](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e36b37/32.png) [@Airman\_Doors\_USAF](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airman_Doors_USAF)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2008, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillary-clinton-as-secretary-of-state/472665/103 "2008-11-17T18:09:16Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > . > What do you mean by “breaking point?” What’s the military going to fucking do about it? Nothing, that’s what. The military will do what the fuck it’s told and shut the fuck up. The military’s ignorant-ass opinions about Hillary Clinton are of no signficance, no value and no consequence. The military is a dictatorship, not a democracy. They know that when they sign. If they don’t want to do what they’re told, they can suck cock in Leavenworth. Blah blah blah. I’m never sure when you’re being willfully obtuse or unspeakably naive. The military members’ opinions of leadership are of paramount importance, they always have been, and you know that. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2008, 6:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillary-clinton-as-secretary-of-state/472665/104 "2008-11-17T18:14:11Z")
> [@Airman\_Doors\_USAF](#): > > Blah blah blah. I’m never sure when you’re being willfully obtuse or unspeakably naive. > > The military members’ opinions of leadership are of paramount importance, they always have been, and you know that. The whole time I was in the military, I can’t remember a single time that the civilian leadership (under Reagan at the time) gave a shit about my opinion. I’ll ask you again, what do you think the military would actually DO ABOUT IT if Hillary got made SoD? Are they going to desert? Would you personally refuse any orders or abandon your post? Would you be ok with others doing it? Sure some people would bitch and complain (even though Bush says that’s illegal), but they wouldn’t revolt. They would keep doing their jobs and nothing would come of it. What do you think Hillary would do that would be so horrible anyway? I’ve got news for you. The military was in a lot better shape under the Clintons than it is under Bush. ---
**Author:** ![Shayna](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/shayna/32/17976_2.png) [@Shayna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shayna)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2008, 6:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillary-clinton-as-secretary-of-state/472665/105 "2008-11-17T18:14:30Z")
[sup]I actually don’t think Hillary as Secretary of State would be a bad thing. Please don’t hurt me.[/sup] ---
**Author:** ![squeegee](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/squeegee/32/14537_2.png) [@squeegee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/squeegee)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2008, 6:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillary-clinton-as-secretary-of-state/472665/106 "2008-11-17T18:41:02Z")
I’d also be concerned that an HRC SD would go off the reservation, making up its own foreign policy. Probably not to the extent Cheney did, but even with Rice as SOS, there was a lot of infighting about policy in the Bush admin (although a lot of that could be laid at Cheney’s door, but a good amount was also Rice and Cheney competing for Bush’s brain). OTOH, if it were Bill Clinton as SOS, I _know_ he’d go off the reservation, and over to the Indian casino. ---
**Author:** ![Ludovic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ab992/32.png) [@Ludovic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ludovic)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2008, 7:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillary-clinton-as-secretary-of-state/472665/107 "2008-11-17T19:02:35Z")
> [@squeegee](#): > > OTOH, if it were Bill Clinton as SOS, I _know_ he’d go off the reservation, and over to the Indian casino. I used to disagree with BC on foreign policy, but his “Powell Doctrine Lite” would be positively refreshing nowadays. ---
**Author:** ![ratatoskK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ratatoskk/32/2987_2.png) [@ratatoskK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ratatoskK)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2008, 8:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillary-clinton-as-secretary-of-state/472665/108 "2008-11-17T20:32:57Z")
Why not Attorney General? Presumably that’s her area of expertise. I don’t perceive her as a very diplomatic person. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2008, 8:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillary-clinton-as-secretary-of-state/472665/109 "2008-11-17T20:54:42Z")
How would Attorney General be her area of expertise? She hasn’t practiced law at all since the early 90s, and when she did, she most recently specialized in patent law. Before that I think she did children’s education work. She consulted on the Watergate hearings in some relatively distant way, I think, but that was 35 years ago and she has never been a prosecutor. I don’t see any way she is qualified for that job, and the AG is always a lightning rod for controversy in any administration. I don’t think you want someone who’s already a lightning rod in that job. I think her track record in the Senate shows she is capable of being diplomatic, although that is not the same as conducting international diplomacy. I have no idea how she would make up policy on her own or why she would supposedly do so. What, people think she’s going to go behind Obama’s back and declare war on Iran, then make some peace treaties he wouldn’t approve of? If that happened she’d lose her job and only harm her own reputation, and she’s not an idiot, nor is she the schemer who some people here thought was trying to encourage someone to kill Obama. ---
**Author:** ![tds1273](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/df705f/32.png) [@tds1273](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tds1273)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2008, 9:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillary-clinton-as-secretary-of-state/472665/110 "2008-11-17T21:08:50Z")
I can’t help but wonder if maybe this was just Obama and Clinton working together to take Palin down a peg(or more). Haven’t heard much from or about her since this has surfaced have we? The entire news cycle before this story broke, was hardly even about the President-elect, rather it was still all about Palin, including, and especially in regards to my theory, her interview with Greta Van Susterin where Palin was very backhanded, condescending, and bitter sounding with her “compliments” towards Clinton. I could very easily imagine a scenario where Barack and Hillary worked together to put the rumor out there just to put the check on Sarah. While Palin is trying to (unconvincingly IMHO) plead her case to be the leader of the GOP or else be relegated to being Mike Gravel in lipstick, Clinton is able to say that she is being actively sought out for one of the highest appointments in politics. Maybe it’s already been worked out between Obama, Clinton, and Richardson- Hillary gets the honor of first offered and knocks Palin out of the news cycle; Richardson gets stuck with the second choice label, but none the less still gets the job; Obama gets to make the gracious initial offer to Clinton, but ultimately gets to make the wiser, and more popular pick of Richardson. Clinton-esque, political gamesmanship? Hillary reclaiming her ‘cracks’? …I hope. ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2008, 9:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillary-clinton-as-secretary-of-state/472665/111 "2008-11-17T21:14:57Z")
> [@Airman\_Doors\_USAF](#): > > The military members’ opinions of leadership are of paramount importance, they always have been, and you know that. I’ve got to agree with **Dio**. The correct response to military members’ opinions of leadership is, “Shut up and soldier, soldier.” Otherwise they can get what MacArthur got. ---
**Author:** ![tds1273](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/df705f/32.png) [@tds1273](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tds1273)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2008, 9:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillary-clinton-as-secretary-of-state/472665/112 "2008-11-17T21:27:17Z")
I don’t see Hillary being AG either (nor SCJ for that matter), maybe Sec.H&HS, but most likely I see her as taking Kennedy’s spot and being the “Lioness of the Senate”; in for the long haul. On the flipside though, I think that Obama would have been a shoe in to be Hillary’s AG, if not VP. That is probably my biggest disappointment of Obama winning, I would have loved to see him work his Harvard Constitutional Law chops and be the new sheriff in town. Any chance he could be AG or SCJ after his Presidency? I’m only half serious about AG thing, but is there anything saying a President could not be a SC Justice? Sadly, I think Obama’s AG appointment was taylor made for the late(great) Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones, a former prosecutor herself, as well, a good friend of the Clintons. ---
**Author:** ![Defensive\_Indifference](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/defensive_indifference/32/6502_2.png) [@Defensive\_Indifference](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Defensive_Indifference)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2008, 9:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillary-clinton-as-secretary-of-state/472665/113 "2008-11-17T21:32:46Z")
> [@tds1273](#): > > Any chance he could be AG or SCJ after his Presidency? I’m only half serious about AG thing, but is there anything saying a President could not be a SC Justice? Taft was appointed Chief Justice a few years after serving as POTUS, so unless something has changed, I don’t think any law would prevent him from being nominated and confirmed. ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2008, 9:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillary-clinton-as-secretary-of-state/472665/114 "2008-11-17T21:42:11Z")
> [@Bayard](#): > > Taft was appointed Chief Justice a few years after serving as POTUS, so unless something has changed, I don’t think any law would prevent him from being nominated and confirmed. And John Quincy Adams was elected to the House of Representatives. A President could be anything after his term is over, except President or Vice-President if he served two terms. ---
**Author:** ![Defensive\_Indifference](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/defensive_indifference/32/6502_2.png) [@Defensive\_Indifference](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Defensive_Indifference)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2008, 9:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillary-clinton-as-secretary-of-state/472665/115 "2008-11-17T21:57:26Z")
> [@Frank](#): > > And John Quincy Adams was elected to the House of Representatives. > > A President could be anything after his term is over, except President or Vice-President if he served two terms. What happens if a former President finds himself in the line of succession? Say he goes back to the House and works his way up to Speaker, or gets appointed Secretary of State. If the people ahead of him in line are killed in a tragic duck-hunting accident, would the former President just get skipped over? Is there a law in place for something like this? ETA: If I’m reading the Presidential Succession Act correctly, he would be skipped. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2008, 10:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillary-clinton-as-secretary-of-state/472665/116 "2008-11-17T22:02:26Z")
There’s no law preventing Obama from being a Supreme Court Justice, but unlike Taft, he’s never been a judge. if he’s Even if Obama finishes up his terms as a very popular president I don’t think something like that would be possible today. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2008, 10:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillary-clinton-as-secretary-of-state/472665/117 "2008-11-17T22:06:36Z")
> [@Bayard](#): > > ETA: If I’m reading the Presidential Succession Act correctly, he would be skipped. If there are less than two years remaining in the late president’s term, he would not be skipped. ---
**Author:** ![Oy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/bc8723/32.png) [@Oy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Oy)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2008, 10:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillary-clinton-as-secretary-of-state/472665/118 "2008-11-17T22:11:29Z")
I think Obama is completely sincere in at least considering making this offer (and as I understand it, he did not ask her to be, just if she would be at all interested in the job). Clinton may not have extensive diplomatic credentials personally, but she is well-known throughout the world, and has remarkable star power - not as great as Obama’s own, but pretty darned good. Her husband is enormously popular around the world, and I assume that would start her off with quite a bit of good will on the not unreasonable basis that she would hold views not entirely dissimilar to those of her husband. But mostly, I think Obama is quite consciously imitating the man he considers to have been his role model, Lincoln. Hence his consideration of Hillary, and his meeting today with John McCain. Look, in his quiet, diplomatic way, Obama is the most dominant man I’ve ever seen, if only because he listens to everything everyone says courteously, and then goes away to make up his mind. That’s an enormously effective technique, and it really prevents people from playing politics, because it’s so hard to get a read on him. You can’t tell what sways him if he doesn’t ever seem to be swayed. So I’m really not worried about the Clintons, although I used to be. Obama’s not going to be fashed by little stuff, or at least his history shows that he’s very tolerant of people’s foibles as long as they do a good job for him. So if Bill wants to spout off and it doesn’t do Obama or the country any actual harm, Obama will deal with it. If Hillary starts making her own policy (which I strongly doubt she would do; she’s far too well-disciplined to do that), she’ll probably be reprimanded quietly. Once. That would be my guess, anyway. They both want what’s best for the country, and there’s not a huge policy difference between them anyway, so I don’t see its happening as very likely. I like Richardson myself, but I can see the advantages to having Hillary, and I _certainly_ can see the advantages to asking Hillary. It’s a signal of strength, not of weakness. But then, for all the country’s in a really bad way right now, Obama is in about as good shape politically as it’s possible for a president to be at this stage in the game, according to the polls, so he’s got a lot of strength. He might as well use it; it’s not like it will hang around forever if he stashes it under the mattress. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Second\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@The\_Second\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Second_Stone)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2008, 10:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillary-clinton-as-secretary-of-state/472665/119 "2008-11-17T22:40:48Z")
> [@Airman\_Doors\_USAF](#): > > I seem to recall someone running on “change”… yes, I’m sure I heard that somewhere… > > Some change. Now that we’re getting rid of the Bushes, why are we giving the Clintons another bite at the apple? Seems more like business as usual, not “change we can believe in”. Getting rid of Republicans is the change. Yah!! Obama never promised to get rid of the Clintons. If people inferred that, then they are stupid fools. If he sought a Republican for Sec of State or AG, then I’d wonder. And the Clintons are not business as usual in a bad way compared to Republicans. After 8 years of Republican crooks and idiots torturing the constitution and whomever they please (only 3 waterboarded, but countless “stress positioned”) we are going to have a constitution and better government accountability. > [@MichaelQReilly](#): > > I would call anyone who went to Yale, one of the top 3 law schools in the country, a top flight lawyer. I know two guys who graduated from Harvard law. Neither has ever practiced law. Neither is a “top flight” lawyer. Hillary, however, was one of the top national lawyers in area of children’s rights before becoming first lady. > [@Airman\_Doors\_USAF](#): > > No, if he appoints a Clinton, that’s not change. Don’t go putting words in my mouth. > > If he said that he wanted to go back to the halcyon days of the Clinton administration I would have taken him at his word. Instead he stumped for “change”, and Hillary Clinton does not constitute change. How about you not go around putting words in Obama’s mouth? You didn’t vote for Obama (judging by your posting history) and he talked about change and hope in non-specific terms for the most part. He never said anything untoward about either Clinton. As a Clinton supporter, I kept close track of that sort of thing. Obama was very vague about most areas of change. In a politician, that sort of thing is intentional. Face it, the Republicans lost. I’d tell them to get over it, but watching them whine will be soooo satisfying over the next few years. Republican tears are so salty and sweet to me. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2008, 10:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillary-clinton-as-secretary-of-state/472665/120 "2008-11-17T22:41:23Z")
> [@Airman\_Doors\_USAF](#): > > Oh dear God… > > I don’t think you realize what you’re saying. The military as an institution hates the Clintons with the fire of a thousand suns. You think the military is at the breaking point now? If Hillary becomes the SecDef you’ll get to see first-hand what happens when it shatters. I hadn’t realized that not only (a) the military had become politicized to that extent and (b) forgotten that they were supposed to yield to civilian authority, but (c) they’d be a bunch of six year olds about the whole thing, too. I don’t think we should give you guys weapons before you grow up. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillary-clinton-as-secretary-of-state/472665.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hillary-clinton-as-secretary-of-state/472665.md?page=7)