Okay, we need a much stronger State Department

[sandnsea]

I was just listening to Lawrence O'Donnell and he referred to the point of the State Department being under attack by Defense and National Security Counsil. That is true, especially of Republicans.

When you think of the Clinton Machine, the media power, etc etc - I actually can't think of a better operation to go into State if your goal is to INCREASE the power of the State Department so that it is at least as strong as the DoD, CIA, NSC and the rest of the operations in DC. Maybe the signal we should take away from this is that Obama is going to have a diplomatic State Department stronger than anything we have seen, at least in recent memory.

What do you think.

Oh, and save the anti-Hillary snark because I don't like the Clintons AT ALL. But I can see the benefit of strengthening state and I do think they might well be the exact people to do it.

[ProSense]

1. It's not a good idea to turn the State Dept. into a Clinton machine operation manipulating the media

The potential for leaks increases and the potential for a circus atmosphere (as we're currently seeing) is too great.

Boston Globe editorial: What's needed at State

At the State Department, the prospect of Clinton as secretary is creating some anxiety among career foreign service officers worried that she would install her own loyalists and exclude them from policy-making. Some at the State Department see her as a foreign policy lightweight, although there is grudging acknowledgment of her star power.

link

[PresidentObama]

3. Manipulating the media? Who let you out of the basement.

Obama gets to pick. Not you.

If he picks Clinton, I'll trust his judgment.

She'd be an incredibly effective SOS.

[sandnsea]

6. The Clintons are master media manipulators

That is the only benefit I can see of having them at State.

[Skwmom]

10. Which begs the question: What are they going to try to sell the media/public on?

Media manipulation isn't always a good thing.

[sandnsea]

13. That's what we'll have to watch

But if they use it against the DoD, or if Obama plans for them to, then that could be a very good thing for State because that agency is not as strong as it ought to be.

[cherokeeprogressive]

16. Hillary for President - 2012.

Mark My Words.

[sandnsea]

4. Think of Judith Miller - maybe it is

Maybe if Colin Powell had had a stronger media apparatus, his views on Iraq would have been the mainstream views instead of the neocons. I can see the benefit of stronger media savvy in State. They're being run over right now.

[ProSense]

7. Hillary's campaign proves otherwise.

Same circus, same drama, backstabbing and the like.

[sandnsea]

11. If she uses that against the DoD, CIA,

and other neocon-like factions in D.C. - then that could be a good thing, right?

[ProSense]

12. I don't think agencies' infighting is what Obama has in mind. n/t

[sandnsea]

14. I don't think a State Dept that gets steamrolled

by the DoD and NSC, is what he has in mind either. And that's what has been happening. Do you disagree with that?

[QueenOfCalifornia]

20. This happens in the DoJ

every time there is a change from one president to another. There is always anxiety about job shifts. As for the State Department, it is most likely similar.

My husband was demoted by the Bush machine. It goes with the territory. With the demotion came more work and less pay which really sucked and still does. The Bush's were more vicious in that they were after anyone who was a democrat so they could "punish" them. You see, Democrats hate America and want to take away all the guns and not allow people to pray to Jesus. They replaced people who had lots of experience and who had proven track records of accomplishment with people who were loyal only to the Bush agenda - No experience necessary. if you only knew the depths of how damaged the Justice Department is you would be even more pissed off than you probably already are.

Also - I am not a fan of Hillary Clinton. BUT in her defense I believe she will do a terrific job as SoS. She is brilliantly intelligent and understands the nuances of foreign affairs. I want to see her mending some of the broken fences which are in need of fixing. Also, the Clinton's have been terrorized by the media and I see very little evidence of them controlling it.

[ProSense]

21. "every time there is a change from one president to another. "

This isn't about Obama's appointments to the DOJ; it's about Hillary staffing the State Dept. with people who are more loyal to Clinton than to Obama.

[blm]

2. Except history shows us that much was weakened under Clinton, including the presidency, and

he even allowed Poppy Bush and his cronies to continue their global agenda untouched and unscrutinized - an agenda that went UNCHALLENGED by the Dem in the WH.

Give them State Dept. to strengthen it? Not based on their record, certainly, but what people PERCEIVE their record to be. Just as Bush was sold as 'stoic' and 'straightshooter' who wouldn't flinch or lie, Clintons are sold as 'competent' and 'fighters' when they are the only ones they have ever shown competence fighting for - well, themselves and GHWBush, and Jackson Stephens, and Dubai and Saudi Royals....

[sandnsea]

5. I understand that

except Obama isn't Poppy and Hillary isn't Bill and State has a different mission than even the White House. If you want to look at what Bill has been doing since he left the White House, and Hillary's very real concern for women and children, and the mission of State - maybe it does make sense for 'them' to be in there. At the least, State won't get bulldozed the way it did with Powell and Rice.

[blm]

8. Did you see Bill USE his influence to urge Bush and Pakistan to add security for Bhutto when

Biden and Kerry were BEGGING for it? Bill should have had ALOT of influence with Bush by then as he did so much to convince DC Dems to support Bush on his Iraq decisions, and Bill protected his father's secrecy and privilege along with all his cronies. What DID he use his influence for worldwide that made a difference in policy? And did he EVER use it to support Dems trying to make NEEDED changes in policy throughout Bush's terms?

And no one has been able to point to ONE serious foreign policy issue Hillary has led on in the senate, or even one foreign policy issue she led OPPOSITION to Bush.

They do NOT deserve control of the State Dept....the mythmaking about the Clintons and their accomplishments is not much different than the mythmaking about Reagan, Bush1 and Bush2. There's a REASON the fascists who own the media helped craft these images.....and a reason they worked to destroy others. And NONE of it was to make America a stronger democracy.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

9. This is a very good point. Rec.

[beachmom]

15. Maybe, except the point Josh Marshall made: that she has been a poor manager.

Her two major enterprises: health care in '93 and her 2008 presidential campaign were complete "train wrecks".

I think she will be a weak SoS who on the surface looks strong. She is not a foreign policy expert. Her cabinet appointment is not a deal breaker for me. I just don't think she will improve the situation for State, which is a demoralized place at this time. Here's hoping you are right, and that she surprises me.

[sandnsea]

19. Yeah, I know that too

If you look at the worst case scenario, that would be it. Well not the worst, but bad. But if you look at the best case scenario, and the power of the Clinton brand, then maybe they could go in and really turn the State Department around and you know we really need that desperately. Maybe she's learned something, or maybe he has some strong managers in mind to help her.

[Jennicut]

17. Cheney made the state dept. into a joke, at his beck and call

It needs some help, no matter who is SoS.

[sofa king]

18. I think the loss of institutional memory at State may be huge.

This comes only from personal recollection, but I recall at least two times when I was told people were leaving the Department of State as fast as ever they could: first, in 2001, when the smartest ones saw what was coming; also when Condoleeza Rice was appointed SoS. Fewer competent employees have entered the ranks to replace those lost. Plenty of jerks have.

I think within half a year or so we'll at least hear reference to something few will actually be surprised about. The State Department (and Interior, and the EPA, and who knows how many other departments and agencies) were the target of the same sort of politicization that Karl Rove visited upon the Justice Department. Rove's objective was to institutionally poison the federal government with partisan operatives, and it will be decades before the can root the last of them out.

Some of them, no doubt, are underneath it all decent Americans and will serve the transition well. My guess, however, is that at least as many will form a partisan fifth column dedicated to leaking, defaming, derailing, and illegally passing on information to their true masters.