Conventional wisdom on the right and the left doubts that HRC is a good choice for Secretary of State. Whether her nomination will be blocked by the emoluments issue is interesting, but the main problem most commentators have with her nomination, is that they feel the President must be firmly in control of the Nation's foreign policy "message," and they fear that Hillary will never be a reliable conduit for a President Obama's policies.
What they are overlooking is that State is already a rogue agency, dominated by career bureaucrats who are pushing their own euroleftoid agenda rather than the policies enunciated by those elected to the Presidency.
Obama thus has nothing to lose by appointing Hillary to lead the Department. In fact, if she acts as heavy-handedly as she is reputed to do, riding rough-shod over State's disloyal, self-serving functionaries, bringing them to heel at least to her command, if not Obama's, she will have rendered his administration a great service.
What they are overlooking is that State is already a rogue agency, dominated by career bureaucrats who are pushing their own euroleftoid agenda rather than the policies enunciated by those elected to the Presidency.
Obama thus has nothing to lose by appointing Hillary to lead the Department. In fact, if she acts as heavy-handedly as she is reputed to do, riding rough-shod over State's disloyal, self-serving functionaries, bringing them to heel at least to her command, if not Obama's, she will have rendered his administration a great service.
1 comment:
SHE'S THERE TO MAKE BILL AS MUCH MONEY AS SHE CAN BEFORE GETTING FIRED - PROBABLY AAFTER TWO YEARS.
OBAMA WANTS HER OUT OF THE WAY.
WHAT BETTER PLACE TO OUT HER! AND THE HE CAN FIRE HER!
HE COULDN'T HAVE FIRED HER FROM THE VICE PRESIDENCY.
Post a Comment