Strike One

Posted By: Stonecipher

Dec. 1, 2008

When George W. Bush became President on January 20, 2001 I knew it was going to be bad.  I knew that Bush was going to make a strong effort to push his right-wing agenda through as quickly as possible, but I also believed that with only a slim majority for his party in Congress that the newly elected president would be willing to compromise on certain issues.

Of course, I was quickly proved wrong when Bush surrounded himself with some of the most extreme right-wingers he could find.  Yes there were exceptions like Colin Powell, Paul O'Neil and Christie Todd Whitman, but they were the exception, not the rule - and not only did none of their policies or philosophies prevail, but of those three, only Powell lasted through the entire first term.

With people like Dick Cheney, Don Rumsfeld, Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz in place, the radical right-wing of the GOP was solidly in control during the early Bush years. 

By no means did I believe that Barack Obama would go to Washington and govern the same way as George W. Bush, giving the radical left-wing of the party free reign.  Instead, I expected (and still do expect) a moderate, pragmatic cabinet and administration filled with intelligent, thinking and reasonable people who are capable of making decisions based on more than just ideology or self-promotion.  With that in mind, there were bound to be issues that came between the left-wing that helped Obama get elected and the Obama Administration/Transition Team, but the decision to make Hillary Clinton Barack Obama's Secretary of State is a big one and a troubling one for those of us on the Left.

My opposition to Clinton is not simply bitterness left over from the Primaries (although, admittedly, some still lingers), it isn't an opposition to opposing viewpoints (I strongly support the inclusion of conservatives and Republicans like Chuck Hagel, Dick Lugar and even Robert Gates) and it isn't even a general opposition to including Hillary Clinton in an Obama Administration.  In fact, I believe Clinton should be a part of the Obama Administration, but not as Secretary of State.

Hillary Clinton is the wrong person for the job. 

There's no need to rehash all of the reasons why here.  I've done that several times before, but if you would like to read more about why I believe this is a mistake, you can read my Nov. 19 piece here.

The point is that after all of the drama surrounding the Clinton selection, after all the nonsense Hillary has shown she is capable of, after all of the leaking from the Clinton camp, after all of the anti-diplomacy rhetoric from Clinton herself, Obama's selection of the junior Senator from New York signals a willingness on his part to accept some of the worst aspects of politics as usual.

If we're playing by the three strikes and you're out (or at least out of favor) rule, one strike against you can be a big deal, but in my mind, this is Obama's first.  Maybe, six months from now we can look at the instant replay of this and call it a ball instead, but it certainly isn't a hit.  And for right now, it appears to be a swing and a miss.

To paraphrase Christopher Hitchens on "Hardball"  Monday afternoon, in Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama will have a Secretary of State who is always thinking about her job and about something else. 

That "something else" for Clinton is herself, and Hitchens went on to say that Hillary Clinton will always look out for herself first and her husband second - and that is the crux of the problem with making Sen. Clinton the new Secretary of State.

Of course, we have yet to see how Hillary Clinton will actually conduct herself during her tenure as the nation's top diplomat, and I am a big proponent of the concept of innocence until proven guilty, but that doesn't mean that I have to trust Clinton before that verdict comes down.

So Mr. President-Elect, I'm glad you trust her, cause I sure don't.

Consider this Strike One from the Left.