Breaking: Hillary Is A Human Being
A very nice piece by John Harris and Glenn Thrush of The Politico gets at a forgotten dimension to the pick of Hillary as Secretary of State: How extraordinary a moment it is in the context of Hillary's life, career, and persona:
Hillary Rodham Clinton has a favorite expression for turning setback into opportunity: "Bloom where you're planted."Her three-decade career on the public stage has produced countless examples of Clinton sprouting a flower in a pile of manure.
Few of them are more vivid than this week's official announcement that she is the nominee to serve as secretary of state to Barack Obama -- the man whom she initially refused to talk to on the Senate floor two years ago when he first made clear he would challenge her for the Democratic presidential nomination.
Clinton's planned ascension to Foggy Bottom is the culmination of a strenuous effort over the past several months to fashion a next act in a career that long has been defined by two distinct halves: flamboyant celebrity on one side and dogged, often lonely, distance runner on the other.
On this score, I recommend Harris' book on Bill Clinton, which displays the same startling tendency on display in the above piece: A willingness to treat the Clintons like human beings. That book is called The Survivor: Bill Clinton in the White House, which explains this piece's description of Hillary as "the new survivor."
Whatever you think of Hillary -- and the above depiction is of a person who's anything but flawless -- the conventions of political reporting tend to discourage this type of treatment of politicians, so it's worth savoring when a news org comes along and does it right.
Hillary earned the SOS appointment. She worked herself to death on Obama's campaign - she was everywhere. She was in New Mexico at lest 3 times that I know of and I know she was all over the place.
She deserves to be treated like a human being, too, and it is nice to see someone treat her and Bill that way.
December 3, 2008 9:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
It's not hard to write a relatively great book about the Clintons.
It just has to be one of the few books that doesn't accuse them of murdering Vince Foster.
December 3, 2008 9:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
the Clintons didn't murder Vince Foster? that's some dangerous territory to be entering ...
December 3, 2008 10:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
And Hillary's not a lesbian? Really? LOL!
More tripe has been said and written about the Clintons...
December 3, 2008 10:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think that Hillary will do a great job as Secretary of State.
December 3, 2008 10:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
Especially with Samantha Power around.
December 3, 2008 10:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
Amen!
December 3, 2008 11:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
So do I. I'm glad she got it and as mad as I got at her during the campaign, she more than compensated for that with all her hard work and her sincere campaigning. We owe her. Obama owed her. Without her and her supporters, I'm not sure we could have pulled this off -
December 3, 2008 10:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
I cosign every word of this comment.
(and I left you a personal comment on the previous thread)
December 3, 2008 10:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you, Thera. You are a very good friend.
I can't figure that one out; I guess it's about the fact that I have a second house. Someone thinks you cannot be a liberal/progressive and not be struggling financially.
I have always found that to be an interesting perspective, to say the least. But I know what it springs from. I didn't expect playa hating, but that's because I was naive. Haters are everywhere.
It doesn't matter. :)
December 3, 2008 10:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yup, they're just seeking for any handhold or foothold with which to gain a purchase and try to stomp your ideas. It's really funny actually. Just remember how Obama brushes stuff off. And sees the humor. Wow, can we learn from this man!
December 3, 2008 11:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
I agree that Hillary worked her ass off for Obama during the general (in addition to raising $10 million for him), but I don't think Obama picked her because he owed her. Contrary to what Chris Matthews keeps saying, he also wasn't trying to get her 18 million voters since they overwhelming voted for him in the end. The campaign is over.
Obama picked Hillary for one reason: he thinks she will be good at the job.
You piss off your enemies during the election and piss off your friends during the transition. If John Kerry had not selected Obama to give the 2004 convention speech, Obama would not be president. Period. His tremendous success with that speech made him a best selling author, a multi-millionaire and sparked a grass roots push for him to run for president.
Kerry endorsed Obama really early and was a strong and effective advocate for him. Kerry desperately wanted to be SOS but Obama skipped over him for Hillary. IMO, he owes Kerry more than he owes Hillary but Hillary will be a better SOS. I think that's what factored into his decision.
December 3, 2008 10:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
Very good point about "You piss off your enemies during the election and piss off your friends during the transition". Hope Kerry will land something substantial.
December 3, 2008 10:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
The fact that Hillary campaigned very hard for Obama seems to be lost on the media. In all their talk about what was said during the primaries, they fail to mention that she kicked ass on the trail FOR him. And yesterday I was flipping past CNN and Wolf Blitzer, when talking about Bill Richardson for Commerce Sec., referred to him as another former rival. Technically BR was a rival, but Wolf failed to mention that BR endorsed Obama, pissed off some people when he did it, and campaigned for him. All this brings me right back to a comment made by Campbell Brown on her No Bias, No Bull show. She "slammed" Obama for saying in the last press conference that the press likes to have fun with the so-called "friction" between him and Hillary. Yeah, Okay CB, no bias, no bull.
December 3, 2008 11:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary and Bill completely redeemed themselves at the convention. If their speeches did not turn someone around, then that someone has internal biases which conflict with reality.
Obama is choosing his team. I chose Obama to lead. He is rewriting the book on leadership as we watch.
I'm awed. As a voter. As a psychologist. I am awed!
December 3, 2008 11:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
You are generous.
Bill's speech at the convention helped redeem him somewhat in my eyes.
I was about to say "but", but I'll just leave it at that. Too nice a day to reflect on the behavioral conundrum that is Bill Clinton.
\
December 3, 2008 11:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not speaking of his past. I'm speaking of since the convention. Related to the primary. And going forward, I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt. He's had a huge comeuppance. The Clintons have both had to reassess their futures. I'm a believer that people can change. I didn't want him near the White House, but he's got a big ethics watchdog on him now (with Hillary as SoS).
Nevertheless we all come down differently here in terms of where we're at. If you've got your "buts" you're not alone and I respect that.
I've been wrong before. Right on this blog. Could happen again. (any minute)
December 3, 2008 11:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
I agree that the Obama--Hillary friction seems to have been overplayed. But has anyone seen any pictures of Bill Richardson and Hillary since he endorsed Obama? I'm curious if they've made up. I remember Bill C. and Bill R. even watched the Superbowl together...
December 3, 2008 11:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
Here's my guess. Both Clintons were in Chicago on the same day as Richardson... when the two were Hillary and Bill R were being interviewed for SoS. I always assumed that Obama had the men meet and "make up." That did not have to be public. But I'm betting on it!
December 3, 2008 11:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
You know, you are probably right. I can't imagine Bill R holding a grudge (he's infallible, he's my gov! (joke)) , but I definitely could imagine Bill C or Hillary doing so for awhile.
Now, if Bill C invites Bill R for next year's Superbowl, then we'll know for sure!
December 3, 2008 12:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't know if the Clintons hold a grudge any more so than others inside the Beltway. My guess is that they were part of the Democratic inner power circle for so long (Gore and Kerry loses kept Bill as the defacto head), that if someone got on their bad side, that could have some more significant impact in regards to moving up into and through the various circles of influence.
December 3, 2008 12:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Maybe they made a date for the next Superbowl.
December 3, 2008 12:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
The fact that Obama chose Hillary after she "refused to talk to him on the Senate floor" says alot about Obama as well.
December 3, 2008 10:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
But, in the spirit of the thread, let me also add, Hillary is wonderful.
December 3, 2008 10:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not bein' wise, really. Can you imagine being a diplomat trying to run some BS by the USA, having to walk into a room and deliver that message to Hillary Clinton?
No thanks.
December 3, 2008 10:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
LOL!
Excellent point. I like her more as SOS with every day that passes since it started being talked about.
December 3, 2008 10:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
Moi aussi.
December 3, 2008 10:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks Dorn, great mental image. It would take just one eyebrow arch for the bs to go away, most likely.
December 3, 2008 11:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
I don't think campaigning hard for the candidate who vanquished you in the primaries is or should be a qualification for any job but maybe teevee surrogate. Having said that I think Hillary is more than qualified and will be an excellent SoS.
If I have any qualms about Obama's choices for his cabinet it's that he's stripping our upper echelon of politicians from the senate and governorships. I can understand the motivation but not every cabinet post requires a shining political star. We don't want to leave the bench too bare.
December 3, 2008 10:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
O I agree and when I posted my first comment, I thought about that but hoped people would get that I don't think the appointment should be based on just that. She's got the chops - no doubt about that. She's totally qualified. And I have to be happy about seeing women continue to move into the highest offices - we have a woman speaker and this will be the 3d woman who has been SOS - we're making progress here and women have to know that we owe Hillary, among hundreds of others, for this progress.
December 3, 2008 10:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
Ya gotta do what ya gotta do. I think most politicians are adults though it might not look like it during the heat of the primaries.
December 3, 2008 12:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Govs. Sebelius, Napolitiano and Richardson were all term-limited and have to turn over the keys anyway.
Do you really think we're in danger of losing the senate seats in NY and DE? Do you think Rahm Emanuel's seat is in danger in true blue Chicago?
December 3, 2008 10:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
Helpful info. Thanks!
December 3, 2008 11:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks FreeRider, good info that puts my mind at ease.
December 3, 2008 12:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh brother. Rah, rah, rah. She is just sooo wonderful. Yipeee! Give me a break. The daily clintons love post. I guess we'll have this one until 2016? Ugh.
By the way, you stick a flower in a pile of manure, it's still a pile of manure. It's kinda like putting lipstick on a pig, it's still a pig. Just sayin.
December 3, 2008 10:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
But manure can grow a beautiful flower.
December 3, 2008 10:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
The entire idea behind the lotus as a sacred flower to the Buddhists is precisely because it grows up out of mud and muck.
December 3, 2008 10:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, that's true.
An aside, as a kid, I'm not sure how many piles of manure I helped shovel onto the garden plot. It's how we got tomatoes that were grapefruit-sized.!
December 3, 2008 11:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
I mulched all my fruit trees in Taos before I left with cow manure. Great stuff.
December 3, 2008 11:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well I have serious doubts about Clinton as SoS based on her past Middle East policy record, much of which I deplore. I also don't buy the theory that Clinton will just be a servant executing Obama's commands. The State Department participates in making and shaping policy, not just executing it.
But the decision has been made and the proof is in the pudding, so at this point all we can do is hope things work out.
Yes, obviously, the Clintons are human beings and have feelings. But you can write one of these touching human interest stories about almost any politician. They carry little weight with me. As a citizen, I'm more interested in politicians' deeds than their private joys and sufferings. We all have to deal with ups and downs, triumphs and trials. But where the lives and prospects of millions are at stake, we can't afford to indulge our popular taste for celebrity hanky moments.
December 3, 2008 10:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well-said. Politics is not the place for emotions.
Just, plain, cold facts. m'am.
December 3, 2008 10:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
Au contraire - it's precisely where everything is most at stake that we do need popular tastes and celebrity hanky moments. We just don't need them to take the place of real work on real solutions.
But it is in times like these - really tough- when we do need to remember we're human and we do need to laugh and to cry. Look at popular culture during the 30s.
December 3, 2008 11:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
When I saw the clip of G.W. Bush at the G-20 conference, I felt sorry for him. Nobody would look at him or shake his hand. Any human being understands how painful that kind of loneliness and ostracism must be. Unless you are a sadistic psychopath, you might experience sadness when viewing such a tableau.
But what of it? I felt my twinges of pity, but try not to let them interfere with the recognition that this is a man who is responsible, in my view, for the needless deaths of hundreds of thousands of people, the erosion of our constitutional system of government and the blighting of the economic prospects of millions of Americans.
Now, Hillary Clinton is no G.W. Bush. Not at all. But in my view she is responsible for a series of foreign policy pronouncements and votes that have abetted a misguided US Middle East foreign policy agenda that has threatened the security and well-being of millions of current and future Americans. That's what is important to me. If others don't see her record in the same way, I can respect their position, but I disagree with them. Should I feel for her because she is trying to make lemons from lemonade, grow flowers in manure, sprout where she is planted or because she is dreaming of a new pony over the rainbow? OK, I can spare a few moments of sentiment ...
There I'm done.
Now back to caring about the world of the millions of people her decisions have affected and will affect.
December 3, 2008 11:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
You know what you're going to be called, don't you? Anyone who can't see just how "brilliant" this choice is is designated a "hater".
December 3, 2008 11:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
Not by me.
December 3, 2008 11:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
No, you're sane.
I was castigated loudly yesterday for being a Clinton hater (even though I was defending her) because I wasn't, apparently, appropriately enthusiastic over the "brilliant" choice.
December 3, 2008 11:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
But if you ever catch signs of insanity, please let me know (compassionately).
December 3, 2008 11:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
As a fellow psychologist, I will be happy to....although I'm not "that kind of psychologist", as I am forever explaining to my students....
December 3, 2008 12:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
What's your area? Are you involved in research as well?
December 3, 2008 12:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Cognitive, specifically visual perception.
(and some decision-making work, as well).
December 3, 2008 12:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
I feel sorry for Bush too, in a way. And I think that's a good thing. I hated him bitterly partly because I was afraid of him. Feeling sorry for him means I'm not afraid of him anymore - he's nuttin.
As far as Hillary and the ME goes, all I can say is that she's working for Obama and it is Obama's policies she will be implementing. Anyone who doubts that is underestimating Obama. Again.
People keep underestimating Obama. He's way strong enough to handle Hillary Clinton as SOS. When did you ever see him tolerate someone going off his policy or message? How many people did he get rid of immediately when they did go off policy or message during the campaign? *cough*SamanthaPower*cough*
Sheesh! How much more does Obama have to show you before y'all get it?
December 3, 2008 11:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well, let's suppose that Obama opens up a new White House initiative on the Iran front aimed at a broad "grand bargain". Suppose Hillary and Aipac don't like the direction this bargain is heading, and on her next Middle East tour she takes several opportunities to make highly provocative and critical statements about the Iranian leadership, undermining the prospects of the grand bargain.
Now, suppose Obama calls her up and says, "I'm not really happy about the way this is playing out." Clinton might retort, "Look, you put me in charge of the diplomacy department, and you have to give me leeway to implement a diplomatic policy that advances your agenda in the way that seems best to me and my team of diplo experts here in the State Department. Stop micromanaging." Obama says, "I don't know. It doesn't look to me like it is my agenda. It looks like another agenda." Clinton retorts, "Are you accusing me of disloyalty?"
Now where can Obama go from here? Clinton knows that Obama can't afford the political firestorm that would come from publicly rebuking, disciplining or firing her. She and her supporters would stand for it. Doesn't it appear that she now has him right where she wants him?
December 3, 2008 12:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Love, I can 'suppose' anything at all. Anyone can. That does not make it more likely to happen than anything else.
December 3, 2008 2:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have my doubts about Clinton's ability to both formulate policy compatible with Obama's and execute the Obama agenda while stifling her own policy inclinations. While these qualms are somewhat mollified by the knowledge that Obama is a master politician and can manage Hillary (to a degree), I am more worried about the other Clinton that comes with this choice, Bill. Obama has virtually no means to control him and what he may do in the foreign policy arena unless and until Obama brings him officially into the tent. I don't see that happening since I fail to detect any real sign of genuine respect that Bill may have for Obama, something Obama can't have failed to notice. Nonetheless, I'm so far from the players that any evaluation of their relationships that I can offer would be meaningless speculation.
I remain sanguine in Obama's judgment of character and his political skills. Indeed, the proof of the pudding he's constructing will be in the eating, but so far, the scent of its baking has proven delightful, if a little exotic.
December 3, 2008 11:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
The one thing that keeps me somewhat calm thinking about Bill is that he has shown he is motivated by his desire to have a positive public image, ie he saw how easy it was for the press and (Liberal) public to turn on him. I'm sure he realizes that for the press the story of Bill underming Obama is bigger than Obama making a mistake. So at least early on, I think he will actually try to stay out of the news (just how long he can control himself will be the question).
December 3, 2008 11:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
I agree with your assessment. In addition, it seems to me that as long as those guiding Bill's role play to Bill's narcissism, his need for adoration, by sending him on endless missions to places of disaster and so on, he may be an excellent ambassador for people helping people. Obama is advised by mental health experts who can make sure the wheels are greased where they need to be. Let's wait and see. I'm sure they can help Bill help himself - and the world in the process.
December 3, 2008 11:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
Good point. The one thing Obama doesn't need is a Bill with too much time on his hands.
December 3, 2008 11:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think the thing to fear more is a Bill Clinton intent on protecting his legacy and acting to do so regardless of how it undermines Obama's objectives, particularly if he still harbors resentment based on a perception that Obama disparaged said legacy during the campaign.
(whew! Sorry for the humongous run-on sentence! Proust would be proud of me.)
December 3, 2008 11:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
Just trying to having a upbeat view of this, but I would add that the world is so utterly different since 2000 because of Bush's foreign policy and other factors, that there is little left of the world (and hence his legacy) that Clinton left behind. So there are few foreign policy decisions, whether India-Pakistan, China, Russia, Africa, European Union, etc, that would make Bill feel his legacy was threatened.
December 3, 2008 11:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
Agree. In fact, Bush's adventures into foreign policy have made it possible for Obama & H. Clinton to look like absolute rock stars. To rip off Jim Morrison, we've been "down" so very damn long on the world scene that any way you go looks like "up."
December 3, 2008 12:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
I began to respect her a bit more after witnessing the committment and affection of her supporters in the last days of the democratic primary- her strength and grit are remarkable. She isn't my hero but I think I now better understand why she's a hero to millions across the country.
I see her as a flawed politician with some remarkable gifts and some questionable motives. But I don't understand the pervasive hatred which borderlines paranoia.
December 3, 2008 11:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
Which brings up the point that in the coming years, Obama is going to have persuade (convince, sell, etc) certain foreign policy decisions that the public made not be too keen on at first. I'm thinking of military intervention to stop a genocide. HRC will be an asset in this regard.
December 3, 2008 11:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
Loved the headline!
Clinton campaigning so hard for Obama demonstrated that she's an adult, capable of putting history behind her. While this may not seem as if its an important trait, I think that it is. Frankly, she was better able to put history behind her than her supporters and Obama supporters have been.
And I tend to think that we need a "celebrity" as SOS now, after the tragedy that is the Bush reign.
December 3, 2008 11:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
Celebrity has its place in this age of constant media blitzkreig, but what this country really needs is a sound foreign policy that is efficiently and effectively executed in a quotidian fashion by diplomatic professionals. I hope that Clinton's first agendum is to (re)hire those State Dept. professionals who abandoned the service rather than facing the dilemma of carrying out Bush's betrayal of long established principled policy. Clinton can be the star, but she needs competent worker bees.
December 3, 2008 11:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
Unquestionably. I guess I'm confident that she's going to get them, because the BMOC seems capable of realizing this necessity as well.
I just think that a "celebrity" at this point will make it easier to start building better alliances, because there won't be that period of getting to know you, so to speak, and, (and I could be completely wrong about this) there won't be the requisite pissing match, either.
December 3, 2008 11:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
Word!
She is now and forever what a friend of mine calls a Big Woman. Which means she is grown up and capable of putting her own feelings aside and doing what is best for everyone, including herself. Not that many people are capable of doing that with the kind of grace and intensity Hillary showed at the convention and while campaigning for Obama.
December 3, 2008 11:40 AM | Reply | Permalink