Kerry for State?
Spencer Ackerman reports:
Obama campaign advisers declined to comment on the record for this story. Nor would many Democratic foreign-policy experts who might join an Obama administration. But off the record, Obama aides made clear that Kerry’s name is on a very short list of contenders to become the country’s top diplomat. Another person talked up by the great mentioner is Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.), a Vietnam War veteran whose foreign-policy views align surprisingly well with Obama’s.
The rest of the article focuses on Kerry, rather than Hagel. As the ninth most-important person in America, I’ll just observe that while Hagel seems like a plausible Secretary of State an the idea of an extended term for Robert Gates at defense also seems plausible, you surely couldn’t do both.
51 Responses to “Kerry for State?”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
November 4th, 2008 at 1:13 pm
Wow, Matt, when did you become the 9th most important person in America? Congratulations!
November 4th, 2008 at 1:15 pm
you surely couldn’t do both
Why not? I realize Kerry is fundamentally a decent guy, but I certainly don’t want a Serious Loser running State just because of his position on abortion (or whatever else it is that keeps Hagel a Republican.)
November 4th, 2008 at 1:20 pm
why not?
maybe you should explain yourself a little here matt, instead of just assuming all of your readers know exactly what you’re thinking….
November 4th, 2008 at 1:22 pm
Now, what was it Matt said about not filling your cabinet with Republicans, because it gives the impression that Democrats think themselves incompetent? I can’t remember…
November 4th, 2008 at 1:22 pm
As the 12th most important person in America, I think Gates and Hagel should get gay married and share the SecDef position.
November 4th, 2008 at 1:23 pm
How about one for State and the other for Perm Rep to the UN?
Personally, I’d rather see Biden as Sec. of State, but that’s obviously not gonna happen.
And what about Richardson? Clinton (either one)?
I love speculation on these types of things!
November 4th, 2008 at 1:25 pm
Secs of State and Defense aside, I’ll just throw this out: make Bill Clinton World Bank President. He’d be great at the job.
November 4th, 2008 at 1:27 pm
I’ve heard chatter of Kerry for awhile, and it’s noteworthy how enthusiastic Kerry has been for Obama throughout the whole campaign, back into the primary. Wouldn’t be surprised if this was already a done deal.
November 4th, 2008 at 1:28 pm
I don’t think you can do both, nor do I think it sets the right tone. SecState is an outward-looking position, and while Hagel might be a Bush-sceptic Republican on foreign policy, he’s still a Republican. If Hagel wanted State — or if Obama wanted Hagel in Foggy Bottom, then there needed to be some kind of explicit endorsement before the election, not as a quid pro quo, but just to establish his bona fides with leaders outside the US.
Kerry’s an interesting possible choice, though Spack points to some caveats: you’re already taking Biden from the Senate, there’s a degree of overlap in Biden and Kerry’s experience, and while Dodd’s no lightweight as the potential chair of the Foreign Relations committee, you’re losing a lot of depth.
I noticed that Bill Richardson shaved off his beard, so he may be expecting (or hoping for) a call.
November 4th, 2008 at 1:28 pm
maybe you should explain yourself a little here matt, instead of just assuming all of your readers know exactly what you’re thinking….
I think Matt’s saying that while there is a plausible argument for keeping Gates as SecDef, that wouldn’t extend to replacing him with Hagel. Keep Gates on because he seems genuinely compentent, and incidentally it demonstrates bipartisanship? Fine. But replacing him with Hagel would very clearly send the message that only Republicans can handle foreign policy. Which is ridiculous, but all things being equal we shouldn’t give pundits the ammunition.
November 4th, 2008 at 1:29 pm
If you want to bipartisanize the Cabinet, State would be better than Defense, just to avoid reinforcing the notion that Republicans are the only ones who ‘get’ Defense. People already thing Dems are fine diplomats.
November 4th, 2008 at 1:47 pm
People already thing Dems are fine diplomats.
That is true of Dems generically, but people think that the specific Dem (Kerry) is a waffling incompetent of a communicator. Whether or not that is true, I’d hate to see State starting the new administration down two touchdowns in public opinion.
I can see the logic behind ‘don’t grant Republicans State and Defense since it advances their competence’ argument, but if that’s really an overwhelming factor, there must be Dems who would bring a less tarnished brand to State than Kerry. (And if you don’t think Kerry is a tarnished brand, you’re living in the new bubble.)
November 4th, 2008 at 1:59 pm
If Obama wins, Obama and Biden will both leave the Senate; they might want to keep a few guys like Kerry there, rather than in the cabinet.
November 4th, 2008 at 1:59 pm
I would prefer Hagel or even Lugar, and Hillary for AG.
November 4th, 2008 at 2:03 pm
Hagel is waiting in the wings for the transaition period of SecDef Gates to expire. Then in he slides.
November 4th, 2008 at 2:05 pm
Matt, it’s time to slow down. Your influence isn’t great enough to make you the 9th most important person in America.
If you were, I think we’d have SUPERTRAINS under construction everywhere. Which I would applaud. But let’s not get ahead of ourselves.
The SoS should (in my view) be offered to Bill Richardson first. Nothing against Senator Kerry, but he hasn’t displayed the appropriate judgement. Richardson may be a poor public speaker, but he has talent for Diplomacy.
Secretary of Defense, in an ideal world, would be offered to General Clark. He obviously knows defense, and he’s a strong Democrat. And he has sound judgement. I think he would be willing to weaken the military and restore the powers to State that were usurped by Defense under Rumsfeld.
Matt, maybe you can angle for Secretary of Transportation. Then maybe you can work on SUPERTRAINS.
November 4th, 2008 at 2:09 pm
Hagel? Bleah.
I would prefer to see Colin Powell return rather than Hagel. Especially at State. Powell does have the overwhelming stain of supporting the war. But then Kerry also voted for it as well. Powell was very well liked at State (I have friends who work at State). And if we’re going to pick a Republican cabinet secretary we could do much worse than Powell. Personally I’d like it just to see all the neocon heads explode.
Remember, the Sec of State is foremost an ambassador. It must be a person with a charismatic and commanding presence. You put your uncharismatic foreign policy expert into the national security advisor position. I see that as a better fit for Hagel than State if we’re going to be talking about Hagel at all.
November 4th, 2008 at 2:12 pm
Secretary of Defense, in an ideal world, would be offered to General Clark. He obviously knows defense, and he’s a strong Democrat. And he has sound judgement. I think he would be willing to weaken the military and restore the powers to State that were usurped by Defense under Rumsfeld.
I believe there is a statute that requires the SecDef to have been out of uniform for 10 years before being appointed to SecDef. Clark would not qualify for a few more years yet. The place for Clark would be State or Nat. Security Advisor
November 4th, 2008 at 2:15 pm
Neat Massachusetts side note:
If Kerry gets tapped for State, then, considering that Kennedy could retire for health reasons pretty soon, MA is about to get not just its first new senator in 24 years, but TWO new senators. I wish I knew MA politics better and could offer up some predictions of who they’ll be.
November 4th, 2008 at 2:21 pm
Reading into Obama’s selection of Joe Biden, if Obama picks any Senators or Governors for his cabinet, it’ll definitely be from states where Democrats will keep control. No Jim Webb, No Claire McCaskill, No Brian Schweitzer, maybe not even Sebelius or Tim Kaine.
Kerry seems likely given this reasoning. Jack Reed, too.
Howard Dean Surgeon General?
November 4th, 2008 at 2:22 pm
Fuck me, John Kerry for Secretary of State!? Do we want to put our best D-bag forward or what? How about somebody with the capacity to inspire, or excite, or something.
Ugh, if this is really a possible member of Obama’s cabinet, I’m already having buyers remorse.
November 4th, 2008 at 2:22 pm
I wish I knew MA politics better and could offer up some predictions of who they’ll be.
Joe Kennedy will be one, don’t know the other though. Maybe Bill Weld?
November 4th, 2008 at 2:33 pm
I wish I knew MA politics better and could offer up some predictions of who they’ll be.
Joe Kennedy will be one, don’t know the other though. Maybe Bill Weld?
what about Gov Patrick?
November 4th, 2008 at 2:57 pm
Anyone who believes that Gates will stay isn’t thinking. The reason why he came on was solely because of Bush 41. It’s a WASPy respect thing. The last thing he’s going to do is stay on and undo what Bush 43 put together (despite not really believing in it). That’s not the way that these things are done in that circle. Gates will depart even if asked by Obama to stay.
Which leaves us with an open SECDEF and SECSTATE. Should Kerry get the latter, that would be most unfortunate. Kerry is an embarrassing figure that would be little better than Richard Holbrooke at the position (another Wilsonian nut who would find common cause with the neocons).
Hagel on the other hand is a guy that belongs in this administration given the contingency that he brings with him (disaffected Republican realists). He’s not qualified to fit in at SECDEF, especially because he hasn’t served on the Armed Services committee. A better fit at SECDEF would be Danzig, who commands a great deal of bipartisan respect (for good reason).
Obama would be wise to choose Hagel for the SECSTATE job at least for the first term. Then he could pull Kerry in for the home stretch after managing our withdrawl from Iraq, stabilizing Afghanistan and dealing with Pakistan, Russia and North Korea.
November 4th, 2008 at 3:01 pm
How about somebody with the capacity to inspire, or excite, or something.
As Sec of State? I think the main thing you want to project in that pick is ‘you can take us seriously again’. While Kerry gets a bad rap for his 2004 campaign, he’d be taken seriously. You’re looking for someone who can show up in Cairo or Jerusalem or Islamabad or Rio or Seoul or Beijing and command respect from the people running the show. Hagel and Richardson have the chops too, but Hagel would need to be a very early announcement, accompanied by a clear break from Bush-era foreign policy. The line might be that party politics stops at the water’s edge, but across the water, there’s a lot of distrust towards Republicans doing foreign policy.
November 4th, 2008 at 3:04 pm
These lists of potential cabinet members always seem heavily populated with senators and recent presidential contenders. My impression is that those folks have the highest profiles nationally, which is why people think of them, but of course one of the things about appointment positions is that public profile doesn’t matter a whole lot. Historically, how common is the appointment of sitting senators or failed presidential candidates to cabinet positions?
November 4th, 2008 at 3:06 pm
While Kerry gets a bad rap for his 2004 campaign, he’d be taken seriously.
Really? By who? Certainly not by, say, Americans.
November 4th, 2008 at 3:20 pm
Please no.
November 4th, 2008 at 3:25 pm
Richard Holbrooke was ready to move in at State in ‘05…. until Kerry lost the election; no sure if he still has a chance, especially after being a big Hillary supporter this time.
November 4th, 2008 at 3:30 pm
Do we really want to start pulling sitting senators (much less ones who have just won re-election like Kerry) out right when we’re poised to have a real majority? How about Richardson for State and Hagel at defense?
Gates may be less political than Rumsfeld, but then again, so would anyone short of a re-animated Lee Atwater. And I really don’t want hold-overs from Bush–anyone that that chimp picked can’t be good for the country.
November 4th, 2008 at 3:45 pm
Whether or not Kerry commands respect around the world is a secondary issue (or even a non-issue with respect to Hagel). The question is, what does Kerry believe with respect to foreign affairs?
Kerry is a Wilsonian who, like the neocons, believes that the U.S. can remake the world in its own image through a range of policies. While Kerry might be less inclined to use the end of a spear to support those policies, he nonetheless would fritter away U.S. resources to do so. That’s not what this country needs now.
Moreover, a Wilsonian at SECSTATE will ensure that the neocons remain relevant. Any time the U.S. intervenes anywhere in the world, the Wilsonians will find a bunch of Republican neocons to support the intervention. This is what happened in Haiti, Somalia, Bosnia and Kosovo.
Keeping the neocons in the game is enormously dangerous…because as soon as the U.S. is attacked, or a crisis develops, they’ll use that opportunity to pressure an Obama administration to do something crazy.
Per Joe Biden’s warning, you aren’t going to be able to sell Obama’s foreign policies if you’ve got the democrats advocating patience and prudence vs. the neocons advocating a punish our enemies mentality in a crisis. That’s where a guy like Hagel comes in. He brings with him a significant cadre of Republican realists which can shore up a bipartisan approach to an international crisis.
I’m very much hoping that Obama (provided he wins) does not make this mistake. This will be strategically and politically disastrous if he gives these morons another chance.
November 4th, 2008 at 5:29 pm
Props to Ed Smithe: he makes a very good case for Hagel. When you see people like Cakewalk Ken Adelman coming out for Obama, you get the sense that a certain subset of neoconnerie fancies its chances at keeping a foot in the door.
All that said, you have to assume that Sam Power is going to be welcomed back in the fold during the transition (National Security Advisor?) and that Obama is inclined towards her approach, which doesn’t easily fit either the neocon or realist models.
November 4th, 2008 at 5:33 pm
As a Massachusetts Democrat I would not want to see two Senate vacancies for the Commonwealth. I’ve been thinking about who might be chosen to replace Ted Kennedy, and I think the most likely choices would be Ed Markey or Barney Frank, OR Deval Patrick might just pick someone as a placeholder if both are interested in the job (and they needed to hold an election to see who would be elected) and a good placeholder would be Mike Dukakis. Certainly not Joe Kennedy (who is out of politics) or Bill Weld (who is a Republican).
November 4th, 2008 at 5:47 pm
Four words that would just make the Republicans weep:
Secretary Kerry
Senator Frank
November 4th, 2008 at 6:24 pm
You appoint Hagel to the cabinet so he won’t run against you in 2012. You don’t move Kerry to the Cabinet because Frank might actually lose that Senate seat due to his championing the bailout.
November 4th, 2008 at 8:38 pm
Where did all these douchebag commenters come from? Luis, Mike, TW Andrews? Kerry would be an excellent pick. Grow up, kiddie trolls. And try to view the election like adults instead of like spoiled teenagers who will only be happy if they’re constantly “inspired” (read: “entertained”).
November 4th, 2008 at 9:04 pm
I would be more open to Kerry in the Cabinet if he didn’t just win re-election. Save him for the reshuffle after 2012.
Hagel to Veterans Affairs not Defense
Robert Kennedy Jr. to Interior
Gore to State
Bacevich to Defense
Krugman to Treasury
Clarke to Homeland Security
Hightower to Agriculture
Lieberman as your bi-partisan pick to Sanctimony
and just for fun
Spitzer to SEC and Edwards to AG
March 1st, 2009 at 5:47 am
viagra
I bookmarked this site. Thank you for good job!
March 1st, 2009 at 6:38 pm
cialis
If you have to do it, you might as well do it right
March 12th, 2009 at 11:31 pm
I bookmarked this site. Thank you for good job!
March 17th, 2009 at 2:28 am
I bookmarked this site. Thank you for good job!
tramadol
March 22nd, 2009 at 6:17 am
tramadol
I want to say – thank you for this!
April 9th, 2009 at 6:14 am
thanks !! very helpful post! viagra