I posted this as a comment in someone else's diary. By request, I have fleshed it out into an actual diary.
There has been much controversy and heated debate over the rumor that Obama is considering Hillary Clinton for the job of Secretary of State. I believe this would be a brilliant choice. Hillary has proven herself over the course of the general election, and her foreign policy stances are victually indistinguishable from Obama's. Moreover, Obama's vision of "restoring our standing in the world" would be enhanced by the popularity of Hillary Clinton abroad.
Some may say:
While Hillary Clinton was First Lady, she did nothing but log a few hours at state dinners and funerals.
Well obviously, in her eight years as first lady, she logged more than just a "few" hours doing the aforementioned. She built positive relationships and established goodwill and trust with the leaders of over 80 countries. She also helped spark a women's rights movement in China, by her speech at the United Nations equating women's rights with human rights. Was Hillary involved in high level negotiations? Probably not. But I fail to see the downside of having a Secretary of State that already has amicable relations with the leaders of "Old Europe," (as Rumsfeld said) among other places, when Obama's stated goal in foreign relations is to "restore our standing in the world."
Moreover, her experience does not begin and end with her years as First Lady. She has spent the last 7 years on the Senate Armed Services Committee during two wars, which is not a bad starting point for the job of Sec of State.
What about her Iraq war vote?
Part of the reason Hillary Clinton lost the Democratic Primary was because she signed the 2002 AUMF (along with John Kerry, John Edwards and the majority of Democrats in the Senate). However, Hillary's stance on Iraq is no more hawkish in 2008 than Barrack Obama's, so there is no reason to believe she would undermine his positions. In fact, during the general election, as well as at the DNC convention, Hillary Clinton stated repeatedly that we "must elect Barrack Obama" because "He will bring the troops home safely and responsibly." Sounds good to me.
Some also quip:
Obama promised change. If he appoints Clinton people, thats not change!
The change Obama promised was reducing the influence of lobbyists on Washington DC. He also promised to end partisanship by appointing a "team of rivals." And at one of the debates, he also promised that Hillary Clinton would be among those advising him when he is President. If you assumed change meant tar and feathering the Clintons, and riding them out of town on the rails, and you voted for Obama believing this would come to pass, I am sorry your vote was so misguided. Just as Bill Clinton promised "change" in 1992, and appointed experienced people from the Carter administration to his cabinet, Obama will appoint Clinton people to his cabinet. It sure beats the alternative (keeping Bush loyalists in the job).
One diarist stated:
Obama's 9 million new voters will not re-elect him in 2012 if he picks Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State.
This is just absurd! I'd like to remind everyone that Hillary made over 75 campaign stops for Obama in key states like Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania. Hillary also wrote a gushing op-ed in the NYT two days before the election explaining to its readers why we must elect Barrack Obama. She has been a flawless surrogate. If Obama's supporters were as turned off by Hillary Clinton as some suggest, Obama would not have used her as a surrogate at all.
Another concern was this:
If Hillary Clinton leaves the Senate, we wont have as many votes.
Wrong again. The governor of NY will appoint another Democrat (and after reading his excellent diary right here on this site, I am confident he will make a wise appointment).
Obama won because of his skill, his judgement and his excellent campaign. It seems that in some people's view, Obama is betraying them by even considering Hillary Clinton for Sec of State. I don't believe most Obama supporters would see this as a betrayal. I don't believe that the motivating force behind Obama primary supporters was to "get rid of the Clintons." In fact, most of the people who I talked to during the primaries agonized over which candidate to choose (Hillary or Obama). We had an "embarrassment of riches," as Donna Brazille once stated, in terms of candidates.
The Clintons and the Obamas have been on the same team since June 3rd. I support Hillary Clinton for secretary of state.