In 2009, there were stories that HRC wanted career diplomats in cities like London and Rome instead of people who were politically connected. In fact, as POLITICAL people were appointed by Bill Clinton for 8 years, the whispered complaint was because they were Obama people - not hers. Sussman, the London ambassador was a big financial person for both Kerry and Obama. He was from Chicago, with a home on Nantucket. He suggested JK check out this young state Senator who was then trying to get the Democratic nomination. JK saw him - and by then the favorite for that nomination was out and Obama was likely to win. After he won the Senate nomination, JK asked him to give that speech. The Rome ambassador, who speaks fluent Italian and whose dad administered the Marshall Plan in Rome when he was young, is JK's best friend and former brother-in law, David Thorne. (In fact, if you look at the prime European posts, most have JK connections - which was obvious in the 2009 confirmations. This makes sense as when JK opted out, most of his fundraisers went to Obama - and these posts were their reward.)
It is true that HRC brought in people from the Clinton administration - like Jack Lew, but there were others like Samantha Powers, who were clearly not HRC people. There ARE people that JK brought in - like David Wade, his Senate chief of staff and Frank Lowenstein, the son of Allard Lowenstein, who JK had as a foreign policy adviser in 2004 and then on his Senate staff.
I assume that JK will keep more of the political State Department people than HRC did. The reason is obvious. HRC replaced REPUBLICANS. JK is taking over from HRC. I doubt he would fire anyone who is doing a good job - and they might, in fact, be the same people that he would have hired had he come in in 2009. They are Democratic foreign policy people.
I do think the comment on positions not being filled yet is a problem, but the reality is that he has been there 2 months. It is likely that many left when Clinton did -- or if the positions were empty earlier, why not question why HRC did not fill them? (Could be she thought it presumptuous as she was leaving or it could be that for the last months, she was really incapacitated more than we were told.) I would think that it might be hard to define the positions, find candidates, do background checks needed for clearance and hire people. IF FP is correct that JK has less freedom to pick them -- it also means that he shares responsibility with the WH in filling these positions. One thing to remember is that it is likely WORSE to pick someone who is not good in haste rather than to pick people more slowly.
FP is not at all RW - I think the particular writer might have an agenda with that comment, but I think what I said in the last paragraph more likely.
= new reply since forum marked as read
. She is going to be singing at a local Gospel Brunch. Good tease.
), and the rest are men. That is a shame, if she were to run Pressley would be the only woman.
