Susan Rice, the US ambassador to the UN, has withdrawn her candidacy for the position of US Secretary of State. Citing her reason to the president, she stated that "I am now convinced that the confirmation process would be lengthy, disruptive and costly - to you [President Obama] and to our most pressing national and international priorities." Ms. Rice lost public favor, especially among the GOP, following her incorrect initial response to the 9/11/2012 attack on the US consulate in Libya. Although she acknowledged that she had made a mistake in stating that the attack had been the result of protests over an anti-Islam film, she still gained a bit of a bad reputation from the incident. However, President Obama did defend her from criticism of her ability to serve as Secretary of State. He claims that, regardless of her mistake, she is still fully capable of serving in this position, thanks to her "character and commitment."
The president's support didn't seem to be enough, though, not when faced with strong opposition and a significant past mistake.
So what do you think? Is this an example of Americans fixating too much on simple mistakes? Was the president right to focus more on individual traits rather than experiences where error has led to incident? Or should we only support politicians that have spotless track records? And what about international relations--how would Susan Rice becoming Secretary of State worked out globally after this incident?
4 comments:
Historically, releasing false information to the public is something with which Republicans are very familiar. Perhaps this is not an accurate indication of the behavior of the Republicans who are currently criticizing Rice, but it does inevitably make their total outrage seem somewhat hypocritical. While this does not excuse Rice from the mistake that she made, I believe that the president was right in maintaining his support for Rice, as the many qualities that made her a qualified candidate for Secretary of State should hold more weight than her one mistake. Still, Rice made a respectable decision by refusing the position as it probably would cause a "disruptive" process.
I think that Rice's decision to end her candidacy for the position was extremely noble. She seems to have withdrawn out of respect for Obama and to decrease partisanship and arguments in the upper echelons of the U.S. government. I do not think that this is representative of "Americans' fixating on a single mistake, it is representative of Republican officials excessively fixating on this minor mistake. In actuality, Rice's mistake should not cost her a job opportunity that she is qualified for. But if this issue is to be blown out of proportion, she did the right thing by withdrawing her candidacy.
I agree with David that Rice's decision made her actions noble, especially considering that she would most likely be confirmed, unlike how she claimed that the process would be "lengthy". The Senate Majority leader Harry Reid felt confident that he could have kept the Democrats in line, and only needs 5 additional Republican senators to approve the case. Rice has made some mistakes throughout her career, but that doesn't make her unqualified. Such events make me wonder if the Senate's power to confirm presidential appointment is somewhat excessive. Perhaps the more logical approach is to weaken the Senate's power to block presidential appointment (so that reasonable, qualified appointment would not be blocked) and strengthen the Senate's power to get rid of a cabinet member after the member has been found inept?
It is unfortunate that Rice had to end her candidacy run due to all the news about one mistake. Unfortunately President Obama's support was not enough to keep her in the running, but John Kerry is still a good option.
What I found interesting was something I heard on the Rachel Maddow show regarding Susan Rice for Secretary of State. The republicans seemed to NOT favor her, and rather favor John Kerry for the position pretty early on. Rachel Maddow attributed this to the idea that with John Kerry leaving his seat in Massachusetts, this would set the stage for Scott Brown to return, who was recently ousted by Elizabeth Warren. Whether this is a bit conspiratorial or not, all is fair in government and politics?
This article here does speak about Scott Brown's possible return to the position emptied by John Kerry http://www.policymic.com/articles/20952/john-kerry-secretary-of-state-nomination-scott-brown-return-may-be-imminent
Post a Comment