Is being First Lady executive experience? Depends on the Lady.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

Being first lady did not prepare Maimie Eisenhower to be President. Being first lady did prepare Eleanor Roosevelt to be President.

Hillary Clinton was not the national hostess. She was the closest adviser to the President of the United States for eight years... the closest adviser on domestic affairs, foreign affairs and politics. Hillary lacks her husbands people-skills and people-insights, but she is smarter than Bill... a fact he has always recognized and relied upon.

We do not have an official office of "President's closest adviser." Different Presidents fill that role differently. For Bush 41 (and to a large degree for Ronald Reagan) the man was James Baker. Baker served as both Sec State and Sec Treas at various times. What prepared him for those jobs? Serving as Bush 41s' campaign head in 2000 and as Reagan's Chief of Staff.

LBJ's indispensable man was Clark Clifford. Clifford wasn't even in government for most of the time he served as the most influential man in America. When he was made Sec Def in 1968 nobody said he was just a corporate lawyer who had been out of government since 1950 and whose highest military credential was a stint as "Assistant to the President's Naval Advisor", for Truman twenty years earlier. (His other government experience, a stint as white house counsel, certainly isn't a usual credential for a Secretary of Defense) He was a brilliant man who had seen everything there was to see in Washington, and knew and was respected by everyone surrounding the levers of power.

JFK's indispensable man was Bobby. On paper, Bobby was Attorney General (despite having few major credentials for the job other than being who Jack trusted), yet during the Cuban missile crisis Bobby was the top adviser, and the only man JFK trusted to engage in direct back-channel negotiations with the Russians. (An unusual role for AG)

A highly intelligent person who serves for eight years as a president's indispensable right-hand has unique and deep preparation for the presidency. Had calamity thrust James Baker (circa 1984), Clark Clifford or Bobby Kennedy into the presidency nobody would have panicked over their lack of experience... the reaction would have been, "thank God we have someone smart who knows the ropes."

A note: Hillary and Bobby Kennedy have almost the same credentials. Family member and indispensable right-hand to the President, followed by a stint as a Senator from New York.

The only reason Hillary doesn't have exactly the same credentials as RFK is that after JFK a law was passed to prevent a president from putting a family member in the cabinet. Bill would have been delighted to make Hillary AG if it were allowed. (Remember how he wanted a female AG and burned through all those candidates before getting stuck with Janet Reno? God knows he would have rather had Hillary in that job, and she was a qualified for it as a lot of previous AGs)

[maddiejoan]

1. Thanks

For bringing this to attention.

Wonderful post and I highly agree.


K&R

[cali]

28. I don't agree that her time as First Lady gave here executive experience

I do think it gave her valuable experience, but not executive experience. The buck never stopped there.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

34. experience, but not executive responsibility

You're a smart person, Cali.

If you stood over the President's shoulder for eight years following everything that went on and being consulted as a peer on every major decision, you would have remarkable experience in what a president does behind the scenes, and a wealth of learning experiences about the job.

Your experience wouldn't just be a familiarity with a president's formal functions, but a lot of practical experience with how a president gets good advice, deals with congress, etc..

An assistant director knows more about directing a film than anyone except a director. Some folks are career ADs because they lack the confidence or force of personality to have the final burden of responsibility or exert ultimate authority. Other ADs move on to be directors.

If you were hiring a director and no director were available you'd be crazy to hire a producer over an AD. The AD may indeed fail, but hs an experiential inside track to success.

She may not have the personality to be a good president, but it's not like anyone in the field on either side obviously does. Since nobody in the race has experience as President, I find the nuts and bolts intellectual experience with the job non-trivial.

[Captain Hilts]

2. JFK once told JK Galbraith that the nature of the sex act precluded women from...

having what it took to be a true leader. Galbraith begged to differ.

JFK said, "okay, name me one woman who's got what it takes to be president."

Galbraith said, "Eleanor Roosvelt."

JFK said, "okay, but name me another!"

Chalk one up for Eleanor. Too bad she never got the chance to be Gov. of NY.

[Clintonista2]

3. Thoughtful and insightful post per usual, Kurt. K&R.

[Adelante]

4. Well said, K&H nt

[racaulk]

5. Excellent post!

K&R

[Tom Rinaldo]

6. Well Stated...

I remember when Bill Clinton was campainging the first time to become President him telling the public that they would get a twofer if they elected him; a vote for Bill Clinton would get both Bill and Hillary Clinton working for them in the White House. When I get a moment I might try doing a google search for the exact quote. Obviously Hillary Clinton has always been Bill Clinton's political partner, he has never made a secret of it. And Hillary's political service has to be backdated to include working beside him through three terms as Governor of Arkansas.

There are plenty of arguments that can be made for not supporting Hillary Clinton. There are arguments to be made for not supporting Bill Clinton, and many of the arguments against both of them are quite similar. But not to acknowledge the political experience that Hillary Clinton has is simply wrong.

[MannyGoldstein]

7. The Proof Of The Pudding Is In The Eating - And This Pudding Tastes Awful

She voted the wrong way on the Iraq War, the most important Senate vote in decades. Most Congressional Democrats voted against it - she voted for it.

You can point to any experience you want, but by that vote alone she has proven that she is clearly unfit to be a senator, let alone president!

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[durrrty libby]

8. K & R Well Done

[Kolesar]

10. Hey, I liked Janet Reno!

[emilyg]

11. Thanks.

[tinrobot]

12. First lady Edith Wilson...

Practically became president when her husband, Woodrow Wilson, suffered a stroke.

[mrfixit]

13. HRC in comparison to Mamie Eisenhower or Elanor Roosevelt? Please.

The Bobby Kennedy comparison is even MORE ridiculous...and HRC as Attourney General? Hahahahaheeheeheeheeheehohohoho...

During eight years of the Clinton Administration, all she ever did for me was make me feel sorry for the BigDog for having married her.

Thanks for the daily giggle.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

14. This is the worst sort of sexist drivel

The only difference in seriousness between Hillary Clinton and Bobby Kennedy is that one was the president's brother and the other was the president's wife. Since we chose our spouses but not our brothers (Billy Carter!) it is hard to see why brother is a superior credential, aside from being male.

It is easy to argue that RFK had a slightly better resume, since he worked as a prosecuter and had a long senate counsel career, but at the same time, RFK was never involved in a winning governors race, or five or six terms as governor. (Executive advantage Hillary on that one.)

One can say that Bobby Kennedy was more idealistic, or a better person, or whatever. But what's the non-sexist argument that he was clearly smarter or better qualified?

Both HRC and RFK came out of law school and cut their teeth working on congressional investigations. (RFK's career as a congressional counsel was more distinguished than Hillary's) Both were instrumental in their relatives successive electoral victories. Bobby ran JFK's Senate campaign. Hillary was chief adviser for many gubernatorial campaigns, though for cultural reasons her influence--unlike Bobby's--was down-played in public. (It wouldn't do for a Governor to be so influenced by his wife! egad.)

Both were key players in their respective men's long-shot drives to the WH.

Both were carried into the White House as the closest adviser to a good-looking charming relative. Both wielded unusual influence in the WH outside their formal duties.

After the White House, both were elected Senator from New York, and then ran for President. (Of course Hillary was in the Senate longer than RFK.)

If your suggestion is that Hillary was somehow less intellectually capable to serve as AG than Bobby you are confused by your overt prejudices. Both were tough, ruthless and scary smart people with elite law educations and the respect (often grudging) of most who met them.

[mrfixit]

19. I think that you overlook one thing:

RFK was QUALIFIED.

HRC couldn't even pass the friggin BAR EXAM in Washington D.C., so, unless intimidating voters for Nixon or interning with Gerald Ford qualified her for AG in some way, it's a pretty specious analogy.

RFK didn't ride in on JFK's coattails.

And HRC didn't actually "cut her teeth" working on Congressional investigations. She did only one year as Congressional counsel. She THEN cut her teeth defending CORPORATE interests at Rose Law...

I don't see her as tough, ruthess, or scarey. Rough, toothless and hairy, perhaps. If she was tough, wouldn't she have voted to REFUSE DimSon the power to wage war? Wouldn't she have opposed the Patriot Act? Wouldn't she have stood up to BigPharma, BigInsurance, BigOil, BigEnergy, BigMedia, et. al if she was so ruthless, or scarey?

In my opinion (though I know you will not value it), she is where she is today ONLY because WilliamJ was a popular POTUS.

She has proven, time and time again by her votes, that she is just too friggin' STUPID to be POTUS.

[Hekate]

22. Welcome to DU. Enjoy your stay.

:hi:

Hekate

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

25. If Jack Kennedy were not a popular POTUS RFK would not have been a

Senator for NY in 1966 or a presidential front-runner in 1968.

To say otherwise is absurd. (As would be the suggestion that RFK would have been appointed AG if Jack wasn't making the appointment.)

Saying that does not diminish RFK in any way, unless one buys into the bogus "qualifications" argument that is applied to Hillary. Robert Kennedy might have been the finest man who ever lived but it wouldn't change the fact he never even ran for office before JFK died, and that his national popularity and notoriety were due to JFK.

Of course, one can say that RFK was a big part of making Jack who he was... which is the point. Being a big part of the creation and operation of a popular presidency is, in fact, a qualification.

Hillary may be a rotten human being, but she is neither stupid nor notably unqualified.

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

30. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[earthlover]

23. RFK Attornery General. Hillary Wife. Clearly identical. Sarc

I dare say RFK was a tad more liberal and less of a triangulator.

There are some very idealistic quotes from RFK. I can't imagine Hillary saying them.

"Each time a man stands for an ideal, or acts to improve the lot of others, or strikes out against injustice, he sends a tiny ripple of hope, and crossing each other from a million different centers of energy and daring, those ripples build a current which can sweep down the mightiest walls of oppression and resistance”

“Progress is a nice word. But change is its motivator. And change has its enemies.”

“I believe that, as long as there is plenty, poverty is evil."

“There are t hose who look at things the way they are, and ask why... I dream of things that never were, and ask why not?"

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

24. The point is not to compare the quality of the two, merely their qualifications

I have no doubt RFK was a much greater person than Hillary.

He was, however, not particularly better "qualified" to be president in the way people mean that.

In any event, the whole issue is absurd, since the experience battle is between Hillary and one of the few politicians who is clearly even less experienced than she is... that's what makes it so surreal.

[earthlover]

26. Both obama and hillary have about the same amount of elected experience

However, I am not impressed at what Hillary has learned from her experience! All her experience did not stop her from voting for Iraq and for the kyl-lieberman bill. Clearly, if we want someone with experience we should consider Biden. He was in the Senate before Hillary's husband was even done with his schooling! Put another way, Biden has more experience than hillary, obama and edwards COMBINED!

[SIMPLYB1980]

15. K&R

You should watch out. Posting facts on DU will cause a flame fest.

[saracat]

16. There is no evidence whatsoever that Hillary would have been the tough as nails

crime busting AG Bobby was.She does not in any way have those credentials.She was a corporate wonk lawyer for an influence peddling law firm in Arkansas.And as far as her "allegedly ' being 'smarter" than Bill, who was the one with all the scholarships and who was the Rhodes scholar? And who was it that flunked the DC bar? (to be fair, that is something many young lawyers fail but not those that are being claimed as brilliant.) Clue: it wasn't Bill. Her failure to pass the DC bar was one of the reasons she scuttled her promising career to go to Arkansas.One wonders why she didn't merely retake it.

[JohnnyLib2]

17. Good points, nicely put.

I've wondered, but can't remember, if Bobby Kennedy got the same sort of sneering dismissal from rivals and their followers. To the degree that comparisons of the two hold, the "wife factor" this year seems way out of proportion.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

18. There was much snark about nepotism when he was made AG

But he was so ruthless that it faded quickly, except in Dem-hating circles.

Because the Kennedys became national martyrs it is easy to forget that they were the Clintons of the 1960s... major lightning rods for RW hate. (As in the "wanted" posters for JFK that were up in Dallas when he was shot)

[JohnnyLib2]

20. "...it faded quickly when he became......"

I hold out a lot of hope that the same would happen "when she becomes....."
LOL. Seriously, both the "the wife" and the "experience isn't experience" factors are badly flawed but play to cultural biases. Time for changes!

[earthlover]

29. Calling the kennedys the Clintons of their era is to push one similarity to the absurd

Both kennedys came to oppose Vietnam. It is likely we would not have escalated Vietnam if JFK was not assassinated, he was having big 2nd thoughts about our involvement there. I don't see either as mega-triangulators of the hillary vintage. Bill was a triangulator too, but hillary brings it to a new level. I think both Kennedys were idealistic, whereas the Clintons are more into compromise.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

32. As with the question of RFK's idealism, if I wanted to say the Kennedy brothers were exactly like

the Clintons I would say that.

Noting one similarity between two things without saying they are the same. Fire engines and apples are red, though fire engines make bad pies.

Of course the Kennedy brothers were not just like the Clintons in all things. Jack Kennedy got a lot more tail than Bill Clinton ever dreamed of and Bobby Kennedy's breasts were somewhat smaller than Hillary's. I think Bill and Hillary also "came to oppose Vietnam."

The statement you reference was that Jack and Bobby were similar to the Clintons insofar as they were a dynastic, symbolic duo utterly hated by Republicans in a bitter, partisan way and were lightning rods for RW bile. It is what it is. The Clintons can be the most horrible people to have ever lived and it wouldn't change that observation.

[Hekate]

21. Excellently put, K&H. Hillary, like Eleanor Roosevelt, was in on nearly everything

And as the Hillary-bashers line up to take a swing at your post....

Hekate
Member of the I'm-not-really-for-Hillary-but-I-defend-her-on-DU support group

[lyonn]

31. This all makes sense, except

I don't feel I know in what way and what issues she was involved in. If you are going to run on Bill's Presidency then she should be open with her involvement. She has not let me in on her part in the Clinton presidency, in other words.

At least a Senator or Representative has a record of accomplishments. Being First Lady could be good in that you might have been involved in many important decisions. When she voted for the IWR my stomach rolled. Then I decided she obviously knew more than I did. So far this hasn't been explained to me. Why didn't she shout and bitch when Bush demanded that the inspectors leave Iraq as he was about to attack. That would have been presidential.

Edit: Think G.H.W. Bush vs G.W. Bush???

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

33. That's a valid point. Her contributions or lack there-of are somewhat hidden

I cut her some slack for the cultural fact that her level of involvement had to be hidden for cultural reasons.

A governor or president cannot say, "I am not going to make a decision on this until I talk to my wife." After Bill lost his second Governor run Hillary had to reinvent herself as a house-wife. The next time Bill ran she had his last name, contact lenses (and a baby).

Out of Arkansas, Bill gave her out-front status on health-care and it didn't work out well, so for sensible political reasons, whatever she did subsequently was private, as in Arkansas.

What we do know is that Bill discussed every executive decision with her in Arkansas and the white house, not like a couple talking about their day at work, but as confidants discussing decisions and options. And we know Bill valued her advice above all others... not like Bess Truman's warm common sense, but as serious consultation between peers who were presumed to have equivalent policy expertise.

There was an anecdote in a magazine article about the Clinton's riding in a limo and Bill's talking on the phone or something, and he turns to her and says, "what's the court of first jurisdiction for a dispute between states?" I think that was typical of their partnership... that they addressed each other as professional peers... not at all a typical president-first lady dynamic. (BTW, It's the Supreme Court and Bill was dumb to not know that.)