Obama Can Do Better Than Rice at State
Dana Milbank thinks she's an 'undiplomatic diplomat'
By John Johnson, Newser Staff
Posted Nov 17, 2012 11:22 AM CST
Susan Rice, ambassador to the U.N., speaks on "Face the Nation" on Sept. 16, 2012.   (AP Photo/CBS News, Chris Usher)

(Newser) – President Obama has decided to stick up for UN ambassador Susan Rice in a big way, and Dana Milbank of the Washington Post thinks that's too bad. John McCain is right about one thing, he argues: "She is ill-equipped to be the nation’s top diplomat." It's not because of Benghazi, however, but rather her "undiplomatic" ways, even by DC standards. Milbank runs down a list of her past run-ins with the likes of Hillary Clinton, Richard Holbrooke (she once flipped him off at a meeting), and McCain, and concludes that she'd be a lousy pick to run the State Department.

If the president decides to go with her anyway, it might not matter: She's made so many enemies in both parties, she would probably lose the confirmation vote. "The nation’s top diplomat needs to show more sensitivity and independence—traits Clinton has demonstrated in abundance," he writes. "Obama can do better at State than Susan Rice." Read the full column here.

More From Newser
My Take on This Story
To report an error on this story,
notify our editors.
Obama Can Do Better Than Rice at State is...
Show results without voting
You Might Like
Showing 3 of 33 comments
Nov 28, 2012 12:38 PM CST
I am going to be politically incorrect! Obama should stop his "brand" of Chicago-Politics and seriously get down to doing the real business of America in this second term! Susan Rice already has had a very shaky record and was the one, as a matter of fact, who dissuaded Bill Clinton against MadelaIne Albright, to get Bin Laden when the Sudan offered him to the US in 1996-97... Besides and most important, you can have a weird looking US president, but the Secretary of State is a whole different package deal, base on allure, appearnce, competance and know-how, who can develop and nurture sensitive lerdership relationships around the world (much more difficult for a woman alltogether), with ideally a military background and a personality that transcends authority, though diplomatic! In this day and age, above all with the hot-beds of the Middle-East, a MAN would be the prime sellection with all the attributes cited above: this is one function where the messenger may sometimes be as important if not more than the message! Cultural perception and differences should also be taken into account in many area of the globe where female roles in leaderships are de facto nott acceptable and plain even, rejected....Let's change the world syndrome in MANY cases is just not going to work, period! Mr. Obama, as a "feminist" president probably influenced by his environment, has littered the govt with appointees not forcicly based on merit, but as his Chicago-style political favors as trade-in deals often granted pre-selectively by the subjects! Susan Rice in appearance looks more like a high-school teacher ( not even College!), that shouldn't hold the reigns of US foreign policy, and doesn't have the "presence" required for the job. John Kerry is a much more viable candidate, although nt forcibly a 1st choice, as an illustration of uncomparable qualifications between the two! And no: I am not a sexist! My wife would attest to that fact without reservation...
Nov 18, 2012 2:58 PM CST
bo can do better but he will not! i vote for snoorkie for head of state! snooki? what ever. bet bo got him some rice on the side!
Nov 18, 2012 2:46 PM CST
We already had "Rice" . how about "Wheat" , "Weed" or "Turkey" ?? Or whom ever wins the lottery like H.C. did. Why does it have to be another veroscious woman?