Secretary Of State

Presidential Candidate Losers Become Secretaries Of State

If one cannot win the White House, there is always the consolation prize of being the leader of the Presidential cabinet, as Secretary of State.

So we see a distinguished list of Presidential candidate losers who took on the most important and most publicized cabinet agency, the State Department. What follows is the list of these distinguished public servants and the national election that they lost.

Henry Clay (1824) was Secretary of State under John Quincy Adams.

Daniel Webster (1836) was Secretary of State under William Henry Harrison, John Tyler, and Millard Fillmore.

Lewis Cass (1848) was Secretary of State under James Buchanan.

James G. Blaine (1884) was Secretary of State under James Garfield, Chester Alan Arthur, and Benjamin Harrison.

William Jennings Bryan (1896, 1900, 1908) was Secretary of State under Woodrow Wilson.

Charles Evans Hughes (1916) was Secretary of State under Warren G. Harding and Calvin Coolidge.

John Kerry (2004) was Secretary of State under Barack Obama.

Secretary Of State: More Prominent Public Figures Historically Than Presidency!

The Secretary of State serves at the will of the President of the United States, and its ranks have included future Presidents; Presidential candidates who were Secretary of State and later lose the Presidency; Presidential losers who then become Secretary of State; and Presidential contenders who do not get nominated for President, but later become Secretary of State. The Secretary of State also is often a great public figure who becomes notable for his background, without having sought the Presidency. Witness the following:

Presidents who were Secretary of State—Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, James Monroe, John Quincy Adams, Martin Van Buren, James Buchanan

Presidential candidates who were Secretary of State and later lose the Presidency—Henry Clay, James G. Blaine

Presidential Losers who then become Secretary of State—Henry Clay, Daniel Webster, Lewis Cass, James G. Blaine, William Jennings Bryan, Charles Evans Hughes, John Kerry

Presidential contenders who do not get nominated for President, but later become Secretary of State—John C. Calhoun, William Seward, Edmund Muskie, Hillary Clinton.

Great public figures notable for their background, without having sought the Presidency, but become Secretary of State—John Marshall, Edward Everett, Hamilton Fish, William Evarts, Richard Olney, John Sherman, John Hay, Elihu Root, Robert Lansing, Frank Kellogg, Henry Stimson, Cordell Hull, James F. Byrnes, George C. Marshall, Dean Acheson, John Foster Dulles, Dean Rusk, Henry Kissinger, Cyrus Vance, George P. Shultz, James Baker, Warren Christopher, Madeleine Albright, Colin Powell, Condoleezza Rice.

So 42 of the 68 people who have served as Secretary of State are prominent in American history, while some of our 43 Presidents have NOT been notable in their careers or in their Presidency!

Two Experienced National Presidential Campaigners Who Could Challenge Hillary Clinton For Democratic Presidential Nomination: Al Gore And Jerry Brown!

The basic belief that goes around in political circles is that Hillary Clinton has the Democratic Presidential nomination for the asking, and has more experience and background than anyone who could possibly run against her in the primaries, with the major exception of Vice President Joe Biden!

But it is also noted that, actually, there are two very experienced Democrats who have run for President before, along with Hillary and Joe, and yet few are paying any attention to these two men!

I am talking about former Vice President Al Gore, who lost the Presidency in 2000 to George W. Bush, despite having won the national popular vote by about 540,000, but losing the contested election in Florida in the Supreme Court case of Bush V. Gore. Also, Gore sought the Presidency in 1988, before losing the nomination to Michael Dukakis.

I am also referring here to three time Democratic Presidential seeker, California Governor Jerry Brown, who sought the nomination in 1976 and again in 1980 against Jimmy Carter, and against Bill Clinton in 1992!

Both are tested, although both are from “long ago” in many people’s minds, since Gore has never tried for public office since 2000, and sixteen years is a very long time in politics. One could say that Hillary and Joe are also from “long ago”, but they have continued to hold public office consistently since the new century began, with Hillary only “retiring” in 2013 to write her memoir on her years as Secretary of State!

Jerry Brown goes back much further having been Governor of California at age 35, serving from 1975 to 1983; then later being Oakland Mayor and California Attorney General; and then returning to the Governorship 28 years after leaving it, and becoming the oldest Governor in the history of the state in 2011, and now running for a second term at age 76.

There have been rumors that Brown would love to run again, and dog the Clintons, as he did Jimmy Carter. It would be ironic if he was to challenge Hillary as he did her husband in 1992!

Of course, Brown would be nearly 79 were he to become President in 2017, and Al Gore would be nearly 69, just five months younger than Hillary Clinton, while Joe Biden would be 74 at the time of the inauguration!

One might say that having all these “old folks” running or considering the Presidency is disturbing, and add to that mix, two liberals who are rumored to run, If Hillary chooses not to run, or possibly even if she does—Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren, who would be 67 on Inauguration Day, and Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders (technically a Socialist), who would be 75.

While we are at it, why not add Secretary of State John Kerry, the 2004 Democratic Presidential nominee, to the list, with him being 73 if elected to the Presidency in 2016!

These people, all seven of them, represent a lot of talent and experience and brilliance, but ranging from 67 to 79 is NOT a good trend, particularly with the strong likelihood that the Republican Party will nominate someone much younger, probably by a full generation, or close to it, in years!

The Dominance Of Political Family Dynasties

It now seems clear that Hillary Clinton will be running for the Presidency, and that she is very likely to become the 45th President of the United States, and its first woman President.

Every poll imaginable shows her far in the lead against any Democratic challenger, including Vice President Joe Biden, who is the only other Democrat to even score more than a couple of percent in any poll, but about 50-60 points behind the former First Lady, former Senator, and former Secretary of State.

And every poll also shows that NO Republican comes anywhere near Hillary Clinton, with the only one who seemed to compete, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, rapidly collapsing in the midst of the “Bridgegate ” and associated scandals, with the issue of funding of projects with federal money for Hurricane Sandy the more dangerous scandal for Christie and his future.

Hillary Clinton enters the 2016 campaign almost as if she was an incumbent, and really, no one has ever been in as enviable a position as she seems to be. But this means that she must not take anything for granted, run hard and vigorously and not assume victory as Republican nominee Thomas E. Dewey thought in 1948, before he lost in an upset victory by President Harry Truman.

Hillary Clinton must be able and willing to take as much flak and attacks on everything imaginable in her record and life story, and she does seem to be tough enough to deal with that, plus the inevitable death threats which will be visited upon her at a rate probably at least equivalent to Abraham Lincoln, and possibly at the same astronomical rate of President Barack Obama, who faces, approximately, 30 death threats in some form per day!

Many might think that a person who will be 69 and three months of age at the time of the inauguration, making her the second oldest inaugurated President in American history, after Ronald Reagan, who was about eight months older at his first inauguration, would think twice about spending the next ten years of her life, until age 77 and three months, if she served two complete terms, with the pressure cooker and stresses of running for President, and dealing with an increasingly complex and troubled world and nation. But she seems game for the challenge, and would certainly come into office more experienced and better equipped for the Presidency than almost any occupant of the Oval Office we have seen.

But her likely accession to the Presidency, with the full team support and financial backing of many Obama Administration and campaign functionaries, is a true sign that Vice President Joe Biden should give up the quest for the White House, as he is about five years older, and would be the oldest first term President, and if he were to serve two terms, would be past 82 at the end. This author is a great Joe Biden fan, but it does seem time for party unity, in the midst of Republican chaos and anarchy, for him to accept reality, and as soon as Hillary Clinton announces, to be gracious and announce he will not challenge her for the nomination.

There is no likelihood of any Democrat bothering to challenge her, particularly if Biden drops out, and the long range shot by former Montana Governor Brian Schweitzer would only be like a Don Quixote battling a windmill!

If Hillary Clinton succeeds in her quest, she will have made the Clinton dynasty the most dominant in modern American history, without any debate. Consider that her husband, Bill Clinton affected the nation from the time he ran in 1992 until he left in 2001, followed by Hillary as Senator from New York for eight years, and then four years as Secretary of State, making for a total of 21 years, now followed by two years in private life, but ten years into the future of campaigning, and possible two terms in the Presidency, which would make for a grand total of 31 years of national influence. And even these two years of private life, Hillary Clinton remains a national figure of great respect and renown, so one could say 33 years, a third of a century, the Clintons may have been the dominant influence in American history–between 1992 and 2025!

The dominance of the Clintons is only matched recently by the Bushes, with father George H. W. on the political radar from his 1980 challenge to Ronald Reagan until his forced retirement in 1993, after losing to Bill Clinton. Then, his son George W. came on the scene as Texas Governor in 1995 and son Jeb as Florida Governor starting in 1999. When George W. ran in 2000, and then won two terms, leaving in 2009, it meant a total of 14 years of senior Bush, followed by 14 years of junior Bush, for a total of 28 years. Ironically, if Jeb were now to run, which his mother does not advise him to do, and which Speaker of the House John Boehner thinks he should do, and were he to win, he could surpass the potential Clinton family record!

Compared to the Clintons and the Bushes, no other family dominates, as the Kennedy generation of John and Robert only lasted 8 years, and after Ted Kennedy lost his only real chance for the Presidency in 1980 against Jimmy Carter in the primaries, it meant a total of maybe 20 years of Kennedy dominance, although Ted did stay as an influential Senator until his death in 2009.

The only other family worthy of mention are the Roosevelts, if one counts Teddy and Franklin as part of the same dynasty, although different parties and generations completely. But even TR and FDR were only dominant for a total of 20 years combined, although TR remained a national figure for the ten years after his Presidency until his death.

It would certainly be ironic if we ended up with Hillary Clinton and Jeb Bush opposing each other in 2016, as a battle of the titans, the two families who have more dominated American politics than any other in American history!

Robert Gates’ Criticism Of Joe Biden On Distrusting Military Is A Plus!

Former Defense Secretary Robert Gates has made news with his memoir, in which he makes some strong criticism of President Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

And yet, he is positive overall on Obama, and thinks both Biden and Clinton would probably make good Presidents.

Most interesting is his criticism of Biden, that he has been critical of military leadership, and that he has, according to Gates, never been right in the past 40 years on any national security matter. And yet he would make a good President, so figure that!

To say that Biden has been wrong for the past 40 years makes us think that, supposedly, every President since Nixon has been right on national security and defense matters. And to say that Biden has NEVER been right is totally preposterous! And what is the record on Presidents since JFK?

Was Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush I, Clinton, and particularly Bush II, REALLY right all of the time? Give me a break!

When one thinks back, the military leadership misled John F. Kennedy on the Bay of Pigs.

The military leadership misled Lyndon B. Johnson on Vietnam.

The military leadership was wrong on Vietnam under Nixon, as well.

In the brief tenure of Gerald Ford, thank goodness no major flub by the military leadership.

The military leadership misled Jimmy Carter on the Iranian hostage military rescue attempt.

The military leadership misled Ronald Reagan on dealing with “freedom fighters” in Afghanistan, and in dealing with Iraq’s leader Saddam Hussein.

The military leadership misled George H. W. Bush on Somalian intervention.

The military leadership misled Bill Clinton on dealing with Al Qaeda.

The military leadership misled George W. Bush on Afghanistan and Iraq.

So if Barack Obama was skeptical and IS skeptical about the military leadership in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, that was good!

And if Joe Biden had, and has, a healthy dose of skepticism about the military leadership, that is VERY GOOD!

And that means Joe Biden would be an excellent successor to Barack Obama, because he questions, has doubts, does not worship the military leadership!

That is the kind of President we have now, and need, in the future!

Thank goodness for who we have in our top two positions in our national government, men with a dose of skepticism, with the reminder that we have a civilian government, not one run by the military, and that is what has kept us free, and will continue to do so!

Misogyny And The Republican Party’s Doom, Short Term And Long Term

The Republican Party has displayed, again and again, its total lack of respect for women in so many ways!

Not only have they worked to deny women their basic human rights to their own bodies, and had candidates and office holders who debate what rape is.

Not only have they now worked in Texas and other southern states to deny women who are married or divorced the ability to vote by making an issue of their use of maiden names and married names that do not match on IDs, so as to take away the right to vote. Such is the case with a Texas judge recently challenged because she has an ID with her middle name but has also used her married name on other documents and in public, and is well known, and yet is being told they do not match, so she should be denied the right to vote, although never challenged for the past half century! And this is just the tip of the iceberg!

And not only these examples above, but also the total lack of respect the Republicans have for women who serve in the Obama Administration. So we have had nasty attacks on the honesty and competence of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton; former United Nations Ambassador and now National Security Adviser Susan Rice; and Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius.

These three women have devoted their lives to public service in magnificent ways, and are suffering from misogynistic attacks of a party only too willing to attack, while not being embarrassed by the asinine behavior of such women, including Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann, but not limited just to those two women!

The GOP is dooming its future, as already, the majority of women vote Democratic, so continuation of their misogynistic attitudes is a losing strategy, short term and long term!

“Crossing The Aisle”: BiPartisanship Of America’s Presidents From FDR To Obama

A common theme in American history is the “crossing of the aisle”, the bipartisanship encouraged by just about every American President, and the utilizing of leaders of the opposition party to help make his administration successful.

Franklin D. Roosevelt had Henry Stimson as his Secretary of War from 1940-45, with Stimson having served as Secretary of State under Herbert Hoover. He also had Frank Knox as Secretary of the Navy from 1940-1944, who had been the Republican Vice Presidential nominee in 1936.

Harry Truman had Warren Austin as his United Nations Ambassador from 1947 to 1953.

Dwight D. Eisenhower had Robert Anderson in various roles, as Secretary of the Navy, Deputy Secretary of Defense, and Secretary of the Treasury, during his eight years in office from 1953 to 1961.

John F. Kennedy had Robert McNamara as his Secretary of Defense and D. Douglas Dillon as his Secretary of the Treasury and Henry Cabot Lodge, Jr. (who he had defeated for the Senate in 1952, as his Ambassador to South Vietnam.

Lyndon B. Johnson kept on McNamara, Dillon and Lodge as close advisers in his administration, after he succeeded to the Presidency upon Kennedy’s death.

Richard Nixon had Sargent Shriver as Ambassador to France, John Connally as Secretary of the Treasury, and Daniel Patrick Moynihan as Ambassador to India.

Gerald Ford had Moynihan stay on as Ambassador to India, and then as Ambassador to the United Nations.

Jimmy Carter had James Schlesinger as Secretary of Energy, and Lawrence Eagleburger as Ambassador to Yugoslavia.

Ronald Reagan has Mike Mansfield at Ambassador to Japan, Jeane Kirkpatrick as Ambassador to the United Nations, William Bennett as Secretary of Education, and Paul Volcker as Chairman of the Federal Reserve.

George H. W. Bush had Richard Stone as Ambassador to Denmark, and Robert Strauss as Ambassador to the Soviet Union.

Bill Clinton had Alan Greenspan as Chairman of the Federal Reserve and William Cohen as Secretary of Defense.

George W. Bush had Norman Mineta as Secretary of Transportation.

And Barack Obama has had Robert Gates as Secretary of Defense, Ray LaHood as Secretary of Transportation, Jon Huntsman as Ambassador to China, John McHugh as Secretary of the Army, Ben Bernanke as Chairman of the Federal Reserve, and now has pending the nomination of Chuck Hagel to be Secretary of Defense.

Notice that Obama has had more members of the opposition party in his administration than any President!

As John Kerry Becomes Secretary Of State, An Assessment Of The Most Influential Secretaries Of State In American History

With Hillary Clinton leaving the State Department, and John Kerry becoming the 68th Secretary of State, it is a good time to assess who are the most influential Secretaries of State we have had in American history.

Notice I say “most influential”, rather than “best”, as that is a better way to judge diplomatic leadership in the State Department.

Without ranking them, which is very difficult, we will examine the Secretaries of State who have had the greatest impact, in chronological order:

Thomas Jefferson (1789-1793) under President George Washington—set the standard for the department, and was probably the most brilliant man ever to head the State Department.

John Quincy Adams (1825-1829) under President James Monroe—brought about the Monroe Doctrine, treaties with Canada, and the acquisition of Florida.

William H. Seward (1861-1869) under Presidents Abraham Lincoln and Andrew Johnson—brought about the neutrality of Great Britain and France in the Civil War, and purchased Alaska from Czarist Russia, a fortunate development.

Hamilton Fish (1869-1877) under President Ulysses S. Grant—involved in many diplomatic issues in Latin America, had America become more engaged in Hawaii, and settled differences with Great Britain, and often considered the major bright spot in the tragic Grant Presidency.

James G. Blaine (1881, 1889-1892) under Presidents James A. Garfield and Chester Alan Arthur briefly, and full term under President Benjamin Harrison—helped to bring about eventual takeover of Hawaii, and promoted the concept of a canal in Central America.

John Hay (1898-1905) under Presidents William McKinley and Theodore Roosevelt—-involved in the issues after the Spanish American War, including involvement in the Philippines, Cuba, Puerto Rico, and Guam, and a major influence over TR’s diplomatic initiatives in his first term.

Elihu Root (1905-1909) under President Theodore Roosevelt—-a great influence in TR’s growing involvement in world affairs in his second term in office.

Robert Lansing (1915-1920) under President Woodrow Wilson—a major player in American entrance in World War I and at the Versailles Peace Conference.

Charles Evan Hughes (1921-1925) under Presidents Warren G. Harding and Calvin Coolidge—-had major role in Washington Naval Agreements in 1922.

Henry Stimson (1929-1933) under President Herbert Hoover—-was a major critic of Japanese expansion, as expressed in the Stimson Doctrine of 1932.

Cordell Hull (1933-1944) under President Franklin D. Roosevelt—-was the longest lasting Secretary of State, nearly the whole term of FDR, and very much involved in all of the President’s foreign policy decisions.

Dean Acheson (1949-1953) under President Harry Truman—-involved in the major decisions of the early Cold War, including the Korean War intervention.

John Foster Dulles (1953-1959) under President Dwight D. Eisenhower—had controversial views on Cold War policy with the Soviet Union, including “massive retaliation”.

Dean Rusk (1961-1969) under Presidents John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson—highly controversial advocate of the Vietnam War escalation, but served under the complete terms of two Presidents, and never backed away from his views on the Cold War.

Henry Kissinger (1973-1977) under Presidents Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford—-easily one of the most influential figures in the shaping of foreign policy in American history, earlier having served as National Security Adviser.

George Shultz, (1982-1989) under President Ronald Reagan—-very close adviser to the President on his major foreign policy initiatives.

James Baker (1989-1992) under President George H. W. Bush—very significant in Persian Gulf War and end of Cold War policies.

Madeleine Albright (1997-2001) under President Bill Clinton—-first woman Secretary of State and played major role in many issues that arose.

Colin Powell (2001-2005) under President George W. Bush—-involved in the justification of the Iraq War based on Weapons of Mass Destruction, which undermined his reputation because of the lack of evidence on WMDs.

Condoleezza Rice (2005-2009) under President George W. Bush—second woman Secretary of State and intimately involved in policy making.

Hillary Clinton (2009-2013) under President Barack Obama—third woman Secretary of State, and hailed by most as a major contributor to Obama’s foreign policy initiatives.

This is a list of 21 out of the 68 Secretaries of State, but also there are 15 other Secretaries of State who were influential historical figures, including:

John Marshall
James Madison
James Monroe
Henry Clay
Martin Van Buren
Daniel Webster
John C. Calhoun
James Buchanan
Lewis Cass
William Jennings Bryan
George Marshall
Cyrus Vance
Edmund Muskie
Alexander Haig
Warren Christopher

So a total of 36 out of 68 Secretaries of State have been major figures in American history, and contributed to the diplomatic development of the United States in world affairs!

A First In A Presidency: The President, Vice President, Secretary Of State, And Secretary Of Defense All Former Senators!

For the first time in the history of the Presidency, we have now the unique circumstance of having four former United States Senators about to be serving at the same time as President, Vice President, Secretary of State, and Secretary of Defense!

The fact that most Senators aspire to be in one of those four positions is belied by the fact of just how rare that is, and never have all four positions been held by former Senators whose next public position was to serve in one of those posts.

Barack Obama is the former Senator from Illinois. Joe Biden is the former Senator from Delaware. John Kerry soon will be the former Senator from Massachusetts. And Chuck Hagel, when confirmed, will have the distinction of having been a former Senator from Nebraska.

These four men are a distinguished team, with all having sought the Presidency, except Hagel, who had thoughts of it, but had no chance in a Republican party that he realized, as time went by, was no longer the party he had believed in, based on its past.

Pending Nomination Of Chuck Hagel As Pentagon Head A Good Move In Many Ways!

The pending nomination of former Nebraska Republican Senator Chuck Hagel to head the Defense Department is a good move in many ways.

It demonstrates that Barack Obama will not allow criticism and opposition to stand in the way of which person he wants to head the Pentagon.

It shows that Obama has faith in Hagel, a man of strong opinions, sometimes controversial, to clean up defense waste in the Pentagon.

It shows that Obama is willing to put into that office a man who is not a knee jerk “hawk”, and would prefer to avoid armed conflict if at all possible, such as with Iran.

It shows that Obama will not let John McCain and other “hawks” and neoconservatives promote an agenda of constant war, and the extension of our commitment to Afghanistan.

It shows that Obama is willing to back a man who simply made it clear that while we will always defend Israel, we will not allow any pressure group such as AIPAC (American-Israel Public Affairs Committee) to wield undue influence on American foreign policy.

Hagel is a man of his own mind, but also loyal to Obama, who he backed against his own party’s choice of McCain in 2008, and will be a good team player with Senator John Kerry, the choice for Secretary of State.

And both men, Vietnam veterans, with Hagel wounded, truly understand and appreciate the effects of war, and will work together in a smart and effective way to promote a foreign and defense policy that fits the second decade of the 21st century!

Yes, there will be opposition, including those who are upset at past anti gay comments by Hagel, but he has grown on the issue and will enforce the changes that have been made on this matter in the military, and the President is entitled to who he wants in his cabinet, and after a battle, which is nothing new for Obama, he will gain Hagel as his Defense Secretary, and the country will be better off for it!

Finally, recognize that many former military and naval leaders, and former Secretaries of State and Secretaries of Defense, and National Security Advisers under earlier Republican and Democratic Presidents, back Hagel, so let the politics of the Senate play themselves out, but at the end, we will have Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel, another Republican in the Pentagon, as Robert Gates was in the first two years of the Barack Obama Presidency!