PORTSMOUTH, N.H. -- Joe Biden is complaining that his foes keep saying he'd be a great secretary of state.
Nothing wrong with that job, he says, but he's running for president. And if he'd be better at foreign policy than his rivals, well, why in the world shouldn't he be president instead of them?
"I ask you a rhetorical question: Are you prepared to vote for anyone — at this moment in our history — as president who is not capable of being secretary of state? Who among my opponents would you consider appointing secretary of state? Seriously. Think about it."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071129/ap_on_el_pr/political_play_of_the_day
In other words, the Democrat front runners are all foreign policy LIGHTWEIGHTS (e.g. Hillary, Obama)
2007-12-01 22:44:42 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
NOTE: I'm no Biden fan, but even a broken clock is right twice a day
2007-12-01 23:30:13 · update #1
Good point.... at least as to what a Secretary of State is supposed to know.... In reality I'd like to see John Bolton in that job... He's likely fire 3/4 of the State Department and might actually get something done without being sabotaged from within.
2007-12-02 01:11:07 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
In the early istory of our nation, Secretery of State was seen as a natural step to gain needed experience before becoming President. (Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, JQ Adams, Van Buren--all were SecState beore being elected POTUS). People tended to vote for somone who had already been Secretary of State. Of course can you imagine Al Haig or Waren Chirstopher as President?
The Democrat frontrunners ARE foreign policy lightweights--but history has also shown us that "experience" is not a requirement for the job--some very experienced men have been dismal presidents and some with no experience to speak of have been fantastic. In some sense its always a crapshoot.
Yes, Biden makes a valid point, but only advisedly so.
2007-12-02 03:35:00 · answer #2 · answered by RTO Trainer 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
The way I see it, the President needs to be an all around kind of player. And the members of his cabinet need to be more focused in a certain area of expertise. I don't know much about Joe Biden, but I'm guessing that other candidates think he is great at foreign policy, but not so great in other areas such as domestic issues. Would someone with a lack of domestic responsibility really make a good President?
2007-12-02 03:52:44 · answer #3 · answered by smellyfoot ™ 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
he's definately operating he has suggested that better than once and is already taking doantions to his campaign. Do i imagine he's a strong candidate? NO!!!!!!! Will he win the democratic nomination? on condition that he kills 0.5 his warring parties and Iwould no longer placed that previous him. If he by some ability wins the nomination will he win the final election? hi President McCain or President Rice, or President Republican someone. If the Democrats want to face a danger Senators Biden, Clinton, and Kerry want to miss about operating. in the different case say to a distinct 4 and probable 8 years of Republicans contained in the white domicile. those of you that want to vote in accordance to what he says on television communicate shows or radio communicate shows for that be counted are what's inaccurate with this united states of america sit down and do your homework discover out who he's as with basically about each baby-kisser tose interviews are packed with lies. those human beings will say some thing to get into workplace and then even as they get in it is going to likely be company as commonly used. Why do you imagine John Kerry lost. He suggested what he concept human beings had to hearken to and that replaced from daily and all of his 2 confronted lies were uncovered to boot as an excellent style of human beings did there homework and positioned out who he somewhat is.
2016-10-25 07:27:37 · answer #4 · answered by Erika 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I do not think a good secretary of state will make a good president. A good sec is a good diplomat. We need leadership in the White House. Two different points.
I also think that he is correct that the democrats in the race are unqualified and inexperienced in foreign policy. Negotiating with people who want to kill you is idiotic.
2007-12-02 02:15:21 · answer #5 · answered by GOPneedsarealconservative 4 · 6⤊ 0⤋
The fact that Hillary says she has more experiance than Obama is laughable... She's been a senator for 1 term only getting reelected once. She was first lady for one of the worst presidents this country has seen.
If either Hillary or Obama are elected the credibility of our country will be at an all time low!...
2007-12-01 22:53:47 · answer #6 · answered by damond h 6 · 7⤊ 1⤋
Yes. When he asks, "Who among my opponents would you consider appointing secretary of state?" he does make a good point.
I wouldn't appoint any of them Secretary of State. Of course I wouldn't appoint Biden either.
2007-12-02 04:42:01 · answer #7 · answered by SallyJM 5 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Biden would make a horrible secretary of state AND president....first thing we would have to do would be to tape his mouth shut!!
2007-12-01 23:08:20 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 0⤋
Like McCain, Biden is the most seasoned, and, wisest of the candidates for his party, but, isn't being considered by the majority of registered voters.
2007-12-01 23:41:15 · answer #9 · answered by alphabetsoup2 5 · 3⤊ 2⤋
But you mentioned before "Nothing wrong with that job, he says, but he's running for president."
And people are voting for the best candidate, not the best foreign policy advocate.
2007-12-01 22:49:22 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋