The Second Coming of Obama is peddling the hapless Susan Rice as potential Secretary of State. Rice’s “qualifications” are summarized here; and if even 10% of that article is true, then one must conclude that Rice is where she is today solely because she is a moderately good-looking minority female who will cling desperately to any religion that has big enough guns to allow her to continue her life of unearned privilege and power.
But sarcasm aside, it’s hard to think of any candidate who is less qualified than Rice for any leadership position, not to mention one that requires at least rudimentary diplomatic skills. I would say that it is high time to revisit the whole issue of why we appoint people to positions of authority. My personal take is that we ought to appoint people because their demonstrated (not potential, not hoped-for) abilities that will contribute to the health and prosperity of the common weal.
Radical notion, I know. But we do have many centuries of empirical evidence worldwide that giving people power because of their sex, their skin color, or their ideology (or any combination thereof) is a prescription for disaster. Such appointments are bad enough locally, but if they are made at a high enough level, disasters will ensue on a national or even international level, as indeed they already have.
As if State Department, indeed most of the U.S. Government, hadn’t had enough problems in the past four years under the heels of incompetent appointees who had been put in place solely because their outward appearance and ideological conformity. It’s as if the whole of the U.S. government had suffered one gigantic, four year-long “wise Latina moment.”
And no, none of that is Bush’s fault.