Heidi Li's Potpourri

International Women's Day: Women - the Forgotten 51 Percent Minority

This picture from the 1970s, reprinted in a March 8, 2009 story in the New York Times, is heartbreaking. It is heartbreaking  because even though such a picture today would, I fervently hope, show women more diverse in age and rage, it would be easy enough to find women - millions of them - who came out of the 2008 Presidential election cycle realizing that women are the forgotten majority in this country.

Women are the people who can be called anything for supporting another women's bid for higher office; indeed a woman governor who runs for vice-president can publicly be called a c*nt and absolutely no member of the punditry nor any politician in high office of either party denounces this. Imagine if photos of young people wearing shirts that called our current President a n*gger had circulated widely during the last election. The media and politicians would have been absolutely up in arms. They would have been right to have been, too. But what many women are only realizing now, after surviving the dashed hopes of seeing Hillary Rodham Clinton given a fair shot at the nomination in Denver (instead the Democratic Party held a rigged process where pledged delegates were pressured to change their votes for the first ballot and superdelegates were pressured, starting in June, to act as if they had already voted for a candidate to lead the Democratic ticket) is that the entire political and cultural situation in this country not is stacked against them, but that almost no progress in the fight for political and economic equality has been made since the "Women's Liberation" movement of the early 1970s. The wretched and persistent wage gap persists; no Equal Rights Amendment has been added to our constitution; and despite the de jure legality of abortion, women's reproductive rights generally cannot be vindicated by actual individual women, at least not without hardship.

Our current President had his inauguration blessed by a pastor who believes in "wifely submission" and has retained as his chief speechwriter a man who blithely posed for a picture depicting himself metaphorically groping the most powerful person in the president's own Senate - a person who happens to be a woman, Secretary of State Clinton. This same President has ignored calls for a Presidential Commission on Women modeled on John F. Kennedy's 1961 - 1961! - Commission on Women; and has displayed zero interest in creating an even stronger institution, one that would be on par with the President's Advisory Boards on Intelligence (spying) and Economic Recovery.

The other day I was reading and listening to Mario Cuomo's address to the 1984 Democratic Convention. Well into a classic speech, Cuomo delivers this message:

We speak for women who are indignant that this nation refuses to etch into its governmental commandments the simple rule "thou shalt not sin against equality," a rule so simple -- I was going to say, and I perhaps dare not but I will. It's a commandment so simple it can be spelled in three letters: E.R.A.

In 1984, the Democratic hall went wild when Cuomo added this apparent ad lib. The crowd chanted over and over E - R - A.

Thou shalt not sin aginst equality, thou shall pass and ratify the Equal Rights Amendment. Can you imagine a keynote speaker from either major political party today uttering these words at its presidential nominating convention?

The closest we came in 2008 was Hillary Rodham Clinton's convention speech, which included this declaration:

And I know what that can mean for every man, woman, and child in America. I’m a United States Senator because in 1848 a group of courageous women and a few brave men gathered in Seneca Falls, New York, many traveling for days and nights, to participate in the first convention on women’s rights in our history.

And so dawned a struggle for the right to vote that would last 72 years, handed down by mother to daughter to granddaughter – and a few sons and grandsons along the way.

These women and men looked in-to their daughters’ eyes, imagined a fairer and freer world, and found the strength to fight. To rally and picket. To endure ridicule and harassment. To brave violence and jail.

And after so many decades – 88 years ago on this very day – the 19th amendment guaranteeing women the right to vote would be forever enshrined in our Constitution.

My mother was born before women could vote. But in this election my daughter got to vote for her mother for President.

This is the story of America. Of women and men who defy the odds and never give up.

How do we give this country back to them?

By following the example of a brave New Yorker , a woman who risked her life to shepherd slaves along the Underground Railroad.

And on that path to freedom, Harriett Tubman had one piece of advice.

If you hear the dogs, keep going.

If you see the torches in the woods, keep going.

If they're shouting after you, keep going.

Don't ever stop. Keep going. (emphasis added)

Although the convention applauded wildly it should be noted that in 20 years the Democratic Party went from demanding the Equal Rights Amendment to reminding women that when they hear the dogs, they must keep going.

Many women and women understand that women's rights are human rights and human rights are women's rights. They demonstrate this knowledge in this country and around the world as they keep going. Some make small contributions, financial and otherwise, to new organizations like 51 percent (disclosure: the author of this post is the president of 51 percent), WomenCount, and The New Agenda - organizations formed in direct response to the unresponsiveness of the Democratic Party to American women's dreams and hopes for their emancipation and autonomy. In other countries, too, women take action on the local level. A friend from Europe decided that she would mark International Women's Day (a holiday not recognized in the U.S.) by protesting a local piece of artwork that, however unwittingly, depicts a woman in a subordinate and demeaned posture compared to her male coworkers (the art is meant to celebrate rice harvesting). Here is the artwork as it looks on an ordinary day:

 But on International Women's Day, the woman sweeping wore a placard that, translated, read:

"I feel enslaved in this humiliating posture next to the two strapping men standing up. I demand equality."

Dones endavant! (Translation: "Put women forward!")

I believe that 2008 will be remembered not as a year of defeat for women, but as year of galvanization. Despite the wretched economic uncertainty that plagues men and women today, those who want to see the majority-minority - women of the world - put forward, are banding together and one placard or one donation or one blog post at a time these men and women realize that we must renew the fight against oppression and for emancipation of women everywhere.

To read Secretary of State Clinton's 2009 International Women's Day statement on the importance of advancing the interests of women throughout the world, go here.

Secretary of State Clinton reaches out to women in Seoul, Korea

Main information crossposted from 51 Percent.

"I think that it’s imperative that nations like ours stand up for the rights of women. It is not ancillary to our progress; it is central." - Hillary Rodham Clinton speakng in Seoul, 2/20/2009

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton is doing as many of us expected, using her position to reach out to and therefore empower women around the world. One way women here at home can begin to overcome their differences to work together toward women's emancipation is to understand what we share in common with women around the world, so that we can all work toward women's emancipation. Below is the text of Secretary Clinton's primary remarks, my emphases added.

Women's Empowerment Is Key To Progress

Hillary Rodham Clinton

Secretary of State

Town Hall Meeting at Ewha Women's University

Seoul, South Korea

February 20, 2009

SECRETARY CLINTON: Good afternoon. (cheers and applause) Thank you so much, President Lee. I am honored to be here at this great university. I wish to thank also Chairperson (inaudible) and the more than 107,000 alumni at this great school. Standing up with me was our Ambassador Kathy Stephens, who has told me that more than 50 graduates of Ewha Womans University work at U.S. Embassy Seoul. We are extremely proud of the education they have received here.

It is a great privilege to stand here before you on the stage of the largest women’s university in the world. And I came to – (applause) – this university as a matter of destiny, because you see, Ewha and I share a connection. (Cheers and applause.) I am a Methodist, my family on my father’s side comes from Scranton, Pennsylvania – (applause) – and I must say that Wellesley College is a sister college for Ewha University. (Applause.) So being an honorary fellow seems right at home today.

I also note that in this audience are some Korean-American friends from New York and California. There are several Wellesley graduates whom I met backstage as well – (applause) – and an extraordinary number of talented young women, faculty members, and administrators.

Learning about this great university and the role that you have played in advancing the status of women made me think about so many of the women throughout history who are inspirations to me: Madame Scranton, someone who started teaching one young woman, and from her dedication and hard work came this university; Eleanor Roosevelt, a pioneering First Lady of the United States and a voice for democracy around the world, and one of the driving forces behind the United Nations Declaration on Human Rights. Now, that was more than 50 years ago, but just a few weeks ago, one of Korea’s most accomplished leaders, United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, called on all nations worldwide to push for more progress on women’s equality. And I want to thank the Secretary General – (applause) – because he said that women’s empowerment is the key to progress in developing nations.

People who think hard about our future come to the same conclusion, that women and others on society’s margins must be afforded the right to fully participate in society, not only because it is morally right, but because it is necessary to strengthen our security and prosperity.

Before I came out on stage, I met a number of young women who are in political office here in the Republic of  Korea, and I hope I was looking at a future president of this great nation. (Applause.)

As you think about your own futures, keeping in mind security and prosperity and the role that each of us must play, is essential because of the urgent global challenges we face in the 21st century. We need all of our people’s talents to be on the very forefront of setting a course of peace, progress, and prosperity; be it defending our nations from the threat of nuclear proliferation and terror, or resolving the global climate crisis or the current economic crisis, and promoting civil society, especially women’s rights and education, healthcare, clean energy, good governance, the rule of law, and free and fair elections. All of these matters speak to our common desire to make a nation that is safe and strong and secure.

More than half a century ago, this university became the first to prepare women for professions that were formerly reserved for men, including medicine, law, science, and journalism. At about the same time, your government wrote women’s equality into your constitution and guaranteed protections for women in employment. And there have been other rights and protections for women encoded in Korean law in subsequent decades.

These advances coincided with Korea’s transformation from an undeveloped nation to a dynamic democracy, a global economic power, and a hub of technology and innovation. The inclusion of women in the political and economic equation, calling on those talents and contributions from the entire population, not just the male half, was essential to the progress that this country has made.

As I have been on this first trip as Secretary of State, I have visited Japan and Indonesia, and tomorrow I will be in China. I was very impressed by my visit to Indonesia, a young democracy that is demonstrating to the world that democracy, Islam, modernity, and women’s rights can coexist. I met elected women officials. I met high appointed members in the foreign ministry and other cabinet positions in the government. It would be hard to imagine the progress that Indonesia has made in the last ten years, moving from a stagnant autocracy to a burgeoning democracy, without women being part of the reason.

And on Sunday, I’ll meet with women in China to hear about their efforts to improve opportunities for themselves in their own country, another reason why women have to lead the way if there’s going to be higher standards of living, a healthier population, and an actively engaged citizenry.

But no country has yet achieved full equality for women. We still have work to do, don’t we? And just a few weeks ago, President Obama signed into law a new provision protecting women from salary discrimination, a step that was overdue. So there is a lot ahead of us to ensure that gender equality, as President Lee mentioned, becomes a reality. And we also need to remain vigilant against a backlash that tries to turn the clock back on women and human rights, countries where leaders are threatened by the idea of freedom and democracy and women are made the scapegoats. The abuses of women under the Taliban are horrific reminders that just as women had been central to progress in countries like ours, the reverse can happen as well.

Some of you may have seen the news reports some weeks ago of young girls in Afghanistan who were so eager to go to school, and every day they went off with a real light in their eyes because they were finally able to learn.
And one day, a group of these young girls were assaulted by a group of Taliban men who threw acid on them because they had the desire to learn. We have to remain vigilant on behalf of women’s rights.

We see this kind of suppression in different forms in different places. In Burma, the valor of Aung San Suu Kyi, who won the Nobel Peace Prize for her courageous struggle for freedom of expression and conscience. To the North, 70 percent of those leaving North Korea in search of a better life are women, a sad commentary on the conditions in their own country.

So part of my message during this trip and part of my mission as Secretary of State is that the United States is committed to advancing the rights of women to lead more equitable, prosperous lives in safe societies. I view this not only as a moral issue, but as a security issue. I think that it’s imperative that nations like ours stand up for the rights of women. It is not ancillary to our progress; it is central.

In 1995, when I went to the United Nations Conference on Women in Beijing and said that women’s rights were human rights, and human rights were women’s rights, people were so excited. But that to me was almost a sad commentary that we had to say something so obvious toward the end of the [twentieth] century.

So here we are in the [twenty-first] century, and every day we make progress, but we can’t be complacent. We have to highlight the importance of inclusion for women. We have to make clear that no democracy can exist without women’s full participation; no economy can be truly a free market without women involved.

I want to use robust diplomacy and development to strengthen our partnerships with other governments and create collaborative networks of people and nongovernmental organizations to find innovative solutions to global problems – what we call smart power.

Today, I’ve come to this great women’s university to hear your thoughts about the future. The other night in Tokyo, I had the privilege to listen to students at Tokyo University, and I came away not only impressed by their intelligence and the quality of their questions, but encouraged by their concern about the future that lay ahead and what each of them wanted to do to make it better.

Today, I’ve held bilateral meetings with your president, your prime minister, and your foreign minister. We have discussed issues like the need to continue the Six-Party Talks to bring about the complete and verifiable denuclearization in North Korea, and how we can better coordinate not only between ourselves, but regionally and globally, on the range of issues that confront us. But in each meeting, we took time to reflect about how far this country has come.

Back in the early 1960s, there were a series of studies done where different groups were looking at nations around the world, trying to calculate which ones would be successful at the end of the 20th century. And many commentators and analysts thought that the chances for the Republic of Korea were limited. But that wasn’t the opinion of the people of Korea. And so for 50 years, you have built a nation that is now assuming a place of leadership in the world, respected for the vibrant democracy, for the advances across the board in every walk of life. And it is a tribute to your understanding of what it takes to make progress at a time of peril and uncertainty.

The relationship between the United States and Korea is deep and enduring, and it is indispensible to our shared security. Without security, children can’t even imagine their futures and may not have the potential to actually live up to their talents. Our two countries have joined together as a force for peace, prosperity, and progress. Korean and American soldiers have served shoulder-to-shoulder in so many places around the world.
We know that the most acute challenge to stability and security in Northeast Asia is the regime in North Korea, and particularly its nuclear program. It bears repeating that President Obama and I are committed to working through the Six-Party Talks. We believe we have an opportunity to move those forward and that it is incumbent upon North Korea to avoid provocative actions and unhelpful rhetoric toward the people and the leaders of the Republic of Korea. Remember that the North Korean Government committed to abandoning all nuclear weapons and returning at an early date to the Treaty of Nonproliferation of Nuclear Weapons.

And I make the offer again right here in Seoul: If North Korea is genuinely prepared to completely and verifiably eliminate their nuclear weapons program, the Obama Administration will be willing to normalize bilateral relations, replace the peninsula’s longstanding armistice agreement with a permanent peace treaty, and assist in meeting the energy and other economic and humanitarian needs of the Korean people.

Also essential to our shared security and prosperity is a resolution to the global economic crisis. Korea and the United States have both benefited from a strong economic relationship, and your leaders and I today discussed ways we can develop that relationship further. We are going to work on a vision of a much more comprehensive strategic relationship. We want more partnerships to bring not just government leaders together, but business and professional and academic and political and people-to-people. We want to work with Korea so that both of us will be leaders in getting at the root causes of global climate change and vigorously pursuing a clean energy agenda. And I applaud your country for being a global leader in this area, and for calling on the ingenuity and skills of the Korean people to promote green technologies that will create jobs and protect our planet and enhance our security.

Students here at Ewha have a long and proud tradition of engagement with the world. And you have the talent and the training to help shape that world. It may not be always obvious what you can do to make a difference, so do what you love. Do what gives you meaning. Do what makes life purposeful for you. And make a contribution.

I don’t know that Mary Scranton, who founded this university teaching one student in her home, could have ever dreamed of where we would be today. But that’s often the way life is. I never could have dreamed that I could be here as the Secretary of State of the United States either. (Applause.) You have to be willing to prepare yourselves and as you are doing to take advantage of the opportunities that arise, to find cooperative ways to work with others to promote the common good, and then follow your dreams. You may not end up exactly where you started out heading toward, but with your education and with the opportunities now available in your country, there is so much that you can do. And I know that you will be well-equipped to make your contribution that will contribute to the peace and prosperity and progress and security, not only of Korea, but of the region and the world that needs and is waiting for your talents.
Thank you all and God bless you. (Applause.)
And now we’re going to have some questions, I think, right? (Laughter.)

[Secretary Clinton's meeting continued]

Secretary Clinton heads to Asia - smart power, meetings with women, discussions of economy and security

Here are  two sets of remarks Secretary of State Clinton has given directly to the press already, having only just begun her trip. The combination of openness to the press and the decision to get off the ministerial level to speak to ordinary citizens demonstrates how Secretary Clinton's style, as well the substance of her ideas, will transform American diplomacy. Emphases mine.

Overview of Trip to Asia

Hillary Rodham Clinton

Secretary of State

Remarks by Secretary Clinton En Route to Tokyo, Japan

Tokyo, Japan

February 15, 2009

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I wanted to come back and talk to you about this trip. It's my first trip, obviously, as Secretary of State, and going to Asia is, for me, a very big part of how we're going to demonstrate the Obama Administration's approach to dealing with the multitude of problems that we see, but also the opportunities as well.

This region is indispensable to our efforts to seize the opportunities and meet the challenges of the 21st century, and it is part of a larger context in which we intend to create networks of partners in order to deal with the problems that no nation, even ours, can deal with alone. And for me, this means employing all the tools of smart power. And I will be discussing with the leaders with whom I'll be meeting not only our bilateral relationships and our relationships with institutions in the region, but joint efforts that we can undertake on behalf of global problems like climate change or nuclear proliferation, or specific issues like the future of our efforts in Afghanistan and Pakistan and beyond.

Now, this is not just about meeting with leaders, though, because I think it's important that we get out of the ministerial buildings and listen to the people in the countries where I'll be visiting. So to that end, I'll be doing town halls and visits in areas of concern that we can discuss with NGO leaders and local officials.

This is not the first time I've been in these countries, but it's obviously the first time that I come in this capacity. But it's an opportunity to renew relationships with some people that I've known before, as well as those with whom I'll be meeting for the first time.

And it really is about listening as much as talking. I think that's an important point I want to underscore. We think it's not only a smart approach to engage our friends, partners, and have an opportunity to hear from them, but we also are looking for the best ideas about how to further the objectives of this Administration in pursuing peace and prosperity and progress.

The final point I would say is that the global economic crisis is the backdrop against which this visit takes place. The four nations I'll be visiting are all members of the G-20. They will be in London. I will be discussing with them the approaches that each are taking, explaining what we have just done with the passage of our stimulus bill, and seeking greater cooperation about how together we're going to work our way through these very difficult economic times.

But I'm optimistic and very much looking forward to this trip. I chose to go to Asia deliberately in order to send that message that we are reaching out. We do see Asia as part of America's future. As I said in my speech at the Asia Society, we are both a transatlantic and a transpacific power. And part of what I hope we can do is better understand and create the kind of future that will benefit both Asians and Americans.

The U.S. and Japan: Collaborating To Address Global Concerns

Hillary Rodham Clinton

Secretary of State

Remarks upon arrival in Tokyo, Japan

Tokyo, DC, Japan

February 16, 2009

Thank you very much, and I am delighted to be back in Tokyo. I have come to Asia as my first trip as Secretary of State to convey that America’s relationships across the Pacific are indispensable to addressing the challenges and seizing the opportunities of the 21^st century. By strengthening our historic Asian alliances, starting right here in Japan, and forging new partnerships with emerging nations, we can begin together to build networks around the world to help us solve problems that none of us can solve alone.

The bilateral relationship between the United States and Japan is a cornerstone of our efforts around the world. I will be speaking with Japanese leaders and citizens during my visit, and we will be looking for ways to collaborate on issues that go beyond just our mutual concerns to really addressing the global concerns, including climate change and clean energy, Afghanistan, Pakistan, nuclear proliferation, and other common concerns.

The U.S.-Japanese alliance is vitally important to both of our countries, to the Asia-Pacific region, and to the world. And our partnership stretches back half a century. Its foundation has been and always will be a commitment to our shared security and prosperity. But we also know that we have to work together to address the global financial crisis, which is affecting all of us. And we have to work together, as we are doing, to try to assist those around the world afflicted by poverty, natural disasters, and disease. We have a longstanding tradition of exchange and cooperation between our two countries, and between the people of our two nations. We have cooperation in the fields of education and science, and through programs such as the Fulbright Exchange and the Japan Exchange and Teaching Program.

With us this evening are some of the Japanese citizens who have been part of the exchanges. We have two preeminent Japanese astronauts, both space pioneers whose work is indicative of the ongoing scientific cooperation between Japan, the United States, and our other partners around the world. It is an honor for me to meet Dr. Mukai, who is known and admired for her participation in two space shuttle missions. And I wish to acknowledge and welcome Ms. Yamazki, who is on her way to becoming the first Japanese mother to fly in space when she joins the International Space Station next year.
I am also pleased to be joined by members of Japan’s Special Olympics Committee, the leaders and the coaches and the other officials, and most importantly, the athletes who have just returned from the 2009 Special Olympics World Games in Boise, Idaho. I want to congratulate all of the athletes. We salute you for your accomplishments in the athletic arena, as well as the message of peace and kinship that your participation in the Special Olympics sends around the world.

I am looking forward to my opportunities to meet with government leaders and citizens in Tokyo. I look forward to these discussions, and to do the work together with the government and people of Japan that will continue our long friendship and alliance, and will enable us to move forward with confidence and optimism into this new century. Thank you for this gracious and generous welcome back to Tokyo and Japan.

For a friend: What it is like to be a liberal law professor in Washington, DC in February 2009

Dear friend,
You asked whether I was finding it easier to be a liberal who was not enthusiastic about President Obama's candidacy and is not enthusiastic about his administration. The short answer: no. The problem is both due to external circumstances and internal ones. I've never been a left-leaner who takes pride in being left of the mainstream Democratic establishment. But this year, as the race narrowed down to Clinton and Obama, it was clear to me to that the more liberal candidate was Clinton: the candidate more interested in a politics favoring the middle-class, especially the lower middle class, and the poor; the candidate more interested in separation between church and state; the candidate more interested in gay rights and women's rights and economic justice. The candidate who understood that Kumbaya is not popular song in Washington, D.C. and for good reason: politics is not nonpartisan: it is fight, rooted in competing visions of social good and the means to achieve it.

I work at a place of higher education where it was unfashionable to support Clinton's candidacy, on the widely broadcast assumption that no liberal could prefer any other candidate to a viable black Democratic candidate. There were some underlying messages broadcast along with this: that it was "cool" to support a relatively young black man who liked sports while it was "shrill" to support a slightly older white woman who liked her daughter and her friends. Indeed as time went on, the misogyny of the academy, which is a topic for another time, became more and more apparent.

I started this blog with the intention of giving those friends and family interested in the volunteering I did for then-Senator Clinton's campaign a way of opting in to updates. I told almost nobody at work about the blog or the extent of the blogging because it was so obviously assumed by every colleague around me (except for those encountered at Clinton events, where we greeted each other with happy surprise) that we must all be on the same side and that meant the Obama side. Work is enough of a stressful environment (that's why it is called work, after all) that I did not have the interest or the energy to forcefully object to this blind assumption.

I did occasionally express my frustrations with the DNC and the way it rigged its convention, its refusal to follow its own rules. This usually provoked hostility. I think some of that hostility had to do with the fact that, since I am a member of law school faculty, the criticism hit home: law professors - full fledged ones - tend to take pride in due and fair process. To be reminded that the Democratic Party had engaged in the same sort of hijinks that so offended my colleagues when performed by the Republican Party did not make people happy.

Part of my coping strategy was to put my head and heart into my teaching and scholarship and try to tune out the political noise, which was very loud. The line between work and politics at a "liberal" law school in Washington D.C. is very thin. The strategy has been effective for my teaching and scholarship. But just as so many people feel irreparable rifts with friends who could not accept that they would not support Senator Obama, I feel a rift - I don't know if it will be irreparable - with an institution that felt so comfortable silencing anybody who supported Senator Clinton.

Coming up is our faculty retreat. Part of its theme is "reflections on the presidential election." I will have a better idea of how things are after this event, because I will see if I can talk about the misogyny during the election and the centrism (even economic and social right tilt) of the current Democratic administration without getting the same blowback that went on prior to the general election. Maybe it will be easier for people to hear about these concerns now that a Democrat is safely ensconced in the White House. They, like me, were so ready for an end to the Bush years, and maybe any questioning of whether the ends justified the means or even whether the the means were regrettable was too scary or painful or threatening before President Obama actually won. I confess I am nervous about voicing my views at the retreat. Yet if I do not, then I am not being fair to my colleagues who may not realize just how antagonistic they seemed to any Democrat who did not share their faith in party and candidate Obama.

"Official ceremony" but with authenticity: warm friendship and real respect from Vice President Biden, two generations of maternal kvelling, acknowledgment of life's complexities by Secretary of State Clinton

If you can watch this - one of the rare times when seeing and hearing an "official ceremony" provides information the transcript alone cannot.

One rare occasion where the obvious respect and friendship of those onstage comes through. A display by Secretary of State Clinton of the poise, graciousness, intelligence and humor to which I aspire. Vice-President Biden set the tone. Secretary Clinton's family warmed to it.

The trouble with appointing tax evaders to high positions in government: its a rule of law thing

I wish people would stop telling me to be relieved that President Obama is not President Bush. I detested President Bush, and I detested him from the moment he arrived on the national scene, from the way he ran his campaign which led us to the debacle of an election stolen in Florida (decided by 547 votes in the state George's brother was then Governor; and a long-time Bush supporter designed a confusing ballot and refused to go through the sort of recount that Al Franken is now having to endure); a campaign filled with bait and switch promises (viz: local control over schools, only to be followed by the No Child Left Behind Act: one of the greatest federal government takeovers of local affairs in recent memory.) But these bad-faith measures were just the prelude to an administration that pursued an agenda of putting the President and the executive branch above the law: George W. Bush personally committed war crimes, had his administration engage in illegal surveillance of American citizens, directed his Justice department to come up with justifications for U.S. violations of international law, tolerated or encouraged a host of troubling cronyistic contacts and relationships between his vice-president and members of the energy industries, tolerated or encouraged his justice department to go after government lawyers for their political positions, encouraged the expansion of executive privilege to cover the the office of the vice-president in unprecedented ways, and used various suspect methods (e.g. substituting executive regulation for legislation) to flout the separation of powers and checks and balances built in to the structure of the U.S. Constitution. George W. Bush was shady and underhanded, rivaled in recent times only by Richard M. Nixon, who was literally a crook.

I have no idea whether Barack H. Obama will turn out to be more or less unscrupulous than George W. Bush, more or less interested in the rule of law, and the place of the executive branch in American constitutional democracy. But less than a month into the new administration and, sure, I'm relieved that Obama isn't Bush, but I am not at all persuaded that he is going to be qualitatively more honest, in better faith, and more sensitive to the ideal of a government of laws rather than persons.

Coming into his presidency, Barack H. Obama showed a willingness to bend rules to gain office, and not just when he accepted 20 delegates from a state in which he never even ran, but going all the way back to Chicago. ("As a community organizer, he had helped register thousands of voters. But when it came time to run for office, he employed Chicago rules to invalidate the voting petition signatures of three of his challengers." (source)) So far, his vetting failed to catch problems with at least three high level appointments (Bill Richardson, Tim Geithner, Tom Daschle) and even when ethical concerns have arisen about others (Jon Favreau) he's done nothing.

Obama's treatment of Geithner and Daschle particularly distresses me. Both are sophisticated, well-educated people, people who know when to get tax advice, people who understand the distinction between legal tax avoidance and illegal tax evasion and presumably how to work with an accountant to make sure that they are erring, if err they must, on the side of an abundance of law-abidingness. Both have had held fiscal policy-making positions. Each was found to have broken the tax laws. The Geithner strategy  - apologize, act contrite, claim embarrassment, apologize some more - is now being used by Daschle (go here for a round-up  of media reaction), who we are assured has not only the solid backing of Senate Democrats but enjoys President Obama's absolute support, as of today, Monday, February 2.

Now, I am happy to remark that the Obama administration has taken steps to bring the U.S. more in line with international law. But President Obama's consistent support for would-be office-holders who engage in inappropriate, unethical, illegal conduct does not bode well for those of us who really did want a different kind of politics in this country. I simply do not believe that there is nobody else who could head the Department of Health and Human Services other than somebody who evaded paying over $100,000 in taxes.

Oh, and yes, I do think there is a double standard at work here. Secretary of State Clinton was incredibly wise and politically adept to start early in working out disclosure arrangements regarding President Clinton's Foundation and the Clinton Global Initiative. But note: she anticipated the problems and questions and dealt with them beforehand, knowing that the boys' club was unlikely to close ranks around her had she not handled the issues forthrightly and adroitly. Meanwhile, for Daschle and Geithner the treatment is like that of small boys caught with their hand in the cookie jar: the men of Washington - and note the it is the men of the Senate, especially Harry Reid, and the man who is President, Barack Obama - who are quick to say of Geithner and Daschle the equivalent of "boys will be boys":  these guys are good guys. Yes, tax evasion is bad (Reid and Obama cannot seem to quite bring themselves to say "illegal") but as long as Geithner and Daschle know how to act contrite and express embarrassment, they really ought to get the jobs they want. But this is no way to create a sense of respect for the rule of law, that respect that George W. Bush never displayed. To restore respect is a tough task and it requires demonstrating little tolerance for those who break laws directly relevant to the responsibilities of the offices they seek.

President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton forging an intriguing partnership

If you can, watch Senator Clinton introduce Special Envoy for Climate Change Todd Stern and listen to Mr. Stern's comments. If you cannot watch and listen, read the remarks. This is the third special envoy appointed to the State Department I count in the past four days, and in some ways the most telling one. To have an envoy on climate change in itself is remarkable, a real turn around from the Bush administration's see no science, hear no science, make no science approach.  To place this envoy within State is scientifically, diplomatically, and politically insightful. Climate and climate change does not respect national boundaries (scientific fact), but nations must work together to care for the climate and address climate change (diplomatic reality). But putting this envoy under Secretary Clinton's auspices suggests an emerging political phenomenon: a real partnership between President Obama and Secretary Clinton. Adopting a scientific and pragmatic approach to climate change was something both Obama and Clinton campaigned on. But there are various departments within the executive branch where a high level special position dedicated to the position could be created. Casting the position as a State Department Special Envoy shows real smarts, presumably attributable to both the President and the Secretary of State (and their advisers). It takes advantage of the double world-world wattage (green-powered) of these two remarkable politicians. It suggests a degree of trust between the President and Secretary of State: he is confident enough to give her control over nontraditional terrain for the State Department; she is confident enough that she's not worried about being scapegoated with unaddressable problems. Pay close attention to this passage from Stern's acceptance remarks:

"I deeply appreciate the confidence that President Obama and Secretary Clinton have shown me. And I am excited by the opportunity to work for two such inspiring leaders who recognize the enormity of this problem and are deeply committed to solving it. And I – let me also say that 12 years ago, I worked for two other great and inspiring leaders, Bill Clinton and Al Gore, and it was a great privilege for me to do that. And it’s a great privilege for me now to work – be able to work for President Obama and Secretary Clinton.

People may have forgotten this, but especially during President Bill Clinton's first term, he had a unique relationship with Vice-President Gore, giving Gore control over a number of projects and issues of major importance, and in which Gore had relevant expertise. In that partnership, President Clinton took more of the initiative on external and international affairs and Vice-President Gore  led the way on some prominent internal reforms. What was unusual, though, was the the genuine cooperation that marked the pair's working relationship.

I find it notable that Stern invokes working for the Bill Clinton-Al Gore pair as he undertakes working for the Barack Obama-Hillary Rodham Clinton one. Whichever of these politicians appeals more to you ( to some, Obama appeals not at all; to others, Hillary Rodham Clinton does not), both are now serving in two of the highest offices in the land. The land is mighty troubled right now. If these early signs bode well for a productive partnership of historic proportions, this bodes well for us all.

To come: some posts on relationships between Presidents and Secretaries of State past.

Support for Secretary of State Clinton as she faces Afghanistan and all the world's troubled hotspots

Tonight I have Afghanistan on my mind: the next quagmire in the "war on terror." I'm not yet sure if we'll be nearly extricated from Iraq within two years, but I am pretty sure we will be all caught up in Afghanistan, and that it will not be pleasant. Basically, we are stuck with following around after the colonial hashes Britain and France made in the Middle East and western Asia, where old dysfunctions render current politics deadly and incomprehensible.

Rudyard Kipling knew of the dangers that awaited soldiers far from home, fighting on the plains of Afghanistan.

When you're wounded and left on Afghanistan's plains,
And the women come out to cut up what remains,
Jest roll to your rifle and blow out your brains,
An' go to your Gawd like a soldier.

-- from The Young British Soldier, a poem that should be read in its entirety and with exegesis lest it be misunderstood; go here for both the complete poem and good commentary.

When I contemplate the complexity that faces the world and this country's efforts to better it - or at least do its people no further harm, I find this photo, of Secretary of State Clinton's swearing in, on January 21, 2007 both comforting and inspiring.The photo also provides a good way to introduce people to "DipNote", the U.S. Department of State Blog, on which it was posted.

There too I found this quotation from Secretary Clinton, addressing USAID: "And I wanted to come here today with a very simple message: I believe in development, and I believe with all my heart that it truly is an equal partner, along with defense and diplomacy, in the furtherance of America’s national security." Finally, here you can read Secretary Clinton's introduction of Richard Holbrooke as Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan and George Mitchell's introduction as Special Envoy for Middle East Peace.

Reading these remarks and beginning to acquaint myself with Hillary Rodham Clinton in her new role reminds me again of her ability to convey strength and confidence without arrogance, in the way she discusses this country's place in the world; the role of diplomacy and development in partnership with defense; and yes, the relationship between her department and the President and Vice-President. Secretary of Clinton has recruited two amazing diplomats to tackle two of the most troubled hotspots in the world; she has already begun bridging the fiefs that make up the entire U.S. foreign policy apparatus.

I believe I can go to sleep tonight with some greater confidence that we will be leaving fewer dead on Afghanistan's plains because Secretary of State Clinton will be working hard for that less brutal outcome.

For those in pain because today is not the day Hillary Rodham Clinton becomes President of the United States

Today, many men and women of good will toward this country and its new president are, nevertheless, heavy-hearted. These are men and women who looked heartily forward to seeing Hillary Rodham Clinton inaugurated president. In an election cycle when winning the Democratic nomination was tantamount to winning the presidency, these men and women worked and rooted hard for Mrs. Clinton during a hotly contested Democratic primary season, one where she won the popular vote and where we can never know for sure who would have won at the Democratic National Convention had announced and promulgated Party procedures been allowed to run their course.

Some of these men and women supported Mrs. Clinton despite of her gender, some because of her gender. For some, gender truly was not part of the equation of their support. Some, like me, started as a firm Clinton supporter for reasons that had nothing to do with Mrs. Clinton's gender and ended up realizing that in order for this country to ever elect a woman president, we will have to work together at the deepest of social and cultural levels - let alone in politics -to eradicate the misogyny and sexism that reared its head as soon as it became clear that there was high likelihood that a woman would become the next president of the United States. Misogyny and sexism did not just pop up out of nowhere, either. It was used deliberately or willfully ignored by alleged liberals from whom we expected so much better.

The pain felt today by many of Mrs. Clinton's supporters is the pain of frustration: frustration at realizing how deeply and pervasively sexism and misogyny infiltrate our lives and our world. It is the pain of impatience: impatience with others' obliviousness to the infiltration. It is the pain of anticipated toil: the toil ahead to put women into 51 percent of the positions in all spheres of public life so that eventually one woman with even half the qualifications of Mrs. Clinton will indeed be elected President of the United States of America.

We can take that pain and turn it totally inward, to the point where it exhausts us. Or we can take that pain and turn it outward, in the form of energy to fuel the changes we demand. As I have listened to Mrs. Clinton herself spend her time in the build up to being confirmed Secretary of State, I have witnessed a leader showing us how to do the latter. I do not know Mrs. Clinton personally, but from what I know of human nature and what I can glean from her odyssey since Denver, surely she has experienced some of the pain so many of her supporters feel today. I am also sure that, like all of us, she will always carry some measure of the pain within her. What makes Mrs. Clinton's leadership so extraordinary is that she exemplifies the power of pushing through the inner pain or going around it or using it to fuel continuing achievements.

If today you are among the hurt and the angry, remember that tomorrow (or the next day or the day on which you are ready), you will have a chance to take that hurt and anger and put it to use for full social justice for all people, including the 51 percent that are women.

Some pleasing surprises found today:

• a post over at Stray Dogs that Amble in: 51 Percent - "The New Women's Suffrage"
• donations from those who have recognized today with a contribution to 51 Percent
• newly discovered site to see: Madam Secretary

Beyond politics: learning from Hillary Rodham Clinton

Yes, I would feel better about the country and the world were Hillary Rodham Clinton about to be inaugurated our next President. Millions of primary voters shared my view. Meanwhile, I sincerely hope that President-elect Obama lives up to the highest hopes of his wisest supporters. Something larger even than the Presidency of the United States is at stake though, when one considers Hillary Rodham Clinton. What is at stake is the question of how to live a life.

I have learned from watching Senator Clinton pursue her career.  I have learned that she processes what might be a permanent setback for a different sort of person, and then looks at the options available to her, picks one, and puts her talent to work for her as she retrains her focus. Some of being able to do that is just having the temperament to keep on keeping on - but we can all work to be that kind of person. And we can look to Senator Clinton as an example of just what one person can accomplish when she does. Because I am a student of the Nixon years, I followed Senator Clinton's career before she moved to Washington D.C. I knew of her post-law school involvement in the effort to prosecute Richard Nixon. I know that whatever Senator Clinton expected of herself or foresaw when she addressed her classmates at Wellesley or when she graduated from Yale Law School, most of what has happened in her life and career could not have been within her scope of vision at those junctures. Moving to Arkansas? Improving the schools for millions of Arkansans children?  Moving into the White House? Putting the idea of universal health care at the heart of public, political discourse? Addressing personal difficulties in the glare of the harshest public spotlight? Becoming a U.S. Senator? Winning more votes in a primary season than any other Democratic Presidential contender, yet having to deal with a party power structure that refused to even permit an open and honest convention roll call vote? Campaigning in the general election harder for a rival than any other politician has ever done? Choosing to give up the relative safety of her Senate seat to accept, if confirmed, the position of Secretary of State in that rival's administration?

Most people's lives turn out to include twists and turns that they could not have foreseen in their early twenties. But most people's lives are not, for better or worse, lived out as publicly as Senator Clinton's has been. And because her life has been so public it is easy to focus on a particular triumph or a particular setback. Today, as I listened to the confirmation hearings regarding the Secretary of State appointment, I realized that Senator Clinton's life is one that supersedes politics. Whether you agree with her political positions or you do not, you can observe her powers of concentration, her tenacity, her buoyancy, her steadiness. These excellences see a person through the unforeseen circumstances, bad or good. Because Senator Clinton is public servant, we, her countrywomen and countrymen, will derive instrumental benefits from her competence. More importantly, though, because Senator Clinton is a public figure, we, her fellow members of humanity, can look to her life and the dignity and wisdom with which she conducts it. From Hillary Rodham Clinton, we can learn how to tackle the unforeseen in our own lives. That is a legacy that transcends politis. It is the legacy of true leader.