While I do hope that Sonal Shah becomes a permanent part of Obama’s administration, I am much more excited to see where my Huma Abedin ends up. Reggie Love ended up besting her for the role of “body man/woman” but you can’t keep this woman down for long. Marc Ambinder of The Atlantic has the latest gossip for us Huma watchers. You guessed it, she will probably follow Clinton to State, showing the world a whole new face of America:
I’ve been a Clinton Kremlinologist for years, and although there are many armor-plated guardians of Clinton’s inner circle, Huma Abedin has been the toughest to crack. No exaggeration: with Clinton heading to State, Abedin is going to be a major force in American diplomacy for the next several years.
Abedin was one of the First Lady’s travelling personal assistants during the second term, but hasn’t been only that for years Formally, she is a Senior Advisor to Senator Clinton, and was her Travelling Chief of Staff during the campaign. In that latter role, she was in charge of the roadshow, one of the few parts of the campaign that met with near universal praise, both internally and externally.
She is part of the crucial connective tissue between HRC and her far flung world of supporters, friends, staff, former staff, advisors, donors, on and on. Not a gatekeeper, because she is famous for her openess and sharing even the smallest details with HRC to keep her fully briefed, and manages some of the biggest egos around with diplomatic aplomb (I can only imagine.. “Hi Huma, it’s Dick Holbrooke and I REALLY need to talk to Hillary about this Jim Steinberg thing”)
The totality of Huma is much more in line with the mythical “Aide de Camp” of old (people like David Petraeus were at one point someone else’s Aide de Camp, and we have no doubt that Huma will one day have her very own)
People who know her say she is a full and crucial member of HRC’s state department and she will be playing a big role at Foggy Bottom – and anyone there or elsewhere that short changes her as a “personal assistant” does so at their own risk.
She is also a Muslim who speaks fluent Arabic –her mother runs a university in Saudi Arabia — and brings that perspective on a complex part of the world to HRC’s sphere. it’s not uncommon to see Huma on Bill Clinton’s important trips to the region, because he too values her in that way. [Link]
Look, for some time now we’ve had a problem between Israel and the Palestinians. Can we get Huma on that? U.S. missiles in Poland? Mr. Putin, we have a Ms. Abedin on Line 1 for you. I am just saying folks, for those of you who didn’t think it was a good idea for Obama to form a team of rivals by including HRC, this little bonus should allay your fears.
Definitely keeping an eye on Ms. Abedin. I’ve been obsessed with her ever since that infamous feature in Vogue. That chica is hot as hell, sharp as nails and she is going to kick ass now that Hillary’s Secretary of State.
i dunno, i hear Jon Favreau’s trying to assume the position, and Hill’s quite touched by his intoxicating enthusiasm…leaving huma groping for an answer. it’s her fault for not keeping abreast of the issues.
2 · Manju said
I believe the trade lingo for this is “pulling a Saxby”.
he was starting his secret campaign for undersecretary early, showing his enthusiasm to be abroad y’know
3 · reacharound said
well, it is georgia. when in rome, do as…
Is she really dating this Weiner?
Is Huma really our closest chance of getting a Muslim in the White House? I’m getting a little disappointed with these appointments. It’s taken all these appointments later until we’ve had our first Asian American appointment, General Shinseki as the Secretary of Veterans Affairs (wasn’t Tammy Duckworth originally said the to have been tapped for this spot?). With Rahm as Obama’s right hand man now, I really think that Obama needs to spend a little more energy on getting some Muslims on board – like the folks in the Keith Ellison and Andre Carson crew. Or, you know, maybe a South Asian Muslim activist blogger (cough, cough)…
Why is getting a Muslim into the White House such a priority? Shouldn’t we care most about geting the most competent person in, regardless of religious affiliation? I know you didn’t write that than in a divisive sense, but I do think it is a peculiar and irresponsible statement. We might say that Huma Abedin deserves to be in because of her capabilities (which I don’t think is true right now; there are far worthier candidates in her age group), but her being a Muslim in no way adds to or detracts from her credentials. Her background might be a foreign policy advantage, but her religion should not be a qualifier, either positive or negative.
Thank you portmanteau. Thank you, thank you, thank you.
And yet, here we celebrate the presence of desis in the administration. Is “Muslim” in a different category?
10 · Ennis said
who is “we”? i discuss desi appointments with folks on this blog because that is a shared interest, but i certainly have no interest specifically in “desi” representation.
10 · Ennis said
Ennis: I don’t personally. I might see them as role models, as a sign that the color of my skin or my religion doesn’t detract for my competence and I feel proud of the people who vote them in or confirm them. At the end of the day, I will not celebrate a desi win if I felt it entailed some kind of tokenization. My politics comes first, and my desi loyalty is, frankly, not a factor. For instance, Bobby Jindal becoming president will give me no joy, neither will an election win by Amit Singh. Further, I showed support for Obama because I think he is a very capable politician, pragmatic and idealistic, not because I wanted to see a Black guy as the president. OTOH, I would support extra attention toward black-dominated inner-city schools because education is an issue that I care about and I think black children bear the brunt of our ridiculous funding policies. I’m no saint, however. I do tend to give more to Indian charities, or prioritize books by desi authors. I’d probably donate to an Indian conservation project versus a Kenyan one (say) if I could donate to only one of those. I do feel a huge debt to the Indian state. Although I recall when I donated to a microfinance organization, I specifically wanted to donate to an organization that itself manages my money rather than targeting it to Indian recepients. Just FYI, I’m DBD and think my moral philosophy makes sense to me. But only me, perhaps 🙂
Is that what the kids are calling it these days?
portmanteau, portmanteau, portmanteau! I missed you so : )
14 · bess said
what to do bess? i had to retreat: i just hate sharing the love with rahul.
Everybody wants a piece of the good stuff.
It’s perfectly normal and natural to be excited about and hope for high profile representation by people you tend to identify with. One hopes (and assumes) that they are capable. But of course the everything-is-equal brigade must object. I have to say I’m surprised and delighted to see this form of human-ness from Taz who I always thought was head of the aforementioned brigade.
17 · Divya said
i don’t object. i think i am better than you. don’t you agree?
17 · Divya said
but of course the let’s-celebrate-our-basest-and-most-primal instincts must object to somebody else’s sincere and heartfelt beliefs. typical response: either you’re like me inhuman. fuck you. how’s that for an impassioned response?
19 · portmanteau said
portmanteau, is that what the kids are calling it these days?
correction: please amend to “either you’re like me or inhuman.” what can i do? even cold inhuman multi-cultis lash out in rage sometimes and mess up their grammar.
in that case divya, did you vote palin? i only say that because she’s a self-decared lipstick-wearing pitbull whose competence was “assumed” by many. or do you eschew lisptick?
I might, I might not. I’ve never met you. In any case, your middle sentence needs a context.
Someone just f- you’ed Divya-ji ?? Wow !!! Liberal rage runnin on overdrive here !!!!
ah, but some pieces are sweeter than others, no bess? glad rahul got your undivided attention for a while 🙂
decent folk will do anything to fan the flames to precipitate a catfight. well done, sir.
I don’t think a distaste for fools is a solely liberal problem.
26 · Camille said
Au contraire. If there is one thing conservatives have proven over the past decade and more, it is that they are sorely missing a distaste for fools.
OMG, even Camille stoops. I guess it must be hard to see liberal hypocrisy made explicit.
Divya, let me see if I can parse this. 1) Write a bunch of incoherent screed. 2) Include well dropped placement of the terms “liberal” and “hypocrisy” in order to provoke a response. 3) When people finally lose their patience, gleefully point at how they fulfilled your “liberal hypocrisy prophecy.” It’s that easy, right?
Being irritated with writing that is often couched in offensive pot shots doesn’t make someone a liberal hypocrite; it makes them fed up. My comment was that being irritated or fed up is not unique to, or exceptional to, “liberals.” But it’s much easier to trade in divisive rhetoric and generalizations than to actually discuss or contest underlying rationales.
I forgot to add: I don’t think you always write screed, just saying I am not surprised that your writing often offends people and gets them riled.
Anyway. Hope everyone has a great day.
I love to see the angry wing-nuts. It is fun. If people disagree with them, their anger spills off into name calling and abuse.
I am waiting for Obama to appoint a Telugu Brahmin (Niyogi would be preferable) who was born in India because that is what I identify with 🙂
This is just personal. I find the substance of your comments offensive too (honestly, not just saying to get even) although your style is generally admirable. So what is more important?
And what was so offensive here, I’m curious? Do you think I don’t really hold the opinion I expressed in #17? My gripe is that I do not believe people when they say things of the sort I objected to, i.e., these are not standards anyone lives by no matter how much lip service they pay to them. Nor should they be. And then there’s always that element of being on higher moral ground which is unbearable.
Anyway, do you personally believe it is wrong to hope for someone of your religious background to make it to a high profile position? And this is not just personal now. Muslims could use a friendly face in the cabinet. What are your thoughts from a personal, i.e, human, i.e., how-is- it-going-to-be-good-for-you, perspective? Or do you think such perspectives are wrong?
Please, portmanteau. Undivided? I’ve been in line behind Manju this whole time.
(I’m so happy to see you and Camille and when ak shows up we’ll have the Brainy Triumvirate.)
32 · Nara said
Ramesh Ponnuru was our great hope…Jindal got to him and now we have to play the waiting game…
And what was so offensive here, I’m curious?
Probably the following
But of course the everything-is-equal brigade must object.
You replaced saffron with everything-is-equal.
Divya, I think what was irksome was the tone, to be honest, not necessarily the content or the underlying question. This is honestly the big drawback of online communication — it’s really difficult to gauge tone and intent. Apologies up front for lashing out — you’re right, it wasn’t really warranted and wasn’t classy. I was letting frustration in other communication threads spill into this one. Doesn’t make it right, though.
Not sure I’m following?
I’m not offended though; I know people disagree with my viewpoint. What I like about SM is that there are many people who disagree, but most of the time we’re able to engage with one another and hash it out or add to the development of a position or argument. I don’t expect everyone to agree or come to the same page, but I do like when the conversation is less “I hate you” and more “what are you really trying to say?”
28 · Divya said
no, it’s painful again to be dismissed out of hand yet again. this has always been my chief complaint to you; being otherwise intelligent, you seem to think that another party cannot have a very sincere and actionable policy that is the very opposite of yours, supported by a decent set of propositions. i was very clear on what kinds of desi accommodations i make and what kinds i don’t. in fact, the ‘everything-is-equal’ comment doesn’t really apply.
i basically think that in some situations (personally) it’s okay to be in favor of your heritage (eg choosing the name of your child or the festivals you choose to celebrate or the hobbies you pursue) and in some situations, that shouldn’t be the prime consideration (eg choosing your nation’s political leader or who should be in the adminstration). this is broadly a distinction between the public and private sphere, which btw, the conservatives think is sacred in many contexts. i didn’t say you should follow my rules; merely, told taz that i didn’t agree with her on this issue.
meanwhile, i don’t see the hypocrisy in the ‘liberal’ comments here. unless you think that a liberal viewpoint automatically entails the original sin of hypocrisy. i assume you deserve more credit than that.
and bess: you’re very kind. it’s nice to have friends in this diffused way over the internets. and as for manju and rahul, sweet and sour has always been a favorite subcontinental combination.
camille, i just went ‘oh snap!’ in my head. that was very different from your usual style, and i was glad to have seen it.
RC, don’t be frightened, big boy. As Divya ji well tell you, for us liberals
port, I think you articulated what I felt much better than I did. In the future, I’ll just cite to you 🙂 The issue isn’t the content, it’s that the argument takes place in the context of denigrating other viewpoints, reducing them into caricatures, and not really opening the door for conversation (or even for principled opposition).
one of my professors was a telugu scholar who absolutely agreed with the notion that the niyogis made the best administrators. multi-lingual, they kept fastidious records under indigenous and british rulers. basically a historian’s wet dream. so maybe they meet my secular and your parochial criteria 🙂
Never mind. It does sound garbled.
I guess the difference is that I always regarded SM as enemy territory where I had to fight my fight. But I’ve gotten used to people now and it ain’t so bad after all and even if it is, this is precisely what I should be expecting so it’s silly to get bent out of shape. Will try and follow your policy and see if I can make it work.
Whoa. This thread is hard to handle.
Calm down ladies. 🙂
In other news, someone mentioned in another thread that Huma’s mother is the president of a religious university in Saudi Arabia. Does anyone know the name of this university?
This was after you said fuck you, so you are not entitled to this objection. jeez this is beginning to sound like third grade 🙂
But this is not a matter of opinion. Human beings necessarily evaluate, emote, and react at the same time as they perceive. There is no such thing as a disinterested stance. I have science on my side (although public opinion may be against me).
Equality is the essence of being liberal and I think I am well within my rights to use the L word as a slur at least in this context. The difference between the public and the private sphere that you speak of is a fantasy derived by way of Christian theology that is expressed in secular terms. In reality, where you draw the line between the private and public sphere is highly subjective and always in one’s self interest. Conservatives are open about their self interest, liberals imagine that they are being fair and balanced. Please, (anyone) tell me how can I say that liberals are hypocrites in a polite way? (this is not against you, port in particular).
43 · Divya said
I think you contradicted yourself there…
In what way?
I did not know that Ponnuru was born a brahmin. Anyway, my grandmom would not approve. He is a catholic now.
Thimarasu was. My uncle used to tell me that Iyers from Chennai make better administrators. Anyway, as you might have have figured out I was trying to be facetious.
Just curious if Huma’s mother runs a Saudi university. Saudis tend to be mostly conservative Wahabi Muslims where women must be covered head to toe in black while in public, etc. My thought is if Huma is working for a center/slightly liberal democrat like Hillary Clinton, Huma herself must be more middle of the road (or slightly left) in her political views. But, I am not too familiar with Huma’s views and her work. At her level, she must be outstanding in her field to get such an influential position.
Of course, grown sons and daughters tend to go their ways in every aspect of life. Your parents don’t necessarily determine if you’ll be right, democrat, republican, center, or whatever.
OMG can we talk more about Huma and less about ourselves? Come on people. This is about Huma not about left vs. right. She transcends that sort of gutter debate.
43 · Divya said
There have been a thousand ways that people have come up with to call people who attempt to be a little less selfish hypocrites – from non-vegetarians complaining about vegetarians occasionally eating a piece of meat or a fish to rants about limousine liberals (which in most other countries besides the u.s. is limousine socialist) and latte drinking “elitists.”
But this is quite boring because the two labels you’re talking about exclude me, so I’ll act in my self-interest now and get going. Seeya!
8 · portmanteau said
Well I think from the vantage point of an administration that has to
clean up the mess it’s been leftattempt to deal with issues in the United States and outside that turn on different notions of Islam and how different Muslims live their different lives, it would be helpful to have at least a few people who have a sound understanding of some of this. I agree the people don’t have to be Muslim to do so (the same way that David Galanter is not an Indian lawyer but has a perspective on reservation), but it would in practice probably help.From a moral vantage point, given the immense amount of damage the U.S. government has done to Muslims in the last few decades, both within and outside the United States, and the anger that this has produced, I understand what emotional place the demand might come from and what suspiciously hegemonic place the demand might be met from.