I wonder if he's thought about Chuck Hagel?

Oh, wait......

for the response.

So how does your suggest of him appointing aa Republican read as anything other than a suggestion to do more of the same that he has already done (and which has obviously been a failure since Hagel is being shown the door).

I'm sure he will appoint a Republican since the beltway media narrative that is very important to him says that it has to be a big strong Republican Daddy type. But that wouldn't be any kind of covert, sneaky or manipulative move on his part. It would be what has already been done and what he is expected to do.

If he nominates a Democrat?

What do you foresee in the next two years if that happens?

Do you think it will be easier for the President and the Democrats?

Your original post suggested that him nominating a Republican would be some sort of bold, risky move.

I merely pointed out that It would be nothing of the sort. It would be 1) something he has done already, as the outgoing SOD is a Republican 2) Something that all involved expect him to do since the only thing he loves more than appearing bipartisan is feeding into Republican/Media narratives that SOD has to be a big, straong Republican.

I think anyone, defender or critic of the president would be shocked if the person he nominated wasn't a Republican.

that time, space, and circumstances stay the same. Hagel was opposed by Republicans moreso than Democrats in his nomination. I doubt that would happen again? Reality changes.

applaud his foreign policy again.

On foreign policy Republicans and Democrats aren't that far off. Republicans like to attack Obama as weak and (interrupted to add a republican thought - BENGHAZI! BENGHAZI! BENGHAZI!), but Republicans and Democrats both favor an interventionist policy in the middle east. Democrats might, in general, favor more diplomacy and treating our allies as allies rather than servants, but they really aren't that far apart. In that context setting up a Republican might be a good idea.

The problem is, though, that many people at DU feel like Republicans and Democrats foreign policy should be a lot different, rather than largely on the same page. And for people of that mindset, nominating a Republican, even a moderate, isn't really what they would like to see.

I could be wrong.

Bryant

Well...compared to the Tea Party infestation.

And it will be an excellent pick.

been promoting herself for this job for three years now. And never bothered to serve, herself.

She thought Iraq was awesome, but just poorly executed, and she's a Petraeus acolyte. Fuck her. But I did remove the reference to her cross-eyed-ness, in deference to you.

..and she comes across as very knowledgeable. But she also gives the uncomfortable vibe of a know-it-all dictator-type person, in my opinion. Sparks would probably fly between her and many Republicans, and perhaps, many Democrats also. It would be an interesting choice.

So they'll shove out the old veteran and put her in there (by the way, she refused the Deputy Secretary job under Hagel last year, because she only wanted the top slot) and then maybe David Ignatius will love Obama again. I'm disgusted by this whole episode.

So how does putting another Repub in help matters?

Although I'm sure with McCain and Graham running the show whoever is put into place will be acceptable to the Neocon wings of both parties.