The New York Times is now calling Secretary of State Rex Tillerson "possibly the weakest secretary of state ever." Really, the morons at the Times actually published this. Perhaps, they should call themselves "possibly the most ignorant (or dishonest) media source ever."
Think about it for a moment. Tillerson has only been in place for a little over a month. There is no way to assess his strength or weakness at this point. Indeed, all we really know is that Tillerson, unlike some of his show-boating predecessors does not conduct diplomacy in public. John Kerry was constantly speaking to the press in order to promote himself. Diplomatic actions that might have been successful if undertaken in private were transformed by Kerry into public media battles. Foreign leaders were forced to take positions that would play well in their own media, and, as a result, could not agree to deals that might be a move forward. When Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State, she too did way too much in public (in order to keep herself in the public eye for her run for president.)
Tillerson, on the other hand, does not constantly meet with the media or conduct negotiations in public. In short, the NY Times really doesn't know what Tillerson has or has not done since he's been in office. That does not make Tillerson weak. No, it makes him smart. Tillerson, unlike his predecessors, knows how to make a deal. Kerry and Clinton couldn't negotiate anything. Clinton accomplished nothing, and Kerry's deals were all disasters for the USA. The Times, however, thought they were "strong".
What a joke!
Think about it for a moment. Tillerson has only been in place for a little over a month. There is no way to assess his strength or weakness at this point. Indeed, all we really know is that Tillerson, unlike some of his show-boating predecessors does not conduct diplomacy in public. John Kerry was constantly speaking to the press in order to promote himself. Diplomatic actions that might have been successful if undertaken in private were transformed by Kerry into public media battles. Foreign leaders were forced to take positions that would play well in their own media, and, as a result, could not agree to deals that might be a move forward. When Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State, she too did way too much in public (in order to keep herself in the public eye for her run for president.)
Tillerson, on the other hand, does not constantly meet with the media or conduct negotiations in public. In short, the NY Times really doesn't know what Tillerson has or has not done since he's been in office. That does not make Tillerson weak. No, it makes him smart. Tillerson, unlike his predecessors, knows how to make a deal. Kerry and Clinton couldn't negotiate anything. Clinton accomplished nothing, and Kerry's deals were all disasters for the USA. The Times, however, thought they were "strong".
What a joke!
No comments:
Post a Comment