4 ms·
For some recent historical context, the New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/03/us/politics/top-posts-remain-vacant-throughout-obama-administration.htm
by somecontext 9y ago
For some recent historical context, the New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/03/us/politics/top-posts-remain-vacant-throughout-obama-administration.html http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/03/us/politics/top-posts-rema... reported in May 2013 that "John Kerry is practically home alone at the State Department, toiling without permanent assistant secretaries of state for the Middle East, Asia, Europe and Africa" and "One of the worst backlogs is at the State Department, where nearly a quarter of the most senior posts are not filled, including those in charge of embassy security and counterterrorism."
- michaelchisari 9y agoThe key difference is that the Obama administration was working on staffing the state department (a difficult task to be sure), whereas it's become clear that the Trump administration and Rex Tillerson are doing the opposite, focusing on cuts and issuing a hiring freeze instead. Tillerson has also proposed a 31 per cent cut to the department’s budget and an 8 per cent staff cut. So the context you provide requires it's own context. All of which does not speak to the volatile situation of the commander-in-chief of the most powerful military in the world making improvised foreign policy declarations over twitter. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/17/magazine/rex-tillerson-and-the-unraveling-of-the-state-department.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/17/magazine/rex-tillerson-an...