You're right. Cabinet members report directly to the President and he -- or she! -- is their primary constituent. As public servants they implicitly work for us as well but they are under no obligation to explain their actions or decisions to us.

FWIW I am not a Condi Rice fan, as much as I would like to be. It has nothing to do with the concept of women in power. It has everything to do with her job performance. Her last job did not go well and she actually got promoted to one of the most influential jobs in the world, U.S. Secretary of State. In theory, anyway. On her recent trips to the Middle East it was abundantly clear that she had little sway with the people she met with. Part of that was beyond her control, the ground fouled by the policies of this administration, but a stronger Sec. of State could have done more.


>I'll agree with number 1, but I don't know of any 'mandate' as such in number 2. In fact, the Secretary of State is the President's chief adviser on matters that deal with foreign countries but I don't think there is any mandate in dealing with the public. Time for me to do some research because I really am not sure...
>
>
>
>>>>>Hypotheticals don't need to be discussed publicly by the Secretary of State.
>>>>
>>>>You say a lot of interesting and intelligent things, but that is the most ridiculous statement you've uttered.
>>>
>>>How so?
>>
>>1) She's the chief diplomat. That world is based on hypotheticals
>>2) She's a public servant. Her mandate is to respond to public queries.