Why is it always woman hating, or bigotry and racism, or granny hating, or whatever other straw-mans you Democrats throw around? Why can't it just be that she lied, and was told to lie, and we wan't to know who told her to lie, and if she knew she was lying or not. Whether it was a man or woman doesn't matter. But Democrats don't seem to care about the substance of the argument, just what race / gender / age / nationality / class / whatever else the person being attacked is, in feeble attempts to divert attention from the actual subject.
Of course they want her to be secretary of state, because she is a good drone, who will lie to the American people when told, and do what she's told, regardless of whether it is good for the country or not.
In her present office following orders is the job description. As a Sec'y of State she would be expected to be a bit more independent, even resigning if necessary. Of course, she can be questioned as p/o the confirmation process..
Do you remember what Bush II did to Colin Powell? When he was Sec'y of State he gave a UN speech he was profoundly embarrassed to find was full of lies and he resigned. Condoleeza Rice was his replacement. C. Rice may be quite capable, certainly more than her boss was, but we can't really know because her job description was to do as she was told. Apparently Bush II strung her along as far as future public office was concerned. Republicans despised Powell, perhaps C. Rice as well.