HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Democrats » John Kerry (Group) » Harvard Crimson editorial...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 02:01 AM

Harvard Crimson editorial argues for Kerry as SOS

http://www.thecrimson.com/column/jfmk-school-of-government/article/2012/11/28/kerry-secretary-of-state/

Nicely written, but too negative on Benghazi as Rice was saying what she was told. (Interesting comments on Russia)

20 replies, 1621 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread

Response to karynnj (Original post)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 07:42 AM

1. Thanks,

I read this this morning, and I agree with you on your assessment of the article. I just do not have an idea who this person is.


Here is what the Globe has this morning.

http://bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2012/11/27/susan-rice-seeks-support-for-secretary-state-nomination-john-kerry-keeps-his-own-counsel/0Vqz7UdrN5HtHQ7mQ6mmYP/story.html

Amid wrangling on Hill, Kerry keeps visibility low
...

His recent low profile starkly contrasts not only with his previously outspoken tendencies but also with the prominence of Ambassador Susan Rice, who is widely considered the front-runner to replace Clinton. Rice has been under fire for comments she made in the days after the attacks on the US mission in Libya.
...
“I don’t think he can do anything more than be mum,” said Douglas Brinkley, a historian and Kerry biographer. “Anything he spoke out and said at this point, people would be dissecting it and analyzing. It wouldn’t be helpful.

“Kerry’s doing what he should be doing,’’ Brinkley said. “This is not a time to be all over on television. You lay low.”
...
The Washington Post suggested two weeks ago that Obama was considering Kerry for secretary of defense. But those who know Kerry say that they cannot see him taking such a position — or any post other than secretary of state — and that he would probably continue in his current role.

In disengaging from any public relations battle, Kerry is taking a page out of a playbook he used in 2000, when he was on the short list to become Al Gore’s running mate. Kerry largely disappeared from public view (but still began writing notes for a possible acceptance speech at the Democratic ­National Convention).


It pretty much summarize what we tried to say, and do that in a paper of record that has never been very positive concerning Kerry.

Frankly, I am not sure at this point why the Obama administration waits. Make a decision, give a name and stop this melodrama. This waiting does not help Rice.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mass (Reply #1)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 09:34 AM

2. The only thing I can think is that they want Rice and are concerned they don't have the votes

One difficult thing is that if she is nominated, they would then expect Kerry to seek out the votes because he is Chair of SFRC.

Rhanks for the BG link.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to karynnj (Reply #2)

Thu Nov 29, 2012, 07:25 PM

17. And, that should be of no concern to Obama's people because

Senator Kerry will move forward if he isn't nominated and not look back. He would do all he could to assist her.

Personally, I won't watch the hearings, it would be difficult for me to watch her nomination.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to karynnj (Original post)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 03:49 PM

3. Seems Kerry is at least getting some media love

Not surprised, but it is good to read that,

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gExX9MdehPHq2iMcKr0gezD0hlow?docId=8357be229ae24de482707e43add4bc57

Kerry stays quiet as Cabinet speculation swirls
By By JULIE PACE, Associated Press – 7 minutes ago
WASHINGTON (AP) — Sen. John Kerry is angling to be the nation's top diplomat by being, well, diplomatic.
The longtime Massachusetts lawmaker has largely stayed quiet while President Barack Obama considers him for his next secretary of state. Kerry has asked his supporters to avoid lobbying the White House on his behalf. And he's defended his chief rival for the State Department post, Susan Rice, amid Republican criticism of her explanation of the deadly attack on Americans in Libya.
Kerry's strategy reflects what people close to the senator say is his disdain for some aspects of Washington's personnel politics. But it also underscores his awkward role in the process. If Obama taps Rice for the job Kerry covets, the senator will have to shepherd her nomination through the foreign relations committee he runs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mass (Reply #3)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 06:06 PM

4. This is good, thanks

And boy do I share his alleged disdain for the politics and media frenzy of the process. Ditto this
People close to the senator say he finds backroom lobbying for top jobs irritating and counterproductive. That view, they say, is shaped from his experience on both sides of the process: as a contender for previous high-level jobs and as the one making the decision in 2004, when he tapped John Edwards as his running mate during his presidential bid.
"John Kerry is very seasoned at how personnel decisions get made by chief executives," said Michael Meehan, a former Kerry aide. "He wouldn't be out there advising anybody on how to make this decision."


(it's also still fresh in my brain how pressured he was by the Talking Heads and the Conventional Wisdom to pick Edwards as VP. . .)

He is so smart to keep quiet here. There is absolutely NOTHING to be gained by making any comment whatsoever. This way, whether or not he is asked to be SOS, and whether or not (given the way this juvenile, chaotic and insulting process has unfolded so far) he'd want to accept any offer that is given, he retains his dignity. As he always as.

EVERYONE else involved in this sorry sequence of events -- Republicans, Rice, lobbyists for Rice, even, yes, Pres Obama-- has come off badly so far.

Glad to know that some in the media have recognized Kerry's class-act here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MBS (Reply #4)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 09:45 PM

7. ditto -great thoughts

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MBS (Reply #4)

Thu Nov 29, 2012, 07:30 PM

18. I agree with your comments. This has been sorely mishandled.

It makes me wonder about some of the people the President has surrounded himself with. Are those pushing for Rice the ones that have mishandled this entire process. It actually comes off as looking juvenile and poorly planed. Right now. Senator Kerry looks like the only grownup.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to karynnj (Original post)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 06:29 PM

5. At this point Obama should just get it over with and name his pick

They are really messing this entire process up badly. Nobody is going to come out unscathed here. BLM may also be on to something here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251256147#post7

blm (88,623 posts)
7. I don't want Rice as SoS for same reason I didn't want Hillary as SoS... too hawkish to lead State.

I don't want Kerry to be Sec of State because I'd rather someone of his integrity and investigative skills be independent and keep in check the hawks in the WH, at DoD, and in Congress. Which is also why the hawks like McCain and Co are performing this dog and pony show of praising Kerry as THEIR choice knowing full well it would get the less-informed Dems to rally around Rice, the hawkish interventionist more to their liking.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blaukraut (Reply #5)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 06:47 PM

6. Happy to see once again I agree with blm

and very funny to see how people run for rumors. Right now, somebody has leaked that Hagel was vetted for (uh) something. So, let's run and explain (and forget Hagel and voting machines).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blaukraut (Reply #5)

Thu Nov 29, 2012, 07:35 PM

19. A bit of a complicated plot. I don't know if Repubs

are that smart to have thought this thing out to that degree. I do think the SOS post she be held by an independent thinker and I view Rice as political extension of Obama. But, what will be will be. I suppose all things happen for a reason. I won't go so far as to say he should stay in the Senate though.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to karynnj (Original post)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 10:40 PM

8. Wonderful endorsement for Senator Kerry.

Thank you for posting this. I find it interesting that we see no articles so strongly endorsing Rice's expertise and experience in foreign policy. I think it is obvious that, no matter what outcome transpires, Senator Kerry would be an excellent choice for this post.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to karynnj (Original post)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 10:42 PM

9. Wow, it is toxic out there -

this process is absolutely counterproductive. Between some calling Rice (and to a lesser degree Kerry) war mongers and speaking of her holdings related to the tar sands. they are also back with pushing Wes Clark, forgetting that Obama had little use for him in 2008 or since.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to karynnj (Reply #9)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 10:53 PM

10. There's a thread at kos about the Tar Sands holdings, too

And a certain poster in that thread has been all over it claiming that Kerry's tar sands holdings are much more substantial and is promising a diary on it. I'm so sick of this mess at this point. If either one of them have tar sands holdings, they ought to divest of them before accepting a nomination.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/11/28/1165483/-Susan-Rice-s-issue-is-not-Benghazi

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blaukraut (Reply #10)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 11:03 PM

11. If Kerry has any LISTED holdings, they are from his Senate disclosure

and he has been clear that all the stocks are in various trust funds that benefit either Kerry or Teresa. Neither he or Teresa have any control over what the holdings are and neither are trustees . The trusts have many beneficiaries. Kerry's are the Forbes and the Winthrop trusts that he and his siblings inherited from their mother.

Here is a link that includes a letter where he explained that when he was mentioned in Sweitzer's book. http://www.businessinsider.com/insider-trading-congress-john-kerry-retraction-peter-schweizer-2011-11

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to karynnj (Reply #11)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 11:11 PM

12. Thanks for that info, Karyn.

It's better to be armed with rebuttals if/when this dude over at kos decides to post a diary. He seems awfully invested in the "he does it, too" angle on these holdings. If JK has no control over the investments, and is only one of many beneficiaries of the trusts, then I fail to see the equivalence to Rice's multimillion Dollars worth of stocks in oil and canadian tar sands.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blaukraut (Reply #12)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 11:19 PM

13. I just added an edited version then

The main culprit there RF, seems to be trying to defend Rice with a Kerry does it too line. The letter is pretty clear that the stocks are from their trust funds. (Of course that opens that Kerry is very rich - both from birth and from marriage. That does not make him less desirable as a SOS, Senator or person.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to karynnj (Reply #9)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 11:52 PM

14. Toxic, but the group dynamic is fascinating, IMHO.

Alliances are surprising sometimes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mass (Reply #14)

Thu Nov 29, 2012, 04:56 PM

16. Interesting take by Jim Fallows with whom I agree

http://da.feedsportal.com/c/34375/f/625833/s/260f2c3b/l/0L0Stheatlantic0N0Cpolitics0Carchive0C20A120C110Cpost0Ethanksgiving0Elinks0Esexy0Ekim0Ebloviating0Esolons0Etwilight0Eof0Emccain0C2656660C/ia1.htm

As for Rice as Hillary Clinton's successor, on the merits I would prefer John Kerry in the job. If you have seen him discuss these issues in Senate-floor debate or elsewhere, it is obvious that he really knows them, and knows his counterparts around the world. Also, as with the choice of HIllary Clinton as Obama's first secretary of state, there would be a karmic plus to Kerry's selection. Like Hillary Clinton, he came close but not close enough in running for the presidency -- and, again like Hillary Clinton, he has worked loyally and skillfully on behalf of the Democrat who did make it all the way. (For now, let's set aside considerations of whether removing Kerry from the Senate might give Scott Brown a good chance of taking his seat for the Republicans, as he earlier did Edward Kennedy's.)

But when I see the cheap-shot, hypocritical, know-nothing tenor of the "arguments" against Susan Rice (by McCain, Lindsey Graham, and others), I shift from a so-so outlook on her nomination to enthusiastic support. If her opponents manage to knock her off with these tactics, they'll have every incentive to keep using them. Obama didn't need to send signals that Rice was his first choice. But now that the fight has shaped up this way, he really needs to take it on, and win. He's still in his first term, but this is the first important test case of what he'll put up with in the second.


This is also why I do not believe one minute that McCain is pushing Kerry (for whatever reason).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mass (Reply #16)

Thu Nov 29, 2012, 07:41 PM

20. They have been blocking many of his nominee since his first presidency.

If this was the only time they have done this, I would believe it more. I really think this is more about having a debate on foreign policy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Reply to this thread