HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Democrats » John Kerry (Group) » Kate Sheppard of Mother J...

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 11:00 PM

Kate Sheppard of Mother Jones wrote a nice article about Kerry as a climate hawk



Kerry is among the most fierce advocates for climate action in the Senate. Here he is in a floor speech from August talking about why climate change is "as significant a level of importance" as Syria and Iran:

Well, this issue actually is of as significant a level of importance, because it affects life itself on the planet. Because it affects ecosystems on which the oceans and the land depend for the relationship of the warmth of our earth and the amount of moisture that there is and all of the interactions that occur as a consequence of our climate.
<snip>
That's not to say that Clinton hasn't also expressed interest in climate change; she has. But it seems that it would be far higher up the priorities list for Kerry.



http://www.motherjones.com/blue-marble/2012/12/john-kerry-would-be-climate-hawk-state

14 replies, 1386 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)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 11:23 PM

1. So would he be more valuable at

State or in the Senate?

Who is likely to run for his position? A Kennedy?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cilla4progress (Reply #1)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:14 AM

3. Please no! Ed Markey has said he was seriously interested.

If we want a name that has some serious creds on this issue and has actually real links to MA, this is the one. (and it is not as if we risked losing the 7th district to a Republican).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to karynnj (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:39 AM

2. It's about time he was recognized for his work for the environment

Glad to see this kind of thing out there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MBS (Reply #2)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 01:11 PM

4. Yes, it is. I posted this story in GD, but, positive JK articles tend to get ignored there.

.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blm (Reply #4)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 05:39 PM

5. Oops - I did do, but it sunk very quickly

I also think that global warming itself is kind of hit or miss with DU. They were happy when it was Gore's movie vs Bush and Gore was a hero, but most seem not all that consistent. They also seemed to have no clue that Kerry had the best Senate record.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to karynnj (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 06:16 PM

6. Good, because he is getting no love on MSNBC's Alex Wagner show.

Frankly, I have always been less than impressed by her, but today this is really ridiculous:

http://tv.msnbc.com/2012/12/18/john-kerry-now-the-republicans-favorite-democrat/
Of course the platitude about needing a woman or a minority. While I agree that women should be represented largely in the cabinet and not only in subsidiary positions, why does it have to be in State (and frankly why are they not criticizing Hagel, who after all is a Republican).


John Kerry, now the Republicans’ favorite Democrat
Matthew Alexander
5:59 pm on 12/18/2012

On Tuesday’s show, Alex and her panel discussed a Washington Post report suggesting President Obama will on Friday nominate Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) and former Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) to be his next Secretary of State and Secretary of Defense, respectively.
Kerry is an “honorable” and “qualified” choice to be the nation’s top diplomat, the panel agreed, they couldn’t help weighing his good fortune against the GOP’s harsh treatment of the president’s apparent first choice, U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice, who withdrew her name from consideration last week.
“I do think the White House has to be a little bit careful,” said panelist and former DNC Communications Director Karen Finney. “I think naming two white men in the same week when you just saw an African-American woman who was overly qualified get treated the way she did, and in a cabinet that–let’s face it–could probably use some more diversity anyway, probably not a smart strategic decision.”
...


Then the idea that this was what the GOP wanted. Frankly, I think that, even if true, Kerry was probably also the Democrats favorite, though they knew better than saying it.

The panel saw another irony in Kerry–a decorated veteran whose Vietnam military record was attacked by many on the right eight years ago–now being the No. 1 choice of Senate Republicans.


But the funniest comes from Ben Smith, formerly from Politico (frankly, that would be enough to sound funny that he is taken seriously). But basically, his point is that Rice is "extremely close to the president". Aside from the fact that it is an awkward formulation, while I can believe that she is closer to Obama than Kerry, what exactly allows this person to say that Kerry does not have the ear of the president (he was sent in missions, he was part of the prep team for the debates, so may be he is not a pal who has dinner with the president all the time, but aside from repeating talking points, what justifies this statement?).


“Kerry looks like the right kind of guy to be Secretary of State in terms of central casting,” Buzzfeed Editor-In-Chief Ben Smith said. But “Susan Rice had something which Kerry doesn’t, which is being extremely close to the president.”
Smith noted that secretaries of state usually fall into one of two categories: “Rock Stars” like Hillary Clinton, who impress foreign diplomats with their elevated status, and those who wield great influence because they clearly have the ear of the president. Smith cited President George H.W. Bush’s Secretary of State, Jim Baker, as a good example of the latter.
“Kerry seems to fall in between those two things,” Smith said. “I think that’s not necessarily an ideal profile.”

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mass (Reply #6)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 06:34 PM

7. I had not seen that yet

I have not read the full article, but I found the premise interesting, and far away from the previous one.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/12/team-of-mentors-biden-kerry-and-hagel-are-obamas-senate-mafia/266445/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mass (Reply #7)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:02 PM

9. That is a very interesting assessment

To me what is interesting is that if he gets Kerry and Hagel, which seems pretty likely, the national security team alliances will be very very different than the first term. From many accounts, Biden, though extremely influential, was often the odd man out. It would seem that Biden, Kerry and Hagel would be a very strong sub group.

I like the order that he used here: "Kerry-Hagel-Biden doctrine" When Hagel left the Senate, he joined the foreign policy think tank that Kerry is associated with - that is headed by Gary Hart. http://americansecurityproject.org/about/board-of-directors/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to karynnj (Reply #9)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 11:02 PM

12. Interesting and exciting to. If this in fact will be the President's NST. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to karynnj (Reply #9)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 06:35 AM

13. Biden and Kerry together again, and Hagel and Obama were both on the foreign relations committee

so they have experience working on these issues together.

too bad Feingold isn't in the Senate anymore, he would have been foreign relations chairman after Kerry.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to karynnj (Reply #9)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 08:53 AM

14. Unfortunately, there seems to be a huge push back on Hagel from some quarters, and Flournoy's name

is reappearing. It would obviously satisfy quite a few lobby (a woman, somewhat hawkish, and getting rid of a perceived Israel foe), but it also would mean that the peace side of the equation would be diminished.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/19/us/politics/chuck-hagel-candidate-for-defense-post-criticized-by-jewish-leaders.html?_r=0

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mass (Reply #6)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 06:48 PM

8. Awkward formulation indeed

I've heard this more than once in the media: How close Susan Rice is to President Obama. It's beginning to sound sordid.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blaukraut (Reply #8)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 11:00 PM

11. Yes, I wonder if they have nightly calls.

And, if they are "that close" one could question if the President was really being objective in his choice of SOS.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mass (Reply #6)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:55 PM

10. Imagine me thinking that it was important to get the most qualified people for your cabinet,

not just picking them because they happen to be a certain sex or race.
And, the President never said his favorite choice was Susan Rice, that was the media's narrative. Personally, I think he intended to nominate Senator Kerry all along. If you remember right after the election, it was all about Kerry Becoming SOS, in the media, and them the Republicans ramped up their criticizm of Rice. It was only after the President rightfully defended her, that she became the media's idea of the President's first choice.
And, Smith is an idiot who knows absolutely nothing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread