"Kerry Is the Right Choice

[wisteria]

to Lead U.S. Diplomacy"


"In 2008, Obama’s staff was dead set against Clinton getting secretary of state. Finally, Obama broke in sharply and said, “You guys are missing the fundamental point -- she’s the most- qualified candidate.”

This time, he is. "


http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-11-21/kerry-is-the-right-choice-to-lead-u-s-diplomacy.html

The news has all been about Rice this past week, so it was nice to see something postive posted about Senator Kerry.

[YvonneCa]

1. VERY positive...

...for once. Thanks for posting this, wisteria.

[wisteria]

4. You are welcome. It was nice to come accross this.n/t

[Warpy]

2. And it might positively pave the way for that idiot Brown

back into the Senate. Welcome, Senator Centerfold.

[wisteria]

3. I really don't see Brown regaining his seat.

He isn't at all that popular in Mass. anymore.

[BlueCaliDem]

7. Maybe not at this moment, but in about four months

when SoS Clinton is ready to take a much deserved break from politics and hand the torch over to someone else, the Bay Staters just might have forgotten all those misogynistic remarks Brown made, and fall for his smile again. He has the money and the name recognition. Oh, I can see Brown's chances at regaining a seat in the Senate very clearly.

[Tarheel_Dem]

53. +1. It's a very real fear, and most of us never thought he'd take Teddy's seat....

the first time. A special election, so soon after the general, might not bring out the same enthusiastic voters who went to the polls for the president and Elizabeth Warren. Not only does Brown have name recognition in the state, but he's a national figure as well. Do we even have anyone in the state with equal name recognition, other than Gov. Patrick?

[BlueCaliDem]

129. I was pretty surprised myself. I really didn't think they'd fall for a Republican to take

the Senate's Liberal Lion's seat. I was absolutely shocked.

But should John Kerry take a position in President Obama's cabinet, they say Rep Ed Markey would be the one to win his seat. He's got the money and the name recognition, and he's got good approval ratings. Still, Brown could still prove to be a threat.

[Tarheel_Dem]

131. If this does happen, I hope the scenario you've laid out works to our benefit. I just remember...

the outrage around here when the President selected Janet Napolitano & Hillary for cabinet positions, people were outraged that he had chosen sitting Democratic officials. While we held onto Hillary's seat, AZ wound up with the worst governor in the country. Don't want a replay of the Scott Brown episode, it sucked.

[BlueCaliDem]

132. Today, after Collin's turn to take Susan Rice's words out of context before the cameras,

a reporter asked her if she would be more open to John Kerry becoming SoS.

Guess what she answered?

That's the reason why I'm convinced this coordinated scheme to discredit Ambassador Rice is an attempt by the GOP to ensure she's painted as an inept person before the public. They hope President Obama might feel pressured to pass her over and choose Sen. Kerry instead. That would open up his seat and they can get Wall Street friend, Brownie, back into the senate. As far as I can see, that appears to be their plan. I'm sure President Obama sees that as well and I trust that if he's planning on choosing Ambassador Rice as SoS Clinton's successor, he'll have his troops in place to ensure Brown doesn't weasel himself back into the senate.

[Tarheel_Dem]

133. I'm right there with you. They think they deserve a do-over & taking Kerry's seat would accomplish

that. I want the president to stand firm with his support of Dr. Rice, and if she can't get through confirmation, how about Wesley Clark? I don't want us to lose any sitting elected Dem officials.

[BlueCaliDem]

134. Exactly. AND they can support their beloved McCain as he tries to get Ambassador Rice back

for something she said during the 2008 campaign when "Rice took a disparaging view of Obama's Republican opponent in the campaign, John McCain, calling his policies "reckless", and dismissing the Arizona Senator's trip to Iraq as "strolling around the market in a flak jacket.&quot http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susan_Rice).

I believe McCain still has some unresolved issues he needs to get out of his system.

Also, this bothers me:

"I believe Senator Kerry would be an excellent candidate who would be easily confirmed" - Susan Collins. Yep. They're hoping to get Scottie Brown back into the senate.

[karynnj]

73. Have you heard of Youtubes?

His negative campaign will hurt him and there was a reason he did not want to run on his record. He can't in Massachusetts.

[haydukelives]

5. didn't he just lose

why is this such a worry for some. He lost and wont win again.

[Warpy]

10. Warren was a powerhouse candidate

and the margin was still smaller than it should have been.

I don't see another Democratic candidate of Warren's quality waiting in the wings. Do you?

[wisteria]

13. He has expended himself. He won't even be able to raise the money he has in the past.

I know of no candidate that ran and lost in one cycle, and turned around and ran almost immediately afterwards, let alone win that election. Just how enthusiastic do you think Republicans are in Mass over supporting this guy again?

[chillfactor]

56. if it means winning a Senate seat.....

I can see the recons going all out to see Brown elected...Brown has the money and the name recognition....don't throw Brown away so easily.....

[calimary]

127. Welcome to DU, chillfactor!

This makes me awfully nervous. While I admire John Kerry greatly, and under any other ordinary circumstances would be a STELLAR Secretary of State - OR Defense, I'd hate to see that seat open up. Because believe me, the bad guys will stop at NOTHING to re-install scott brown there. I wouldn't assume for one nanosecond that he'd be unelectable because his time has passed. These are dangerous waters. I wish we could avoid them!

Glad you're here, though! We need you. Stay vigilant!!! Especially if this does come to pass. We're gonna need all hands on deck and ready for battle again, immediately!!! Actually, Dems in Massachusetts should be preparing NOW.

[ashling]

118. Would Rachel possibly reconsider a run?

I don't live in Mass. (yet) but i'd vote for her in a heartbeat.

[Warpy]

130. Rachel Maddow?

She might not qualify for residency in time and it would mean a big pay cut.

Besides, I like her where she is. MSNBC in the evening is now beating Pox and she's a large part of the reason.

[karynnj]

125. Warren will be an excellent Senator and had a fantastic background, but this was the first time

she ran. Her campaign had its ups and downs. There are several MA Democrats who could run a campaign on the same basic argument - that Brown's votes do not always reflect MA - often at important times. It is also clear that he has not really learned - he recently spoke of being bipartisan and working on the fiscal cliff ,,, and then said he thought it wrong to raise any tax rates!

While there may not be a candidate who you will be as impressed with, there are people who have run and won elections in MA.

[wisteria]

14. Yes! You are right. n/t

[Mass]

9. It would not. We just won two election cycles where people were saying

the same thing. Coakley's defeat was due to a bunch of external reasons that do not exist anymore (including the fact that Dems at all level were caught asleep at the wheel, high negative feeling against Democrats, ...).

I dont know whom Obama wants, but if he were to want Kerry, being afraid of Brown is not a reason to let him go.

[wisteria]

12. +1 n/t

[defacto7]

6. Kerry has always been my first choice.

I think Kerry would be a great service to America if he served in that position.

[chillfactor]

59. I agree Kerry has a great background for the job....

but it is not your choice...it is the president's.....

[karynnj]

76. and the President has not made his choice yet

so any of us saying "Kerry" are no worse than you saying "Rice" -- especially in the John Kerry group!

[chillfactor]

82. no..the president has not

but I will respect HIS decision...will you..or will you come here and whine if Kerry is not his choice.....

[karynnj]

126. Of course I will - but I will discuss things with my friends here in OUR group

This group has existed since 2005. The fact is that even before the decision has been made, I have said that either is a good choice. What I hate is the way the Obama administration leaks these things in ways that hurt the reputation of people considered (which in itself is an honor) but are then rejected. (and yes, they are worse on this than previous administrations.)

[Mass]

8. Surprisingly, Chris Matthews had a segment saying the same thing.

Quite a few people have been saying the same thing, but defending Rice when she was under attack was and still is the right thing to do. These attacks were and are unfair.

[wisteria]

11. I agree with you. It made no sense to go after Rice.

I don't know what the Republicans were trying to accomplish by attacking her. She made none of the big decisions in Benghazi.

Oh, and it is good to read that Mathews had a segment on this very subject.

[Jackpine Radical]

27. They need a scandal.

To paraphrase Rummy, ya gotta go with the scandal you have, not the scandal you want.

[Mass]

15. My best bet at this point is that it will be Rice.

Why would she try and meet Graham and McCain and a negligible quantity as Ayotte otherwise?

http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/11/26/15462667-amb-rice-to-meet-with-mccain-other-senators?lite

And BTW, Mr Russert and Ms Mitchell are absurd.

Kerry, ironically, would chair her confirmation hearings, if she is nominated.

There is nothing "ironic" there, just the US Constitution, and, as he did with Clinton, Kerry would do that with grace, contrarily to McCain.

Also, I find ironic that people assume Kerry will run again in 2014. Senator, let people think you will not be there. He has been there for 28 years. He may want to do something else (not having any scoop here, just finding curious that the noise is that the Senate Leadership (hear Reid and Schumer) are trying to seduce some people to stay (poor Lautenberg. Let him leave if he wants to), but Kerry is not seen as somebody leaving.

[karynnj]

16. Even more why would the acting head of CIA accompany her

I think the fact that people, including both the Senate leadership and Obama, know Kerry will not just be there but will go out of his way to do anything they ask if he sees it as good for the party or country, means he is given less than people they need to motivate. I even thing in a related way this is why people went less out on a limb backing him in 2004 - they knew he would not hold it against them - as say either Clinton would.

It may even be that Obama sees the total package of what Kerry brings as Senator as being greater TO HIM than Kerry as SOS. If that is true, I think it would have been nice for him to tell Kerry that so Kerry could have taken his name out of contention and avoided all the attacks.

[Mass]

17. May be, but I am skeptical about the last part.

I would be nice, but it is clearly not seen by their daily actions.

According to the news media, the list is still Rice and Kerry (and nobody else), so they probably needed Kerry as a backup if Rice could not get it.

The problem is, however, that if he needed Kerry, they made such a mess of this that nominated a highly qualified person would be seen as a loss. Kind of ironic given that Kerry was the first name that came to most reporters' name before people started leaking Rice's name.

I also think Kerry wanted it. By now, he could have made clear he was not interested otherwise. He also would not be absent at a time where so many important events are happening in foreign policy (from Israel to Egypt and Afghanistan), mostly in his area of expertise.

I am less bothered by the fact he is not nominated than by the fact the Democratic Party in general and the WH in particular does not seem able to show respect for people who are worthwhile (Kerry, but also Patty Murray, and others in the House). They were able to create a new position for Schumer in the leadership, but not for Murray? Kerry and Murray seem to be the goto people among the Democrats in the Senate for something nobody wants to do, but they get little recognition for it and this recognition is soon forgotten. I guess it goes with the territory, but it is sad.

Now. let's just hope Obama names Rice and starts using his political capital for issues that really matter (a choice between Rice and Kerry is not going to change people's life).

[karynnj]

18. Not just the media, there were many Senators who praised Kerry

as the natural choice - and not just Republicans. What I was meaning was that Kerry as chair of SFRC, Obama and the party had:

1) A distinguished loyal chair of SFRC. Just as in 2008, when the idea was floated that Kerry could not be spared as Feingold as chair could be a potential problem, this year Menendez is worse. In addition to his hard right Cuba policy, he is far more hawkish with regards to Iran and far less likely to make the effort Kerry has - sometimes even when it could harm his own reputation - to smooth things in the Senate for Obama.

2) Kerry as chair of SFRC also diminishes the fact that Rice has at best mediocre relations and links to Congress. Expect Kerry to do the heavy listing to get confirmations and administration policy passed - he is far more capable, has the relationships, and did so even when Clinton was SOS.

3) Kerry is a force on the Finance committee and seems well respected by Baucus. (Again as you say, he and Murray have taken on the uncomfortable roles. I would add Durbin to that group.) I would expect that Kerry would be one of the people that Obama/Reid would push to work on a grand bargain. Another lose/lose proposition for any Democrat.

4) It means that Massachusetts need not worry about a special election - something you and other Massachusetts people feel is not that great a hardship.

5) There is no reason that Obama would not use Kerry as a diplomat - with no credentials - just as he did in three of the thorniest problems last term. He did some very good things and got relatively little credit. (With Afghanistan, the Clinton allies even usurped what Kerry did assigning it nearly word by word to Hillary. I guess you can say that was flattery, but not really.)

6) It also leaves Kerry as a fund raiser - something I doubt anyone really enjoys doing, but in the last 5 elections he has been one of the best.

Beachmom posted in 2009 of how Obama did not help the various people in Chicago who facilitated his career. That he looked more to who could help him in the future. This was clearly true in his picking Clinton - and Bill's help in the election may not have been anywhere near as good without it and that could have been critical. But, I would bet that in 2008, Clinton likely wanted HHS to head the healthcare effort - and there were rumors of that or her heading it in the HELP subcommittee. With Kerry, he did nominate Kerry allies to plum diplomatic posts and he has invited him and Teresa to the state dinners, so it is not like he has been ignored.

As to Rice, I don't get what Obama sees in her over Kerry. She is smart, but even before the SOS talk, she was seen as occasionally contentious. She was impressive in her hearing in 2009. Given the Obama's people's claim that Clinton's name recognition would make her more effective, they are pretty hypocritical as Kerry is FAR better known than Rice and he is a born diplomat - which few call Rice. (The only plus for Kerry is that he will be home with Teresa more often.)

[wisteria]

43. Your last comment,

&quot a choice between Rice and Kerry is not going to change people's life)." I think you have to consider that our lead diplomat around the world has the power to broker peace, or anger other leaders enough to start wars,global economic issues and global warming, as well as humanity issues also can have an impact on us all.

[Mass]

46. Yes, but Rice is competent and her philosophy is not that different from Kerry.

In any case, if Obama wants her to work on global warming or any other things, she will, and if he does not want, no SoS will.

[wisteria]

24. Yes, why keep him in the mix when it is obvious what they plan on doing.

It keeps Senator Kerry's supports dangling and seems like a slap in the face for Senator Kerry. I want to say, screw them.

[wisteria]

21. I know I am terrible for saying this, but she apparently did not charm them today.

And, I am happy about that.
It is obvious that Obama wants her. There is absolutely no discretion being used in her regard. It seems almost teasing to keep saying that Senator Kerry is still being considered. I never really cared for her, but I only know a little about her, maybe that is why Obama thought it would be easy for her. I admired Richard Holbrook, and her jesture was disrespectful to a fellow collegue who disagreed with her. I think she will be a mediocre SOS, and will change little during her tenure. I also wonder if she wants thos postion just for the prestige or to really make a difference?

[satxdem]

29. maybe

You should check her background before you assume why she wants the position. You know what happens when you assume

[wisteria]

37. I certainly can not read her mind, and she may want to leave a very positive impact, but....

she still is not the most qualified or experienced overall for this position.I feel Senator Kerry has a better understand on a broader spectrum of issues. I may have been a bit harsh, but I still oppose her elevation to SOS-whether she gets it or not. Oh, and I am aware of her resume-looks nice, but it is only words.

Oh, and what brings you to Democrat Underground, new member since November 6th.

[satxdem]

50. play that card if you want

Just being lazy, registered so I could see the election news. Considering I am only 21, a woman, black, college student, it is strange to imply I am a troll. See, you don't know anybody's background over the internet. This was my first election, was pretty excited, donated money, so don't assume you know me. I would never fit in the republican party so why don't you try a new line of attack. Attacking young democrats is completely unattractive, people are going to need us to come out in 2014 & 2016 and on. Don't assume everybody had ill intentions because they joined late, I was just excited to see a thriving place for democrats. Didn't know people were constantly on the attack, had I known I surely wouldn't have signed up nov. 6th or any other day.

[karynnj]

63. Better question - Why did you come to this group?

Do you understand the purpose of the groups? If you were looking for election news, one would not particularly find it here. As to attacking, you came here to our group and attacked us for not supporting Rice, who has the support of the entire left blogospere - so get real!

I suspect that you looked here because you support Rice, maybe because she is black and female and Kerry is the other person who is considered a candidate. Then you have done nothing except insult all of us here. Not because we attacked Rice - we didn't, but because we think Kerry a better alternative.

[satxdem]

65. why don't you stop responding to my post.

Read what i wrote nutjob. I registered for DU on election night to see election news. Scroll up and see what the person above asked me. Do you see it? It says why did I register nov. 6. To be so enlightened you sure sound like a republican. I am supporting somebody because of race and gender? That is so idiotic. You are actually insulting me and other minorities to actually repeat republican garbage that we just support people because they are black. To assume I support her is idiotic, to assume it would be for that reason is worse. I wouldn't supprt Condi or Hermain Cain so really you need to think about that. I know I have no say in the matter. I am fine with either one of them. I am not attacking anyone on here for not supporting Rice. It's a free country, free opinions.

[karynnj]

81. I assure you that I am neither a "nutjob" or a Republican

The fact is that you came here and in your first post insulted everyone here in a pretty offensive manner. You have also not answered why you sought out one of the smaller forums - one that supports John Kerry - and decided it was necessary to attack us because we were speaking to each other about how we felt.

[satxdem]

88. what exactly did i say when i first got here that was an insult to all?

[wisteria]

108. You know that we support Senator Kerry,

it seems you came in here to either find out what was being said negatively about Rice, and to try and discredit our opposition and opinions. I know what I know and I know how I feel, and I don't need you to try and tell me different.

[satxdem]

115. yea. where was the insult?

[wisteria]

84. We do not call people insulting names here.

And, you still have not explained exactly why you seemed to stumble upon this group. I think there is truth in the suggestion that you wanted to check out what those who support the competition were saying about Ms. Rice. And, I would assume as a Democrat you would not support Cain or Condi.

[satxdem]

93. you all are crazy. another name.

She can insult me by saying I base my support solely on race and gender. Did you say a word about how we don't do that? Ofcourse not. I actually did, perhaps you cannot read, it was under the latest threads. Are we only allowed to view certain post on here? I didn't see that in the rules section.

[wisteria]

110. Iam not biting. Sorry.

I frankly do not care why you are supporting Rice. For all I know, she promised you a position.

[satxdem]

112. and for all I know Kerry promised you one.

How much sense does that make?

[wisteria]

113. Why are you here?

You are not going to change my mind or my feeling towards Ms. Rice or the President's actions in regards to Sen. Kerry. And, I an not going to stop posting my opinion in oppositon to Ms. Rice. So what are you trying to gain by continuing to post here?

[chillfactor]

66. oh good gawd.....wha is wrong with you?

no one is attacking anyone here.....some of us support Susan Rice..but we are not supposed to post our point of view? since when? I also joined DU to get election news...the threads posted here were full of election news.....

I support the PRESIDENT'S choice.. be it Rice, or Kerry, or someone else.....

i do not attack you because you prefer kerry....good gawd....grow up already.

[karynnj]

79. Do you realize what the forum you are in is?

All of us will support either Rice or Kerry and said so.

This is the John Kerry group!

[wisteria]

91. Well, I have to be honest and say I don't support her.

But, my opinion certainly will not change the President's mind. I feel free here to express my honest opinions concerning matters and issues that involve Senator Kerry.

[chillfactor]

109. I believe Senator Kerry is a great man.....

he was shafted when he was running for president....and he certainly had a solid war record.....not the schill slime Mccain turned out to be.....Your honesty is refreshing......and I truly belive in having read your reponses that your support of Kerry is truly warranted.

I also thank you for explaining why you support Kerry for not attacking me as others have done on this site....

I do believe that Rice is the President's choice for whatever the reason but I would be very happy with either Kerry or Rice being the nominated

[wisteria]

89. This is the Kerry forum, I don't understand why you would even

post in here. This is a support group site, not a general discussion site. If we post our opinions outside this group your comments, for or against are fair, here we discuss the senator in a postive manner.

[wisteria]

111. If you support Rice, go and start your own forum.

This is not the place to express you pro-Rice point of views. It is a pro-Kerry forum, and has been since 2004. You are dealing with long time supporters of the Senator, many of us have been supporting him since he began his run for the Presidency back in 2003. If you think we are going to abandon our support of Kerry in favor of Rice, you are mistaken. Again, read the description of a forum.

[chillfactor]

62. your reply to the poster was unwarranted......

I believe that Susan Rice is the best candidate.....and she seems to be whom the president wants.....

are you going to attack me as well since I am new to DU?

[karynnj]

64. This is the JK group - a place where it is reasonable that people are likely to support JK

There are hundreds of threads in GD supporting Susan Rice. Incidentially, the President has not made his choice -- and his choice may not be for the person most qualified to do the job, but could consider other circumstances. (ie Obama may not want Menendez aqs Chair of SFRC)

As you are new, look at the first post in this group - which explains the group. It is pretty odd that both of you low post count people just happened to wander into a group that was set aside for supporting John Kerry. As such, it is pretty weird for her to wander in and insult us for preferring Kerry - and you to then chime in.

[chillfactor]

75. other folks here also support Susan Rice......

and we are not doing the insulting...you are. I have not been registered on this site for very long but I have scouted this site for months. I have never seen any thread devoted to anyone person.....

so get off your high horse...there are TWO supportive bodies here ...for Rice and for Kerry.....if you support Kerry..that is you choice...if I support Rice that is my choice......

but attacking newbies is not the way to increase the membership on DU....and you should be ashamed of yourself....

[Blaukraut]

78. Holy Crap! What part about John Kerry Group do you not understand?

Read that little thingie up on top of the forum. A Safe Place To Post For Supporters of John Kerry. Get it? This in't the Susan Rice for Secretary of State group. Maybe you two should start one.

[chillfactor]

85. why are you coming after me?

other people here also support Rice.....what about that do YOU not get?

[Blaukraut]

90. If you actually read my posts, you'd see that I have no problem with Susan Rice as SoS

I believe she will do a good job. Likely do what the President wants her to do, as it should be. My personal belief (and this is my opinion, not speaking for everyone in here) is that JK would, at this time, be a better choice, but as I have also said: I want him to stay in the Senate and remain as Foreign Relations Committee chair.
:
As to why posters here are getting upset at you and Satxdem: Do you honestly not understand that this is supposed to be a safe group, where we can gripe, moan, complain, express our support for John Kerry, without having to deal with attacks such as yours. Simple concept, right?

[chillfactor]

114. simple yes..but I was NOT attacking anyone..let alone Kerry

i agree..I want Kerry to stay in the Senate as well...I like his seat being a safe Democratic seat

I have not said one time I would not support Kerry as the SoS....only that I prefer Rice...

[satxdem]

87. or we can stay on this one?

I never said I didn't support John Kerry. But you all got whatever you wanted out of the post. You with your where were you in 04 garbage and crazy karynn with her black on black support garbage. We all need to relax. Good grief, as if any of our post are being considered in the whitehouse. Personal attacks on who has been here longer, when you registered, mentioning rice, and race and gender is stupid.

[Blaukraut]

98. The point, once again, was this:

Most of us have been members of the DU JK group since 2005, and some of us have been DU members even longer. We have met in person, have formed friendships, and our common bond happens to be our support for John Kerry. Nobody is saying anything about you and your tenure at DU or in politics or on this planet for that matter. This is about the concept of the group you are engaging in, and the nature of your comments in said group.

[satxdem]

104. the point is you don't know me.

You don't know my motives because you misinterpreted something I said. You have been members since 2005. Great, I would be too young to join, and meeting with you all would have probably gotten you all arrested. My point is why can't I post here if I am not attacking Kerry and without you all assuming I am here to praise Rice. This whole thing started because someone said that they don't know Rice but they don't like her, she is a war hawk, and she doesn't want the job for the right reasons. All I said was to look into her background before attacking her character or background. That wasn't to say that she should have the job over Kerry. You all just assumed it was. Then you all get mad because I say that you all don't know the nature of Kerry and Obama's relationship. Just really odd things to blow up over.

[karynnj]

83. On DU, that is the norm, but you misunderstand what I wrote

Look at the top of this GROUP's threads:

This is a group, not a forum. Groups often serve as safe havens for members who share similar interests and viewpoints. Individuals who post messages contrary to a particular group's stated purpose can be excluded from posting in that group. For detailed information about this group and its purpose, click here.

The purpose of the group is supporting John Kerry.

[wisteria]

117. Some here will support the President's choice.

No matter what, others would like to see him still remain there Senator in Mass. Others, think the position should go to Kerry, but are willing to live with Rice and other only support Kerry here. So we are a deverse group, but the thread that binds us is our respect, admiration, and belief in Senator Kerry's abilities and statesmanship.

This site is only for Kerry supporters. It is a site devoted to one person and it has been this way since 2004. So either you just post about Kerry here or find somewhere else to post support Rice.

[karynnj]

119. No, you are the one who has not bothered to take the time to learn the organizational

structure. This GROUP is one of many DU groups - each of which has a charter that explains its purpose. In addition there are the main forums that are far more general.

This IS, in fact, the John Kerry group - not the John Kerry and Susan Rice group. Several of us have tried to explain that to you. There is a difference posting here and posting in the main group.
In that context, you should be able to see why the posts that several of us responded to were out of character with what is usually seen here.

[wisteria]

96. Exactly. n/t

[satxdem]

68. Thank you.

The whole I must be supporting her because she is black and a woman completely caught me off guard. I always thought our party was supposed to be more enlightened.

[karynnj]

71. Why did you search out anything in this group?

Did you read the function of the group? What is your problem? Are you that insecure that you feel the need to attack anyone who does not agree with you 100%.

[satxdem]

77. no.

But i think you most certainly are. It isn't that serious to me, we aren't friends and I will never meet you or know you. I didn't search for this group. You know that tab uptop that says latest? I pushed it and this was one of the threads that came up. Relax a bit. If I'm not mad at you for playing the republican black support card, perhaps you shouldn't be mad at me for...? Idk nothing. I am very secure but it doesn't appear that you are.

[chillfactor]

80. she was not "attacking" anyone.....

you are the one doing the attacking...

One thing I understand about DU is that we are not all of the same mind....we accept that..why can't you?

[Blaukraut]

86. Oh the irony. Can YOU accept it, too?

Apparently not, or you would not be so adamant about telling us to accept the President's decision. What difference does it make to you and Satxdem how we feel? Why the need to get us to shut up and fall in line? As you said, we are not all of the same mind.

[satxdem]

95. dont put words in my mouth.

Never said for anybody to shut up and fall in line.

[wisteria]

99. You suggested this not her.

And, aren't you supporting her. And, again, why stumble in here? Did you expect that we all would be jumping for joy over her suggested nomination? I think not, you wanted to see what we were saying about Rice. Sorry you didn't care for some of what you heard.

[wisteria]

94. You have had your say, support whom you want.

Now, why continue to post here? We support Senator Kerry here.

[satxdem]

100. what is your point?

I support Kerry, have I said one bad word about Kerry. No. I have I said one is better than the other in my eyes, no. I know this is a group, but it's open to the public to view and post.

[wisteria]

116. Whatever.

I commend you for not finding fault with Senator Kerry, but I find huge faults with Ms. Rice and I will continue to oppose her in the JK forum. Almost nothing would make me happier than to have her name withdrawn from consideration.

[chillfactor]

58. I agree..

I believe Susan Rice is the president's choice...he knows who he wants and what he is doing...I am not about to second-guess him.....

[wisteria]

101. Good for you. That doesn't mean I support his choice,

or even consider it the best choice. My opinion and I am entitled to it even if you don't like it. I don't follow my leader blindly.

[wisteria]

106. And, the more you post here,

the more I am opposed to her nonimation.

[Blaukraut]

19. Judging by the latest reports (no links, just MSNBC, etc)

Rice appears to be the top choice for SoS. According to Mitchell, Kerry will indeed be offered SoD, and will reportedly accept it, too. This disproves Obama preferring Kerry in the Senate. If that were the case, why offer him the consolation prize?

As I said before, I would much rather see JK remain in the Senate, but barring that, he richly deserves SoS. He is also the better choice at this point, as he is less hawkish than Rice.

Finally, the Obama administration has now treated JK like crap more than once. He has been on of Obama's strongest supporters and advocates, and by all appearances is once again getting shafted. I honestly don't know if Obama is that obtuse or if he really doesn't give a shit about Kerry and has been using him since the 2004 convention. Regardless, the administration's handling of this situation is tone deaf and downright unseemly.

[Mass]

20. I mostly agree

Not sure about SoD, as I am not sure it will be an easy confirmation. Otherwise, you' re probably right.

karyn may be correct with the fact that the White House may see him as a better asset in the Senate, but I find very frustrating when I see these types of comments

http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/11/27/15490075-democrats-on-rice-fight-bring-it-on

For those thinking Obama might instead avoid the fight and go with Sen. John Kerry, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and a likely shoo-in for confirmation, the aide noted that it’s well known that Majority Leader Harry Reid doesn't want to lose the potential vote

Now, this is only an aide, but it is likely to be one of the leadership aide and he was probably not speaking unauthorized, but this is all they could say about Kerry, that they needed his vote? I also notice Kerry has been mum of this. While I do not want to speculate on the reasons, it seems strange coming from him.

[wisteria]

23. So he is only a vote?

What an insulting thing to say. And, I don't by it either. It may be an excuse, but they can get along fine without his vote.

[karynnj]

25. That's my problem too

It hurts that they imply that Rice is more qualified when the test is just who Obama wants. It might be that he does not want a strong voice on the national security team other than himself and Biden, who he has not real choice on. Remember all the important issues. When you heard who pushed what side, Rice in most cases (though there as UN ambassador ) was never mentioned. All of us have seen Kerry and Biden in the SFRC - Kerry is FAR stronger and has a clear world view. Could he be TOO strong for Obama's liking. (With HRC fp was not her strong suit and there were MAJOR Democratic politics reasons for choosing her.) Putting Kerry as SOD also puts a capable man in a post that is not his strongest - and I suspect it may not happen. The worst scenario is that after fighting over Rice, he later nominates Kerry, and then gets him to withdraw over the protests that would happen on that and not on SOS.

One other possibility is that it may be Obama who is the root of both State and Justice being pretty non responsive to Congress.

[wisteria]

40. I do see a fight if Kerry were nominated for SOD,

and frankly I am not certain Senator Kerry and Teresa would want to have 2004 drudged up again. You are correct about Kerry being one of the strong voices on foreign relations,and I though he was a very, very strong contender this time. Imagine my shock when Rice was elevated from nowhere. And, the only real major qualification she has is she is very close to the President. Maybe he doesn't need a yes person as much as he needs someone who can agree with him, but also challenge him and present a great case for doing something else. Face it, Obama has been slow to respond many times on foreign policy issues in the past, he needs someone who has hands on experience. Biden has been removed from things for several years now, and I just do not see Rice as having the broader experience necessary for this post at this time.

[Mass]

42. This is unfair concerning Rice.

She is a qualified person after many years as a diplomat or working for the State Department. She will do a good Secretary of State.

I suspect she is the ideal choice if Biden wants to be very involved in foreign policy (Obama will always be very involved).

I am irritated at the way some people have dealt with this within the White House and how the media have dealt with this (Chris Matthews was still very careful to say people do not know who Obama will choose, but I do not really see how he can name somebody else), but frankly, Kerry is a big boy and he knows the music.

We' ll see if he will want to run again. After all, he has been at it for 30 years and may consider it is time for something else. After all, if he was nominated, he would not do that more than 4 years, so it would be the end of his career as well. (as I said earlier, no scoop on that. I just have some feeling).

[Tarheel_Dem]

70. I'm not sure why you feel the need to trash Rice in your effort to promote Kerry.

Susan Rice is every bit as qualified as Kerry. Look, don't make me start to hate Kerry by going after Rice the way the McCain trio has. This president was elected to make just these sort of choices, and I trust him to make the right one. Hillary has been a star on the international stage.

And, by the way, you seem to have a bee in your bonnet about the president's ill treatment of Kerry. I remember these same kinds of whingings when the president didn't find a position for Howard Dean. If we're talking about returning favors, which you seem to be implying, then I think the president should definitely find a spot for Bill Clinton. This may be a foreign concept to you, but not everyone does something for payback. Some people do things out of a sense of duty and moral imperative. I've always thought Sen. Kerry was one of those people, perhaps I was wrong?

[wisteria]

120. Ms. Rice is not as qualified as the Senator.

That is my opinion and I am entitled to it. It has no reflection on how Senator Kerry may feel, and if you dislike the Senator because of my point of view I am sorry. But I am not going to feign support for a person I do not see as qualified to be SOS. Oh, and the Senator is the most qualified of the two, and would have the support of the Senate. He is also the choice of my foreign diplomats. So, he should be given this position because he is the most qualified and respected. And, he has supported our President since 2004, when he gave him his first national opportunity and introduced his to the nation. Senator Kerry had served our President proudly, and with loyalty. He has taken some of the tough assignments in the Middle East and has pushed through the Star Treaty for the President. So do not come in to this forum and threaten to dislike Kerry simply because you do not like what you are reading about Rice.
Oh, and Senator Kerry does do things out of a sense of duty and moral imperative. So, why would my opinion of Rice affect your point of view on this? It makes no sense.

So you have not changed my mind. To bad I have no vote, I would vote against her.

[Tarheel_Dem]

128. "To bad I have no vote,"

And the party heaves a collective sigh of relief.

[wisteria]

135. Whatever, I doubt the entire party is on board with just one candidate. n/t

[wisteria]

22. You have taken the words right out of my mouth.

I had heard he only wanted State though. And, as for Obama I am what I call spitting mad about his treatment of Senator Kerry over and over again. And, I would rather see him not accept SOD too. I am even thinking that he might decide just to retire after 2014.

[satxdem]

32. why is it so personal?

He doesn't give a shit about Kerry? Lol. Is he one of the Obama daughters? It's not that serious. Rice isn't a hawk by the way. Either one of them would be qualified for the job. Calm down and stop seeing it as an Obama attack on Kerry.

[karynnj]

33. I agree that either one is qualified - but this is the JK group

It is presumptuous to come and say that we are wrong to mention that Kerry has likely now been used twice with his name leaked by Obama people then rejected to his detrement. I'm sorry if our criticism of the Obama team offends you.

Given that every other forum is singing the praises of Rice - mostly based on the fact that the Republicans are attacking her rather than any long term regard for her - and many are dismissing Kerry. I posted long ago in the gd forum that I think either qualified and I have no problem with those valuing Kerry elsewhere.

It is just that all of us have seen for 4 years stories of this or that being a test for Kerry - suggesting that he lacks something for the position. The fact is that there are people close to Obama whose leaks have been damaging to Kerry.

In fact, where Obama and the entire left blogosphere have defended Rice (Kerry was among the first), NO ONE haws defended Kerry when the LEAK of Kerry for SOD led to major, just as unfair if not more, attacks on him.

Kerry has been a great Senator and a great chair for SFRC - yet he very rarely gets much credit for any of the things he has done. The most bizarre attacks were those that blamed him for Obama's poor performance in the first debate - which wAS oBAMA'S FAULT - and it should be noted no one credited Kerry for the two good debates.

[Blaukraut]

34. Thank you, Karyn.

You know exactly what I was talking about.

[wisteria]

45. Bravo, if you could see me, I am giving you a standing ovation!!!!! n/t

[karynnj]

52. thanks

[Mass]

47. What you said.

[satxdem]

51. see this is what I mean.

I'm not saying at all not to mention Kerry. Clearly this is Kerry thread, I don't have an issue with Kerry. He's smart, kind, clear thinker, what I said is it isn't personal. I don't think Kerry is walking around frowning and pouting because Obama supposedly doesn't give a shit about him. That's just overblown, we don't know their relationship. We can't defend Kerry when John Mccain is praising him. We have nothing to defend. We know all know Kerry is a good man and a hero, but he isn't under attack now. That's why nobody is defending him.

[karynnj]

57. You can't praise Kerry because McCain is? That is completely batshit crazy

If McCain praised chocolate ice cream, would you say that only Vanilla is good. As to Kerry not being under attack, you are wrong all the swiftboat stuff is out because some idiot leaked that he could be considered for SOD.

Why even suggest that Kerry is frowning or pouting - no one said that and it is contrary to everything he ever did.

The fact is there are - by all accounts - 2 names on the short list. This is the JK group and JK is one of the two. Why are you upset that IN OUR GROUP we are 1) inclined to think he is the better choice or 2) that the Obama team is doing a really poor job on this through their leaks. That this is the SAME thing they did in 2004 is not good?

I've praised Rice in the regular forums and here - as has nearly everyone here. I question why you feel that because Rice is attacked by Mccain et al every needs to not just defend her but state she is the best. I really do not know why you are here objecting to us having discussions completely within the charter of the group.

[satxdem]

61. Twisting things.

Do you know what defend means? It is different from praise. We can praise Kerry, I just said nobody was defending him because he wasn't under attack. I am all for giving him his just deserved praise. I said Kerry WAS NOT frowning and pouting. I am not objected to the discussion at all, never once said we need to spend every thread defending Rice. I said it was way overblown to say that the President doesn't give a shit about Kerry. We don't know their relationship. That's all I said, there is absolutely no reason to be upset with me over that. I am not at all upset that 1) he is the best person for the job 2) that you don't like the leaks. I am actually quite calm, not upset at all but it seems you all are.

[karynnj]

92. As you are new, you do not understand the concept of the groups here

This thread is in the John Kerry group. The charter of the groups is that it is for people who are in support of the group's charter.

The fact is that Kerry has been under attack - because of the leak that he could be offered SOD, a position that a Kerry staff member suggested he would not want. That has raised ALL the 2004 garbage attacking Kerry because of his courageous actions in 1971.

[chillfactor]

102. it makes you wonder does it not?

I believe both Rice and Kerry are excellent candidates..I would be happy with either one. but the folks on this thread are of a single mind. I thought we were the party of diversity..not the party of closed minds.... i have never seen a thread on DU where the posters went bat-shit crazy like some of them have here. You and I are not the only ones stating that Rice is our choice.....but we do seem to be the only ones under attack...must be because we are the newbies......guess long-standing DUers can have an opinion but we supposedly are not supposed to...go figure....

[satxdem]

107. that's exactly why.

First thing do on DU after they attack you is look up how many post you have and how long you have been a member. I just don't know why they went batshit crazy when I never attacked Kerry.

[wisteria]

121. Really, go read some of the right wing posts about his

possible elevation to Secretary of Defense. They drudge up all the old 2004 lies and smears. And, if you think I should just jump on the band wagon and support Rice against the Repubs, I will not do it. I can not honestly defend someone I don't care for.

[Blaukraut]

35. Have you paid attention which group this is?

We have been the John Kerry Group since DU 2, so excuse me for being loyal to my senator first and foremost. If you had been paying attention since 2004 AND BEYOND, you might have noticed that JK gets very little credit and lots of grief among fellow Democrats. And sorry, at this point, the Obama administration has mishandled this whole thing. Pushing Susan Rice to the point of leaving no doubt that she is the likely nominee for SoS and letting Kerry dangle in the breeze (twice now) is unfair. If they really do have Rice in mind, they could have privately let Kerry know so he could in turn state that wishes to remain in the Senate.

As it is now, there is speculation in and out of Massachusetts, and if Rice is ultimately nominated, Kerry will once again be suspected as viewing his Senate seat as a fallback position, and not something he really cares about. This can hurt him in 2014, IF he chooses to run for his seat again. There is nothing people in MA hate more than being taken for granted, rightly or wrongly.

[satxdem]

55. yes i have paid attention.

We all love John Kerry, gosh this is a ridiculous argument. Since 2004 and beyond? I was 12 sir. By dad was being sent to iraq, kinda had other things on my mind. Please calm down.

[wisteria]

41. It is personal because, the President has used the Senator in the past,

and passed him over for his closer friends or politcal gain. The position of President is not about getting your less qualified friends jobs, it is about protecting this country and placing the most qualified people in posts of power.

And, I have to ask why you come out of nowhere and just come here to defend Rice. It seems like you are taking this personally.

[Mass]

44. This is unfair.

He gave the position of SoS last time to Hillary Clinton. Certainly not one of his friends. Certainly, he brought some people close to him on his staff in the White House. This seems a reasonable strategy to have people you trust around you, but, with the exception of Duncan, I do not see that he placed people that he knew well on his cabinet, and my guess was that Duncan was qualified, whether you agree with him or not on policy issues.

Yes, there are reasons for people who like Kerry to be somewhat irritated, but there is no reason to start attacking like that. Rice will do. She is qualified.

[wisteria]

48. You don't think Clinton was a poltical choice?

I always have. Not to say she hasn't worked hard and shined sometimes in this postion, but even back then, it should have been Senator Kerry who was asked to fill this post.

And, you are right, and I an wrong about his most of his appointments last time. Maybe he needs to continue doing things the way he did the last four years and nominate people who are the most qualified for posts. The idea that he feels comfortable around Rice is not reason enough IMO to place her in this position.

And, I will admit to being unfair-to some degree to Rice, she may have some qualifications, but not enough for my liking. I think it is obvious to everyone here, and I have already mentioned it, I am extremely disappointed in our President. I will admit that I did more and gave more, because I thought in someway it was helping Kerry get the position he so mightily deserved and was perfect for. So, in a way, I feel used to, because if I would have know what was to come, I would have kept my hard earned money in my pocket, used my time elsewhere and just voted for the President.

But, thank you for pulling me back some, I can get over the top.

[still_one]

26. At this time it is really not a prudent idea to risk his seat. We need him in the Senate now. It

is going to be a very tough four years

[MotherPetrie]

30. Ditto! I don't want Obama freeing up Kerry's seat for Scott Brown

[still_one]

31. or someone else. I want Kerry's experience in the Senate. I believe he will protect our interests

[Blaukraut]

36. Who is to say he will even run again?

And if he does, who is to say he will win? If people in MA think he is only running again because he couldn't be SoS (the impression that is being forced on him at this point) they may decide to give Brown a chance in 2014.

[wisteria]

123. I don't agree with your assessment.

The first four years were ruff, and we managed without Hilary Clinton in the Senate.

[patrice]

28. K&R for Senator Kerry.

[YvonneCa]

38. NYT Friedman flippant opinion...

...piece on SOS job:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/28/opinion/friedman-my-secretary-of-state.html?smid=tw-NYTimesFriedman&seid=auto


Mentions JK in first paragraph...DOD. Interesting to hear. Most of the article is a fantasy SOS nomination for Arne Duncan...which is nuts, BTW.

[Mass]

39. Thanks. I was going to post this. I did not read the column to see his reasoning, but I got a good

laugh out of the idea that Duncan would be qualified for SoS. Some comic relief after reading the latest posts in this thread.

[YvonneCa]

74. You are welcome. Comic relief is often...

...helpful. This article definitely qualifies...

[wisteria]

49. What did Duncan do, buy him dinner or something?

And, Kerry is great for SOD? Really? And, he has no real opinion on Rice. LOL

[chillfactor]

54. it is not our job to make or to recommend........

if the President wants Susan Rice...it will be Susan Rice.....

[karynnj]

67. The President has named no one yet .... but YOU came to the Kerry group

to say that Susan Rice is best --- so I guess you have NO problem with making your own recommendation where you know it will be unwelcome.

[wisteria]

103. True, but I am entitled to my opinion,

And, I don't have to like or support Rice simply because the President does. And, since this is a free country I can say anything I want about her whether you or your friend like it or not.

[Blaukraut]

60. I find it curious that a number of posters feel the need to come in here to tell us how to feel

As I've said before, this is the John Kerry Group, so please respect that and don't come in here and tell us to calm down or don't criticize what we (some of us anyway) feel is a mishandling of the SoS situation by the Obama administration. I like President Obama a lot, and always will have his back, but when I believe he is doing wrong by John Kerry, inadvertently or not, I WILL say so.

[karynnj]

69. [phone]

It is pretty curious and rather sad when the main groups are nearly 100% behind them that they feel the need to question anyone not thinking she walks on water.

[Blaukraut]

72. The ultimate irony is that I don't even want JK to be SoS and believe Susan Rice will do a fine job

It is the way this has been handled that has me angry. However, we don't need a WWF tag team coming in here beating us into submission.

[wisteria]

124. Me too n/t

[Mass]

97. Dont feel the trolls.

A couple of posters here are old DUers and we know who they are. Note that they also are the ones who do not make personal attacks.

However, I find strange that 2 very new posters decided to cannibalize this thread. Remember that some people may want to reduce Rice's support by attacking nastily. No need to feed them. "ignore is your friend".

[karynnj]

122. Good advice as always! I should have ignored them a long time ago!

[wisteria]

105. This is how I feel too.

In all the time I have been posting here, I have not seen anything like this. I get the impression we are just suppose to go along blindly and accept her and whatever the President wants to do without question or concern. I don't know about you, but I find that idea very distrubing.