Kerry to give his first major speech as Secretary of State Wednesday at University of Virginia,

[Mass]

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2013/02/204780.htm

Secretary of State John Kerry will make his first major public address on Wednesday, February 20, at the University of Virginia – founded by Thomas Jefferson, America’s first Secretary of State.

Ahead of his first overseas trip, Secretary Kerry will speak directly to the American people about the value of President Obama’s investments in a strong foreign policy. In particular, Secretary Kerry will discuss how a relatively small investment in our foreign policy and diplomatic efforts results in a big return for America’s economy and security, and that American businesses and citizens have a stake in the ongoing debate about our nation’s budget priorities.

Secretary Kerry’s remarks in Charlottesville, Virginia, will be the first in a series of domestic addresses he plans to deliver as Secretary to report to the American people about his discussions abroad and their impact back home.

The speech will take place at 11 a.m. in Old Cabell Hall on the historic Grounds of the University of Virginia campus. Members of the university community will attend the ticketed event. It will also be open to credentialed reporters, for more information please contact Anthony de Bruyn at the University of Virginia Communications office by emailing [e-mail].

[YvonneCa]

1. This is going to get...

...GOOD. Can't wait to hear this series of speeches. Thanks for letting us know, Mass.

[wisteria]

2. Thanks for the heads up! n/t

[Luftmensch067]

3. Very excited about these!

Thanks for posting, Mass. I'll be interested to see whether C-SPAN tries to get out of airing these...

[ProSense]

4. Loving this speech

Secretary Kerry is really pushing the power of diplomacy, cheaper than deploying troops. Mentioned the Global Health Initiative, PEPFAR (both programs he had a hand in creating) and Feed the Future.

Kerry: Foreign Policy ‘Matters More Than Ever Before To Our Every Day Lives’

Secretary of State John Kerry argued Wednesday that America's foreign policy in today's global world has important effects not only abroad but also in the United States.

In his first major speech since becoming secretary of state, Kerry spoke at the University of Virginia, saying he picked the location of his speech to highlight the fact that "how we conduct our foreign policy matters more than ever before to our every day lives."

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/kerry-foreign-policy-matters-more-than-ever-before

[YvonneCa]

5. Same here. What a great speech on...

...foreign policy and the interdependence of our world. Kerry is such a visionary. I'm so glad he now has a larger platform to educate others.

[Mass]

6. I have no listened to it yet, just seen some excerpts and articles.

I agree that it is a good speech, though I am surprised that he was so political (or is it just two minutes in the speech that the media decided to excerpt rather than policies).

And of course, GD does not seem on board, whining on the weight of a "could" vs "will" and other BS like that.

[YvonneCa]

7. CSpan is replaying it tonight at 8 EST. It's a visionary...

...speech. I didn't think he was that political at all.

[Inuca]

8. Thanks, I'll try to watch n/t

[YvonneCa]

9. Just saw CSpan2 will have it at noon...

...PST/3EST.

[karynnj]

10. Just watched it now and agree = it really was not political

other than in the sense that he strongly made the case that the State Department/s funding was an excellent investment - creating jobs through trade and reducing the likelihood of military commitment. (At the end, he used his own 12 year old experience in East and West Berlin after West, but not East Berlin was revived with the Marshall Plan.) He also did, of course, speak of Obama's foreign policy.

The speech was well received - with much applause throughout - particularly impressive as it was a very serious, hour long, detailed speech. His enthusiasm was obvious - as was his commitment to the values he has stood for over his entire career.

I think you used the best summary word - visionary.

[YvonneCa]

12. Wasn't it great? It just does...

...my heart good to see his leadership finally get some recognition and coverage. I noticed that C-Span moved the noon PST airing to CSPAN1, which is great because more people will see it there.


Did you hear the applause in the beginning when he first came into the room...wildly enthusiastic, even before he was introduced.

[karynnj]

14. yeah, that was great to hear

I love that he chose to give his first speech as SOS to a college crowd. It struck me that even in this position, he is true to and sees the value of his activist roots. Speaking to these people, he was enlisting them to help fight for giving the state department resources to do the good work they need to do.

It also struck me again how easily he speaks of patriotism in a very natural way. Not as a gung ho America is best jingoism, but as a person proud when America does good things in the world - from the Marshall plan to the help with AIDS in Africa. It was also good to see his enthusiasm to face the incredible challenges before him.

Other than a brief regret that the media hid this incredible person in 2004, it was great watching this.

[YvonneCa]

16. I agree with every word...

...you wrote, karynnj. I have always thought it important for leaders to speak of these issues to my childrens' generation...to teach them and bring them along to solve pressing problems we face. Both President Obama and John Kerry understand the importance of this and regularly strive to do so.

BTW, I get that 'brief regret' moment, too, from time to time. But seeing the progress being made on turning the country around since 2004 really helps.

[wisteria]

11. Loved this speech-broad, but forward thinking.n/t

[Mass]

13. It always fascinates me to see how little attention the media give to foreign policy.

Except when it comes to calling for war, or attacking foreign people because "they are not like us".

Seems this speech was no exception. Generally, the media reported the AP or Reuters releases, which were most likely written before the speech anyway.

Politico did a little more, but did not like the speech. No vision, they say. I guess vision was probably saying "bomb Iran" or "let's arm the rebels in Syria".


But what can we expect from a paper which published this type of insanity about comparing Clinton and Kerry:

http://politi.co/YcO8It


Good sign, Nile Gardiner did not like the speech http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/nilegardiner/100203362/john-kerry-threatens-to-bore-the-world-to-death-with-excruciating-first-speech-as-secretary-of-state/

Here is CNN:

http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2013/02/20/kerry-diplomacy-is-cheaper-than-no-diplomacy/

USA Today

http://www.usatoday.com/videos/news/politics/2013/02/20/1933413/

OMG, Christian Science Monitor seems to have understood the speech:

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Foreign-Policy/2013/0220/John-Kerry-speech-US-must-resist-temptation-to-turn-inward

In his first major policy speech as the nation’s top diplomat, Secretary Kerry said the US must resist the same urge to turn inward that tempted it after World War II. Instead, he said, it should lead in the global causes of the 21st century, ranging from economic prosperity and expansion of democracy to the addressing of climate change.

and this

Kerry did not use his speech to offer a laundry list of the pressing crises he plans to address. He made no mention of Syria’s civil war, the Middle East peace process, or the challenge of a rising China, although he did speak of the importance of “making sure Iran never obtains a [nuclear] weapon that would endanger our allies and our interests.”

Instead, he focused on the broad global challenges that he said actually present “opportunities” for international cooperation and American leadership. Such challenges include “a dramatically changing climate,” demographic changes (defined most starkly by countries in North Africa and the Middle East, he said, where about half the population is under 20 years old), human rights, and global stability and security.

Note to politico: read csmonitor. It may help you understand what you are missing.

[karynnj]

15. The Christian Science Monitor article is very good - and as you said Politico's is pretty shallow

I read your linked Politico article on Kerry and Clinton and it is really strange. As one who values Kerry more than Clinton, I was surprised to find that read closely, it has far more passive barbs against Clinton. Highlighting her travels, but then spending paragraphs that boil down to her not having dealt with big issues, high diplomacy, or been a key policy person for Obama.

They do repeat the WP meme stated as fact that Rice was the first choice. They also argue that Kerry's career was up and down, while HRC's is an upward arc - which is not really true. HRC LOST the primary, Kerry was cheated out of the general election. It ignores that, though losing the Presidency was a blow, he was still a senior senator and his status in 2009 as Chair of SFCR was higher than he was in 2003. Not to mention, given their sometimes implicit, sometimes stated view that HRC was not a powerhouse as SOS, if she does NOT win the Presidency, she has accomplished less than Kerry at this point in time!

They repeat the constant HRC, rock star, popular meme - and seem almost surprised that Kerry looks to people like Marshall as a model. Marshall was probably the best SOS in the last 100 years and if you look at what has motivated Kerry in FP over his public life, that makes sense. (They are so silly they even question why Europe/Middle east and not China.) The comment that history will be less kind to Kerry is ridiculous - that will depend on what he does and given his principles and values, I would guess that, at the worst, he will be seen as not being able to get impossible things done - and equal to Clinton, in spite of her vaunted superstar status. A status awarded by the media and denied Kerry in 2004 - while routinely given to others (Rubio) for no particularly compelling reason.

[wisteria]

17. I like your comments regarding Politico. Politico seems to be nothing more than a political tabloid/

Trash and nothing of real substance. IMO Kerry will run rings around Clinton as SOS. Clinton has strong points. but I never thought she was an effective SOS. But, the media still feels a need to promote the Clintons. I don't understand the Clinton love or the continual Clinton promotion, but it must bring in readers.

I suppose Kerry isn't everyones "cup of Tea", but Poltico's continually put downs make them less believable as a real reliable and unbias source of news.

[karynnj]

18. I suspect that Politico is more comfortable covering politics, not policy - no matter who.

I would be unhappier with the article if I were a Clinton supporter than I am as a Kerry supporter.

To me, the positives they cite for Clinton are all about her popularity and her superstar status - and her career arc, which could as easily as Kerry's be called up and down. (After all, she lost the primary to Obama and without his wise (for political reasons) gift of SOS, it is not clear that she would have ended up where she is now.) Then look at thier comments on her role as SOS. She is said to not have had much policy input - which is untrue as she was instrumental in pushing for the bigger Afghanistan surge. It is said that she avoided big issues as SOS and leads with how much she traveled. Nothing said on what she accomplished. Only time will tell how history will rate this. Obviously our status in the world is up, but is this just because Bush was gone, Obama or partly what the SOS did? I suspect that she deserves at least some credit. I suspect that more than Kerry needed the SOS position for his legacy, HRC might need the Presidency. Without it, she may pale beside two dynamic Presidents. (ie I think that just as in the 2005-2008 period, her importance was based on her potential, not her accomplishments.)

The comment that Kerry is will be judged more harshly is likely true if what is meant is that he will not be judged through rose colored glasses as HRC was - where she was praised for very routine things and errors were ignored. The media has always and likely will always hold Kerry to a higher bar than HRC was - and maybe more than anyone else. I wonder if part of the reason is that he holds himself to higher standards as well as the obvious fact that he has never been a media favorite. However, when they speak of HISTORY judging him harder, I think they are wrong. From a distance of time, where you can see across time, I think the accomplishments that he already has will stand him well - and if he accomplishes even one big thing as SOS, he could well be in that short list of powerful SOS. He already is seen as one of the best chairs of SFRC. Though there are HRC fans calling her the best SOS ever, there are no serious articles making that case based on accomplishments.

[MBS]

19. now on CSPAN video archives

http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/311082-1