He should not take any heat from our part on this if we are not ready to blame Obama and the WH. If the US is not ready to say it was a coup, then what was it? As I said, I disagree with his comment (assuming we have his full comment and are not missing part of it), but could somebody tell me why it is any different from the position of the administration. I want to say Dempsey went high in my esteem when he disagreed with Kerry but refused to take the bait when Raddatz tried to have him say that Kerry misspoke. Once again, as long as the president will not decide whether it is a coup or not, it does not make anybody's life easier. Same goes for Syria (how do you get people to sit around the table if you have no leverage), Egypt (same thing).
As for Russia, once again I will not stop on what ONE person says. As for the letter from Congress, it is strange that people want to see that as a rebuke to Kerry, but when they were writing to HRC, it was not. This said, I hope he will speak out, even though it is not easy to speak out when there is no leverage (what to do? pull out of the OG).
As for nominating women and people of color, he has already (at least for women). Also, remember that the SoS does not nominate ambassador. He recommends them and the president nominates them.
The truth is that it is very clear that the Secretary of State has been managed during the last 4 years in a way that would make easier HRC's candidacy for the presidency. She dealt with sexy things like gay rights, women's rights, civil rights that would please most Democratic supporters, but refused to deal with serious issues. So, yes, there is a lot to do and Kerry has worked a lot on these issues. My only worry is that he is not enough in the US dealing with the department and cabinet issues and that it could (will) weaken his position (I am not that sure that the WH has much loyalty toward him, particularly some of the staffers).
= new reply since forum marked as read