Maddow: GOP attacking Rice so Kerry will leave Senate

[kpete]

It doesn’t matter how many closed-door meetings Republicans have with the CIA and U.S. Ambassador Susan Rice, MSNBC host Rachel Maddow theorized Wednesday, because Rice being named Secretary of State would prevent them from what they really want: the chance to get another seat in the Senate.

The reason, Maddow said, GOP lawmakers “prefer” Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) get a presidential cabinet nomination — either to that position or Secretary of Defense — is that the promotion would open up his Senate seat to a special election.

“You know what? Maybe this is nuts,” she conceded. “Maybe this is nuts. Maybe this is way too simplistic. But maybe this makes more sense than the contention we are supposed to believe, which is that two active investigations, multiple hours-long briefings, a statement from the president, a statement from the UN ambassador, a closed-door, more than an hour long meeting with that ambassador, and a personal one-on-one ask me anything with the director of the CIA have not given [Sen.] John McCain (R-AZ) enough opportunity to ask whatever questions it is he wants to ask about remarks made on a Sunday morning talk show two and a half months ago.”

..................................


http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1112/83771.html
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/11/28/maddow-gop-attacking-rice-so-kerry-will-leave-senate/

[onehandle]

1. Clearly. And Scott Brown will slip right back in. Fuck that. nt

[ananda]

2. That's an interesting take.

I think Obama should just push Susan Rice down the GOP throats and let them choke on it!

[robinlynne]

18. funny thing how the Dems welcomed Alito and Roberts. Remember?

[RC]

20. And they both lied at the confirmation hearings to get in.

[MessiahRp]

26. When every liberal on Earth was screaming about their records, Dems had enough info to know better

I don't buy the "they lied about what they would do" line. You have to be a really naive idiot to take partisan ideologues who have ruled based on party line in their previous positions at their word just because they know what you want to hear.

[Coyotl]

27. I have a different take, more war on women and racism I suspect

What Republicans Want the U.S. Secretary of State to Look Like

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021895962

[ProSense]

3. I really thing this is

a stupid argument. The last thing the GOP want is to see Kerry get anything.

McCain is pissed he's not in a similar position.

[Blaukraut]

21. This ^^ n/t

[David Zephyr]

32. Thank you for logic.

And I agree, McCain is pissed he's not in a similar position.

Should President Obama ask John Kerry to serve, then that's good enough for me. Period.

[Mass]

4. Name Rice and stop the melodrama!

This idea is nuts, because even McCain is not senile enough to miss that his attacks will reinforce Rice's position, not weaken her.

But I guess Maddow is part of the entertainment complex and floating absurd ideas.

[truebrit71]

6. I think Rachel is right on this one...

...

[Mass]

7. In this case, McCain is senile.

because frankly, his actions reinforce the odds of Rice being nominated.

[Gin]

5. They don't want Hillary to run...

So....IMHO....this is tied to tying this attack on HRC...Rice is just the opening act.

[karynnj]

14. Not just Hillary Clinton, but Obama

From McCain's comments, I think where he is going is that the entire Obama administration lied on this because the "truth" would have risked the election. Yes, I know that is a bizarre fantasy, but the Republicans appeared to really think Romney was winning. (It is true that the second debate shifted things to Obama after the VP one halted the slide to Romney - but it takes a lot of creativity to create a way that Romney continues to get momentum and a lot is really needed.)


What it does suggest is that the hearings that Clinton will be at will be contentious and seriously nauseating. I assume they will be in the SFRC committee where Kerry and Lugar are both very good, but there are others - who mostly miss all the hearing who will be there - like DeMint and Inhoffe.

[tularetom]

8. I think Obama should nominate McCain to be S of S

and then fire his senile ass after somebody has replaced him in the senate.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

9. That's exactly what I though watching Barrasso with

Chris Jansing a few moments ago on MSNBC. They want Kerry out so they can boost their numbers in the Senate with Scott Brown.

[ProSense]

10. What if

"They want Kerry out so they can boost their numbers in the Senate with Scott Brown."

...Kerry doesn't plan on running again? How does that theory hold up under that scenario?

[bluestate10]

33. Kerry is up for re-election in 2014. Joseph Kennedy III would have 1 term in the US House

by then and Deval Patrick will be finishing up his second term as Governor, and Scott Brown would have been out of office for two years and his organization advantage at this time would have vanished. Patrick would likely beat Brown now, but would fare better during a mid-term with lots of other democrats running. Joe Kennedy III would definitely beat Brown in 2014 if Kennedy performs well in the US House. I like Joe Kennedy III because he is only something like 30 years old and can either serve for a while or serve until he is old enough to run for President.

[LynneSin]

11. Even if Kerry took SoS, Scott Brown would not win that senate seat

The biggest challenge we had with the election to replace Ted Kennedy was the fact that it was a piss-poor democratic candidate at a time when the Tea Party was something new and interesting.

Four years later I think the democratic party of Massachusetts has learned much from that past mistake.

First and foremost just because you are a democrat in a state that is pretty deeply blue doesn't give you the right to sit on your ass and do absolutely NO campaigning whatsoever. Martha Coakley was a wretchedly horrible candidate who assumed her party affliation and the fact that it was Teddy's old senate seat means she thought she could do nothing and be elected.

Which gives us #2

Back then the Tea Party was something very new and 'exciting' and had alot of momentum back in 2009-10. But that steam has puckered out especially after the wretched returns from 2012 including about 10-12 former Tea Party supported candidates losing.

I'm not saying that Massachusetts is a sure win for Democrats. And Scott Brown is damaged goods with his horrible racist attacks on Warren about her Native American Heritage.

You want to keep MAssachusetts blue - then pick a democrat who will work hard to get elected.

[MessiahRp]

23. ^^THIS^^

THANK YOU.

I am so tired of the chickenshit attitude that somehow Scott Brown who came off looking like a total turd in his race somehow will destroy a Democrat in the MA race. Bullshit! Every one of you that says that should look in the mirror with disgust and hang your heads for a) thinking so lowly of the electorate in MA which has almost ALWAYS been very liberal. Brown won because Martha Coakley was a fucking TERRIBLE candidate. That will NOT happen again.... and b) being such cowards of another race with Republicans, especially in a state that falls in our favor so often.

Not to mention, how dare ANY OF YOU tell a man of great service to his country like John Kerry that is the MOST QUALIFIED INDIVIDUAL for the SOS position that he has no right to want to move to a position that he has worked very hard to earn. He has the right to want to move on to another position, the same as any of you who worked hard at your jobs and apply for a promotion in your company do. With Kerry we don't have Keystone Pipeline nonsense to deal with and we're not expending political capital on a fight for an inner circle buddy rather than using that on key pieces of legislation. Kerry is an EASY confirmation with Republicans even saying they would not fight him in the process.

I'm sure Obama values Susan Rice, in fact his responses make that very clear. However Kerry is better suited for the job than anyone and so long as we toughen up and realize MA is winnable for us and not some fucking lost cause, we can end this stupid fucking fight over a potential nominee and start using this shit to, I don't know, force our will a but more on the tax cuts for the Middle Class/tax increases on the rich/raising the SS cap and hey maybe even extend Unemployment (extensions end NEXT MONTH for a lot of people). As long as we spend week after week talking about Susan Rice and Benghazi in the media, they're going to be able to spin the Administration as untruthful and whatever momentum we have from the election will start to erode.

[LynneSin]

29. When I think of Massachusetts and the Republican party I think of this old adage

Fool me once shame on you
Fool me twice shame on me

Massachusetts will elect GOP statewide from time to time but if they don't stick to their moderate ways they tend to be 1-termers. Hell why do you think Romney didn't run a 2nd term as governor - he knew he was a lost cause and didn't want that on his head when he made it his lifetime goal to run for president.

I know the GOP is very capable of running and winning a statewide race. But when the GOP fails to live up to it's moderate promises the voters lose faith quickly.

[Coyotl]

28. Don't they have a few Kennedys?

[bluestate10]

34. I read your post and the other replies to it. The lack of understanding of my state and it's

politics is stunning. It borders on complete ignorance. I know my state, we don't want another tough election until 2014. Suggest that Obama appoint Feinstein as SOS, she is a woman and California has a better chance of sending a Progressive to the Senate than my state has.

[SugarShack]

12. Not worried about Scott Brown, but indeed worried about Kerry leaving the Senate! Just called office

[blm]

13. McCain's overthetop dramatics are assuring Rice be nominated, and he knows it. They want someone

more hawkish than a SoS Kerry would be, preferring a SoS in the Hillary Clinton mode, and Rice fits the bill. They are targeting Rice because it corners Obama into nominating her. They will get to have it both ways. They get a more hawkish SoS and they can also point to their opposition to her at the first sign of any trouble at State Dept.

[OldDem2012]

15. Very plausible. nt.

[Submariner]

16. The Boston Herald and Howie Carr

are almost orgasmic pushing this line of thought.

[nadinbrzezinski]

17. Yup, it is obvious to anybody paying attention

They want Scott Brown back in

[Zorra]

19. The President could stop this immediately by suggesting Rep. Dennis Kucinich for SOS!

That would scare the GOP and the MIC so bad that Susan Rice would quickly become their new best friend.

[RC]

22. +10

Keep'em guessin'.

[Bucky]

24. From Massachusetts. Such strategery.

They got lucky once in Massachusetts cause the Dems got sloppy with one nominee. The chances of that happening again are... well... I don't know. But figuring odds on winning isn't something Republicans get to brag about.

[JI7]

25. well, he doesn't have to pick Kerry either, if he did it is because

he wants him.

[hrmjustin]

30. K&R!

[woo me with science]

31. In what universe are we supposed to be happy about an SOS pick

who is a warmonger and who has intimate ties to Big Oil?

This sounds to me more like a scam to get Dems to celebrate exactly the sort of SOS we should be opposing.

Removing Kerry from the Senate or placing Rice at SOS should not be the only options here.