Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

UCmeNdc

(9,600 posts)
Thu Dec 27, 2012, 06:09 PM Dec 2012

GOP Plans To Block Kerry Until Hillary Testifies On Benghazi

it’s just a coincidence, now that the 2012 election is over – and Benghazi-gate was useless in defeating President Obama – Fox News is suddenly making it all about Hillary Clinton, a potential 2016 nominee. Last week, the Communications Arm of the GOP was sneering that Clinton’s concussion, which caused her to cancel testifying in Congress about Benghazi, was faked. Today, Fox helped hype a Republican effort to embarrass Clinton by blocking John Kerry’s confirmation as her replacement as Secretary of State until she testifies.

http://crooksandliars.com/news-hound-ellen/gop-threatens-block-kerry-confirm


GOP plan to tarnish Clinton's reputation before 2016?

56 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
GOP Plans To Block Kerry Until Hillary Testifies On Benghazi (Original Post) UCmeNdc Dec 2012 OP
Of course! djean111 Dec 2012 #1
You give them too much credit for planning anything lunatica Dec 2012 #36
They're going to keep doing this BS to keep Obama from confirming ANYONE sakabatou Dec 2012 #2
I concur. sofa king Dec 2012 #3
GOP WILL NOT BLOCK Sen Kerry, they practically nominated him, themselves. julian09 Dec 2012 #5
Nonsense. Susan Rice was the neocon choice in both parties. leveymg Dec 2012 #27
Rice is a neocon? LOLOLOL! Buzz Clik Dec 2012 #30
Apparently, you didn't get the memo: leveymg Dec 2012 #31
.. and your opinion is that the positions she's taken make her a neocon? Buzz Clik Dec 2012 #34
Her ME positions run parallel with the neocons - they support her over Kerry. leveymg Dec 2012 #43
Ha ha ha! "Susan Rice was the neocon choice on both sides." Buzz Clik Dec 2012 #45
Do you have ANYTHING substantial to say on this topic? eom leveymg Dec 2012 #46
About Susan Rice being a necon? Yeah, it's a bullshit claim. Buzz Clik Dec 2012 #48
"It's a bullshit claim" - that's a really well developed argument. leveymg Dec 2012 #49
I you studied Rice's career more closely you'd know that Rice IS an interventionist and Bill Kristol blm Dec 2012 #35
Your analysis is less flawed than leveymg's, but still flawed. Buzz Clik Dec 2012 #37
It is your misreading or misrepresentation of my statement that is flawed. leveymg Dec 2012 #44
Let me add a little punctuation.... djean111 Dec 2012 #55
You will need to add more than punctuation: Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #56
Repubs wanted Obama to nominate Rice, not Kerry. NYC Liberal Dec 2012 #42
No reason to recess appoint Kerry - there are more than enough votes to karynnj Dec 2012 #6
I think the recons want scott brown.. they just want to keep Cha Dec 2012 #8
The problem for them is they can't have both davidpdx Dec 2012 #15
If ever there was an argument for killing the filibuster and the "Hold" in the Senate RomneyLies Dec 2012 #4
Benghazi is the new Whitewater. Kablooie Dec 2012 #7
The GOP is scraping the barrell Rosa Luxemburg Dec 2012 #14
I have no problem with them doing this dsc Dec 2012 #9
still feel the same way? CreekDog Dec 2012 #16
I think at this point dsc Dec 2012 #18
I want bush, Cheney, rumsfeld LukeFL Dec 2012 #20
we should have held up Rice and later Gates to get that testimony dsc Dec 2012 #26
your judgement is terrible if you think having a SoS can wait until Hillary is better CreekDog Dec 2012 #21
and your reading skills are terrible if that is what you think I said dsc Dec 2012 #22
i'm arguing with your position on Friday, which was contemptable CreekDog Dec 2012 #23
You responded to this post dsc Dec 2012 #25
The DUer position is all smoke LukeFL Dec 2012 #32
They block everything. And they can't do a damned thing to stop Hillary, if she wants to run. MjolnirTime Dec 2012 #10
Obstructionism continues. Well, if they want to continue then nominate Susan Rice and have Filibuster Harry Dec 2012 #11
Repubs want a spectacle. I don't think they're going to TwilightGardener Dec 2012 #12
I'd like to see . . . Brigid Dec 2012 #13
I hope they'll accept someone else union_maid Dec 2012 #17
I hope obama and the useless Dems LukeFL Dec 2012 #19
Oh, the drama. Buzz Clik Dec 2012 #29
When all you have is a dead horse you have no choice except to beat it. yellowcanine Dec 2012 #24
No harm in Hillary testifying, and she should. Buzz Clik Dec 2012 #28
Wait this is FOX news talking....... Historic NY Dec 2012 #33
Kerry start doing your SS job and let's ignore those useless GOP. Sunlei Dec 2012 #38
"Advice and consent of the Senate" DavidDvorkin Dec 2012 #39
I guess you mean that whatever the GOP screams about the Senete will confime Kerry /w no issues? Sunlei Dec 2012 #40
No, I mean that he can't be SoS without being confirmed by the Senate DavidDvorkin Dec 2012 #41
Facts never get in the way Dem bashing n/t politicasista Dec 2012 #50
He is not the SOS until confirmed by the Senate karynnj Dec 2012 #47
The party that brought you 9/11, the Iraq and Afghanistan war, war against women, war against gays, still_one Dec 2012 #51
John McCain seemed to know an awful lot about the attacks at Benghazi Rosa Luxemburg Dec 2012 #53
I always thought it was to tarnish her image for 2016 Gin Dec 2012 #52
Recess Appointments... Jeff In Milwaukee Dec 2012 #54
 

djean111

(14,255 posts)
1. Of course!
Thu Dec 27, 2012, 06:20 PM
Dec 2012

But I would have thought they would have saved this crap until 2016.
That's a long time away.
It seems to me the original Benghazi outrage was trumped up to hurt Obama.
It didn't work, but they have this committee and all, and hate to waste it.
Plus they are desperately lusting after the opportunity to get Clinton and/or Obama to sit down for questioning.
Maybe hoping to call someone a liar, or whatever, get some sound bites and photo ops and youtube events for their own next elections.

lunatica

(53,410 posts)
36. You give them too much credit for planning anything
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 12:34 PM
Dec 2012

Basically they're just holding their breath, turning blue, then purple in the face while they kick their heels on the floor just to keep anything from happening that might benefit the Democrats and the country. They don't give a shit about Benghazi, because they already know the facts. They're just doing their latest version of obstruction. It's become second nature to them.

If they were thinking of the future at all they would be making sure Americans didn't hate their stinking guts come next election time.

sofa king

(10,857 posts)
3. I concur.
Thu Dec 27, 2012, 07:11 PM
Dec 2012

The overall GOP object is to obstruct and resist at every turn. Benghazi is just the closest thing to a scandal they can find within the unusually clean Obama Administration, so they'll flog that while they can--like Vince Foster, for us old-timers.

But "no" to everything, and the hostage-taking and dissent that goes with it, is also highly predictable. The President has shown himself to be highly adept at turning Republican obstructionism against themselves.

If I were President, I would consider using the January recess to appoint Kerry for the duration of this Congress, then use the GOP's blocking of Kerry's confirmation as a policy point in the crucial mid-term elections of 2014, when we have a chance to bag a supermajority in the Senate.

It looks like right now Harry Reid plans to keep the Senate open so that Republicans have to sit there and vote against the middle class tax cuts again. But normally, the Senate finds a way to take a week off in January.

That week, when the Senate goes out of session, will be the week that the President uses his recess authority to appoint Kerry for the duration of this session of Congress. The Republicans will be further tarred with infamy, and the mid-terms will be further weighted in our favor.

 

julian09

(1,435 posts)
5. GOP WILL NOT BLOCK Sen Kerry, they practically nominated him, themselves.
Thu Dec 27, 2012, 08:52 PM
Dec 2012

while attacking UN ambassador Rice.

leveymg

(36,418 posts)
27. Nonsense. Susan Rice was the neocon choice in both parties.
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 11:34 AM
Dec 2012

Rice had the misfortune of volunteering to put herself forward as the Administration figure on the point of a dilemma - how to defend the Administration from blowback from a policy of multiple regime change without revealing the particulars of what was going on in Benghazi. The GOP chose the low road of going after red-herrings related to embassy security and unfounded suspicions of a failure to protect US personnel.

Susan Rice fell on the spear for a policy she championed.

leveymg

(36,418 posts)
31. Apparently, you didn't get the memo:
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 11:48 AM
Dec 2012

She's a Mideast hawk, a liberal interventionist, but a hawk who aggressively pursues essentially the same policy of regime change as the neocons. Please, see, "Susan Rice Vocally Supported the Iraq War and Every Mideast War Since", http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021895778

Please read that and we'll talk about it.

 

Buzz Clik

(38,437 posts)
34. .. and your opinion is that the positions she's taken make her a neocon?
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 12:26 PM
Dec 2012

This is your logic:

1. The neocons manipulated the presentation of facts and lies to sell the invasion of Iraq.
2. Susan Rice apparently supported the invasion of Iraq.
3. Therefore, Susan Rice is a neocon.

That's pretty flawed logic.

We could use the same logic to demonstrate that everyone who opposes Obama (or Susan Rice!) on this board is a Tea Bagger. You buying that?

leveymg

(36,418 posts)
43. Her ME positions run parallel with the neocons - they support her over Kerry.
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 02:56 PM
Dec 2012

I did not say she's a neocon, per se. That's something that you read into my statement.

The source of flawed logic in this case is careless reading. Please review what was actually stated above and in the OP I linked.

leveymg

(36,418 posts)
49. "It's a bullshit claim" - that's a really well developed argument.
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 05:51 PM
Dec 2012

And a straw man you made up, yourself. See above. Won't waste any more time on you.

blm

(113,044 posts)
35. I you studied Rice's career more closely you'd know that Rice IS an interventionist and Bill Kristol
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 12:34 PM
Dec 2012

pleaded for Republicans to stop attacking her because she would be a better fit for neocon interventionism. She was an interventionist before the Iraq war and still is now.

leveymg

(36,418 posts)
44. It is your misreading or misrepresentation of my statement that is flawed.
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 03:00 PM
Dec 2012

I said neocons support her, not that she is herself fully a neocon. Just her stated ME policy preferences, but that's most of the way there.

 

djean111

(14,255 posts)
55. Let me add a little punctuation....
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 11:19 PM
Dec 2012

Susan Rice was the neocon's choice in both parties
She was the choice of the neocons.
No one said she was a neocon.
At least that is how I am reading it.

 

Buzz Clik

(38,437 posts)
56. You will need to add more than punctuation:
Tue Jan 1, 2013, 12:53 PM
Jan 2013

The author went on to defend the position that Rice is a neocon.

Sorry.

karynnj

(59,502 posts)
6. No reason to recess appoint Kerry - there are more than enough votes to
Thu Dec 27, 2012, 09:06 PM
Dec 2012

have him confirmed.

What is really despicable here is that Hillary Clinton said she did not want to step down until she did testify. This is pushing the Republican meme that HRC is not ill and is avoiding testifying.

This is more FOX than it is the Republican party.

This does go against the idea that the Republicans want Scott Brown. The longer HRC stays - and Kerry stays in his seat - the longer Brown is out of office and the SHORTER time he (or anyone else) has in office before they need to run in 2014. Push it to say April and the special election won't be until September.

Cha

(297,154 posts)
8. I think the recons want scott brown.. they just want to keep
Thu Dec 27, 2012, 09:37 PM
Dec 2012

up their vampire fanged attacks on the Benghazi tragedy even more.

Thanks for pointing out that the longer ol sb is out of the public eye the better it is for Rep Ed Markey or whomever.

davidpdx

(22,000 posts)
15. The problem for them is they can't have both
Fri Dec 28, 2012, 08:53 PM
Dec 2012

Since Kerry would have to be confirmed as SOS for an open seat to occur. I hope they somehow botch the whole thing (as they usually do) and end up with nothing. Another tire blow out on the clowncar.

dsc

(52,157 posts)
9. I have no problem with them doing this
Thu Dec 27, 2012, 11:47 PM
Dec 2012

There is no reason at all that Hilary shouldn't testify and probably should do so as SOS. This is a legitimate use of the hold peragotive. They are asking for a specific thing and one they have every earthly right to expect.

dsc

(52,157 posts)
18. I think at this point
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 10:18 AM
Dec 2012

they should get a promise of testimony when she is better since this will likely be some weeks.

LukeFL

(594 posts)
20. I want bush, Cheney, rumsfeld
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 10:55 AM
Dec 2012

To testify about 9/11.
Can you make this happen? 3000 Americans died on that day. I have legitimate reasons to want them to testify.

dsc

(52,157 posts)
26. we should have held up Rice and later Gates to get that testimony
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 11:28 AM
Dec 2012

it would have been a legitimate use of the hold.

CreekDog

(46,192 posts)
21. your judgement is terrible if you think having a SoS can wait until Hillary is better
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 10:59 AM
Dec 2012

you posted your message KNOWING that Clinton was ailing and not able to testify, only now you are relenting a little bit, but her condition has been known for a while.

your judgement on this is terrible.

based on your judgement lapse, your idea undermines your credibility, the prudent thing would be to do the opposite of what you suggest.

dsc

(52,157 posts)
22. and your reading skills are terrible if that is what you think I said
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 11:05 AM
Dec 2012

I said they should get a promise of testimony, a promise is something where you say that in the FUTURE something will happen.

CreekDog

(46,192 posts)
23. i'm arguing with your position on Friday, which was contemptable
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 11:13 AM
Dec 2012

apparently reading comprehension requires me to do a memory wipe of what you said 72 hours ago.

nice try.

dsc

(52,157 posts)
25. You responded to this post
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 11:17 AM
Dec 2012

I think at this point they should get a promise of testimony when she is better since this will likely be some weeks.

As to the other post it was posted on December 27th when there was no mention of a blood clot since it happened yet. At that time of that post, as you full well know, it was expected she would be well in a week or so which would hardly have been a problem.

LukeFL

(594 posts)
32. The DUer position is all smoke
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 11:51 AM
Dec 2012

We are not interested in what happened there, benghazi is a "gotcha" maneuver being used by repubs. unfortunately some Dems are also falling for it.

Like I said, when someone investigates 9/11 and all the Americans killed at various embassies during the Bush era I will be interested about benghazi, otherwise, lets move on.

Filibuster Harry

(666 posts)
11. Obstructionism continues. Well, if they want to continue then nominate Susan Rice and have
Fri Dec 28, 2012, 02:56 PM
Dec 2012

Senator Kerry keep his senate seat. Turn the tables on those bastards!!

TwilightGardener

(46,416 posts)
12. Repubs want a spectacle. I don't think they're going to
Fri Dec 28, 2012, 03:57 PM
Dec 2012

get what they're looking for--the whole Benghazi thing continues to NOT galvanize the public's interest. Hillary probably does need to answer questions about it as SoS, but if they think they're going to get something politically useful out of it, they're going to be disappointed.

Brigid

(17,621 posts)
13. I'd like to see . . .
Fri Dec 28, 2012, 05:02 PM
Dec 2012

Any of those Repugs do a stint as SOS and see how long they last without dropping from exhaustion. Don't they hold the record for being the laziest Congress ever?

union_maid

(3,502 posts)
17. I hope they'll accept someone else
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 07:17 AM
Dec 2012

It's hard to believe that a SOS doesn't have staff who can testify as well as the Secretary herself. Right now she needs to be allowed to step down and concentrate on her health. Kerry's probably the absolute best choice in this case, because it's pretty clear they've been in communication about the work prior to this and he can get briefed by understaff. She can finish up the transitional stuff when she's well enough. That's what would be best for the country right now, as well as for Secretary Clinton. Now, will the GOP do what's best? Just once? Or, do we have to wait for flying pigs?

LukeFL

(594 posts)
19. I hope obama and the useless Dems
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 10:51 AM
Dec 2012

In congress learn their lesson.

Repubs are nasty and they will do anything to eliminate us and make them lose their already waek political power.
And I say weak because Obama has not once acted as if he won the election. He is a weak president with no character .
I say this with tears in my eyes I busted my butt off for him in 08 and 12.

I was even spat on by a racist while canvassin during a very hot day in wpb.

My heart is aching.

 

Buzz Clik

(38,437 posts)
28. No harm in Hillary testifying, and she should.
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 11:39 AM
Dec 2012

But, Kerry's confirmation should not be tied to the testimony.

Historic NY

(37,449 posts)
33. Wait this is FOX news talking.......
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 12:15 PM
Dec 2012

The Senate confirms not the Congress......they'd all look like schmucks if the put a hold on Kerry a fellow Senator.

Sunlei

(22,651 posts)
38. Kerry start doing your SS job and let's ignore those useless GOP.
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 12:53 PM
Dec 2012

Even if those GOP disappeared today they would not be missed by me.

Our Gov. would run better without them, they do NOT serve 'the people'. Wish we could fire them, GOP politicans are harmful to America. I hate that we have to pay them and give them the best benefits- to screw America!

Sunlei

(22,651 posts)
40. I guess you mean that whatever the GOP screams about the Senete will confime Kerry /w no issues?
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 01:26 PM
Dec 2012

Good, because I dream about ignoring the gop

DavidDvorkin

(19,473 posts)
41. No, I mean that he can't be SoS without being confirmed by the Senate
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 01:38 PM
Dec 2012

No matter how unreasonable their objections, if they keep the Senate from voting to confirm him, then he won't be SoS.

still_one

(92,155 posts)
51. The party that brought you 9/11, the Iraq and Afghanistan war, war against women, war against gays,
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 06:46 PM
Dec 2012

war against civil rights, now wants a war against a person in the hospital for a life-threatening condition.

They can go to hell

Rosa Luxemburg

(28,627 posts)
53. John McCain seemed to know an awful lot about the attacks at Benghazi
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 07:03 PM
Dec 2012

it's almost as though they planned it.

Jeff In Milwaukee

(13,992 posts)
54. Recess Appointments...
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 07:36 PM
Dec 2012

Obama should make illiberal use of Recess Appointments and Executive Orders for the next two weeks, and simply dare the fuckwits in Congress to do something about it.

I've had it with these assholes. Obama has been President for nearly four years now, and he's still operating under the disastrous Bush Tax Cuts and a host of other policies that he's inherited from the most inept administration in history. Fuck them all -- just start exercising your presidential authority at let Congress be damned.

Obama is about four times more popular with the American people, according to most polls of approval ratings. Start spending that politcal capital, Mr. President.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»GOP Plans To Block Kerry ...