Why Susan Rice Will Be The Next Secretary Of State

[Stephanie]

I suppose she can't be any worse than Shrilly

both experienced in nothing much.. so was Obama so lets put them all in our Guberment

 

[Skull Pilot]

All a secretary of state is is a mouthpiece aka puppet of the current administration .

That some of you think honesty has anything to do with it is puzzling. Puppets have neither honesty nor integrity

 

[Stephanie]

It seems for a Democrat to get into office the less integrity you have the better it is..

As long as you have a D after your name you is AOK

 

[sitarro]

Another weak, joke of a woman, for Secretary Of State.........weak assed president whose wife wears the really ugly pants in the family, weak assed Attorney General whose afraid to prosecute criminals, a weak kneed tax cheat for Secretary of The Treasury, a fake sailor for Secretary of Defense, some unqualified politically expedient and correct Supreme Court Picks.......it all fits.

 

[candycorn]

By John Heilemann

The Republicans have thrown down the gauntlet over the possibility that Susan Rice will replace Hillary Clinton. But the winner is already clear.

1. Because every piece of available evidence suggests Obama wants her in the job.

2. Because Rice is manifestly qualified for the job.

3. Because nothing she did with respect to Benghazi disqualifies her from the job.

4. Because McCain is being a jackass—and Obama is sick of it.

5. Because if McCain insists on pressing that fight, Obama will win.

DETAILS: Why Susan Rice Will Be Confirmed As Secretary of State -- New York Magazine

I think you're right. I do wish Obama wouldn't pursue it though because of 2 reasons.

I think Kerry is better known, better respected on a world scale, and is more qualified.

I also think this would be a good time to extend an olive branch to the Republicans in Washington and Rice (who is 48) has a long career ahead of her if she wishes to pursue it.

From a political standpoint, Obama will probably do it. There is no downside from all appearances.
-She's well qualified having served as ASoS under Clinton.
-Was confirmed by the same Senate 3 years ago.
-She was sent out to the Sunday shows by the administration for the express purpose of improving her stock in advance of the confirmation season--to withdraw would be a sign of weakness.
-There is no danger of losing Kerry's seat as long as he's in the Senate.
-And if the Senate goes through with their filibuster threat, politically, it plays directly into the hands of the Democrats to have such a high profile appointment blocked by a transparently cheap political stunt orchestrated by one of the most visible Republicans.

It should be interesting to watch. There is a time to fight and reasons to fight; this is not the time and there isn't a good enough reason.

 

[candycorn]

Another weak, joke of a woman, for Secretary Of State.........weak assed president whose wife wears the really ugly pants in the family, weak assed Attorney General whose afraid to prosecute criminals, a weak kneed tax cheat for Secretary of The Treasury, a fake sailor for Secretary of Defense, some unqualified politically expedient and correct Supreme Court Picks.......it all fits.

Gee, and Romney couldn't win the election? Shows you who is actually weak there doesn't it skippy.

Oh yeah..

Scoreboard.

 

[Katzndogz]

Rice will be Secretary of State and Kerry will be Secretary of Defense. We have a race to the bottom where the most incomepetent are the only ones qualified to hold office. Isn't this called an ineptocracy?

Ineptocracy (in-ep-toc'-ra-cy) - a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers.

 

[Wolfsister77]

I think they are looking at Kerry for Secretary of Defense and Susan Rice as Secretary of State and both are qualified for their positions. You can debate if they are the right choice but the President should be given plenty of flexibility in choosing his cabinet members. Even the Republicans have said that many times and as long as they are qualified to do the job, it shouldn't be an issue.

Regarding the change in the talking points she was given, that was done by the intelligence community, approved by the CIA, for National Security purposes and not by the White House for some political reason as the Republicans are suggesting.

The Office of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) cut specific references to "al Qaeda" and "terrorism" from the unclassified talking points given to Ambassador Susan Rice on the Benghazi consulate attack - with the agreement of the CIA and FBI. The White House or State Department did not make those changes.

Sources: Office of the DNI cut "al Qaeda" reference from Benghazi talking points, and CIA, FBI signed off - CBS News

So what's the problem then?