JOHN KERRY REVISITED...

KERRY ME BACK

POSTED ON DECEMBER 15, 2012 BY SCOTT JOHNSON at Powerlineblog.com

Today brings word that President Obama has settled on John Kerry as Secretary of State succeeding Hillary Clinton. The record of Kerry’s opinions in American foreign policy is long and deep, distinguished by its devotion to mischief, error and misjudgment. To take only one small example, Jay Nordlinger documented Kerry’s wayward ways Latin America in the 2004 National Review article “Back in Sandinista days…” We’ll have to talk to our friends at NR about making that article accessible online.

Kerry has done a lot of damage in the course of a long public career. I saw Kerry speak at Dartmouth in the lounge on the second floor of Hopkins Center — the top of the Hop — during his entry into public life as head of Vietnam Veterans against the War. It was in the spring of 1971 just after his notorious appearance before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in April.

I had read about Kerry’s testimony in the New York Times. At Dartmouth I heard him repeat his infamous statement that our soldiers had “personally [sic] raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephone to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam in addition to the normal ravage of war, and the normal and very particular ravaging which is done by the applied bombing power of this country.” The Boston Globe placed Kerry’s testimony in the context of his career in part 3 of its excellent 2003 biographical series.

I was a sophomoric antiwar student who had turned out to hear the new antiwar celebrity. Kerry had me eating out of his hand. I believed him. I bought it all. Why not? He’d served in Vietnam and held himself out as speaking from his personal experience. I was a fool, of course, but Kerry cynically exploited the ignorance of me and many others like me.

One of the students right next to me in the audience stood up to walk out on Kerry’s speech and shouted to Kerry as he approached the steps descending to the first floor of the Hop: “You phony. You’re just in this to promote yourself.” Kerry was only momentarily flustered, bending down to the microphone and asking the guy to stay and talk after he’d already made his way down the steps.

At the time I couldn’t believe the obtuseness of the student; I bought Kerry’s act completely. In retrospect, however, that student may have been the most perceptive person with whom I’ve ever crossed paths.

Also read this excellent revisit to Kerry and his love for the Sandinista....

http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...ay-nordlinger#

John Kerry is an excellent choice for Secretary of State.

. . . I expect him to be confirmed straightaway.

John Kerry is an excellent choice for Secretary of State.

. . . I expect him to be confirmed straightaway.

Originally Posted by Fast Gunn

I agree, I suspect that Kerry's confirmation process will breeze through the Senate. If for no other reason, they are hopeful to pick up another Senate seat. Even though, it would mean they would have to hold their nose welcoming Scott Brown back as a Republican Senate candidate.

I think Kerry will be approved as well....Republicans are not like Democrats....they will let the President have his DOS choice...

Obama repeatedly criticized/denied Bush his presidential picks/appointments, recess and otherwise.

What?

. . . We actually have across the aisle agreement on something on this board?

I think Kerry is a horrible choice...better than Rice (maybe). But ultimately it is Obama's DOS and policies. I think the president should have his choices.

Democrats don't think like this...that is why you are shocked I presume.

Democrats don't think like this. Originally Posted by Whirlaway

I see that Whirly is now "Trending" to know what Democrats think.

We know that Sen. Obama and top Democrats religiously opposed Bush nominations......

THEN-SEN. BARACK OBAMA (D-IL):

Recess appointments ‘the wrong thing to do.’ “‘It’s the wrong thing to do. John Bolton is the wrong person for the job,’ said Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., a member of Foreign Relations Committee.” (“Officials: White House To Bypass Congress For Bolton Nomination,” The Associated Press, 7/30/05)

A recess appointee is ‘damaged goods… we will have less credibility.’ “To some degree, he’s damaged goods… somebody who couldn’t get through a nomination in the Senate. And I think that that means that we will have less credibility…” (“Bush Sends Bolton To U.N.” The State Journal-Register [Springfield, IL], 8/2/05)


SEN. HARRY REID (D-NV):
‘An end run around the Senate and the Constitution.’ “I will keep the Senate in pro forma session to block the President from doing an end run around the Senate and the Constitution with his controversial nominations.” (Sen. Reid, Congressional Record, S.15980, 12/19/07)

‘They are mischievous.’ “Also, understand this: We have had a difficult problem with the President now for some time. We don’t let him have recess appointments because they are mischievous, and unless we have an agreement before the recess, there will be no recess. We will meet every third day pro forma, as we have done during the last series of breaks.” (Sen. Reid, Congressional Record, S.7558, 7/28/08)
Recess appointments an ‘abuse of power.’ “Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) denounced the appointment as ‘the latest abuse of power by the Bush administration,’ adding that Bolton would arrive at the UN ‘with a cloud hanging over his head’ because he could not win confirmation.” (“Bush Puts Bolton In UN Post,” Chicago Tribune, 8/2/05)

A recess appointee will have ‘a cloud hanging over his head.’ “Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) denounced the appointment as ‘the latest abuse of power by the Bush administration,’ adding that Bolton would arrive at the UN ‘with a cloud hanging over his head’ because he could not win confirmation.” (“Bush Puts Bolton In UN Post,” Chicago Tribune, 8/2/05)


SEN. DICK DURBIN (D-IL):
‘Troubling.’ “When you have an appointment that is this critical and this sensitive, and the president basically says he’s going to ignore the will of the senate and push someone through, it really is troubling.” (“Bush Sends Bolton To U.N.” The State Journal-Register [Springfield, IL], 8/2/05)
‘Could easily be unconstitutional.’ “I agree with Senator Kennedy that Mr. Pryor’s recess appointment, which occurred during a brief recess of Congress, could easily be unconstitutional. It was certainly confrontational. Recess appointments lack the permanence and independence contemplated by the Framers of the Constitution.” (Sen. Durbin, Congressional Record, S.6253, 6/9/05)


SEN. JOHN KERRY (D-MA):
Recess appointments an ‘abuse [of] the power of the presidency.’ “‘It’s sad but not surprising that this White House would abuse the power of the presidency to reward a donor over the objections of the Senate,’ Kerry said in a statement …” (“Recess Appointments Granted to ‘Swift Boat’ Donor, 2 Other Nominees,” The Washington Post, 4/5/07)


SEN. FRANK LAUTENBERG (D-NJ):
“…bends the rules and circumvents the will of Congress.”(“President Sends Bolton to U.N.; Bypasses Senate,” The New York Times, 8/2/05)


SEN. MAX BAUCUS (D-MT):
“Senate confirmation of presidential appointees is an essential process prescribed by the Constitution that serves as a check on executive power and protects Montanans and all Americans by ensuring that crucial questions are asked of the nominee — and answered…” (“Dem Baucus Joins GOP In Blasting Obama CMS Recess Appointment,” The Hill, 7/7/10)

So what did President Obama do????

Exactly what he (and other top Democrats) criticized Bush for doing !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Obama is a phony.

Personally, I believe that John Kerry is an excellent choice for Secretary of State.

. . . I was shocked thinking you were coming to your senses!

I think Kerry is a horrible choice...better than Rice (maybe). But ultimately it is Obama's DOS and policies. I think the president should have his choices.

Democrats don't think like this...that is why you are shocked I presume. Originally Posted by Whirlaway

I don't think Kerry is excellent; but I think he is the best that Obama will pick...

Put in context Obama's anti militiary/anti-American values and add in Kerry's statements on the military and it is a natural fit for the two !

Kerry's infamous statement that our soldiers had “personally [sic] raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephone to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam in addition to the normal ravage of war, and the normal and very particular ravaging which is done by the applied bombing power of this country.”

Let Obama have Kerry....they deserve each other.

Isn't Kerry the richest person in the Senate? He married it of course. Not like a democrat to work for their wealth. The either inherit it or marry it. I guess this makes it complete, an anti-American now going to represent America. May as well put an illegal alien in charge of immigration reform or border security. We do have a union member in charge of the NLRB and someone who doesn't believe in plentiful energy running our energy department. We have been transported to Bizarro world.

As for the empty seat, this is Massachusetts. Current law says the seat must be open for five months before a special election can fill the seat. Like I said though, this is Massachusetts. The democratic super majority have changed laws within hours when they prevented them from doing something. Ask former governor Mitt Romney. He was going to appoint a replacement when the legislature passed by a veto proof majority that the governor could not appoint a replacement. The seat had to be filled by an election. Now they can change the law back I guess so Ted Kennedy's widow can have the seat.

Now they can change the law back I guess so Ted Kennedy's widow can have the seat. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

What is wrong with that? Following Sonny Bono's death, his wife ran for and won his House seat.

Kerry's slanderous testimony before the Senate in 1971 should have disqualified him from holding public office. It speaks volumes about the state of Massachusetts that they have elected and re-elected him for decades.

Kerry's testimony was based on the so called winter soldiers investigation of alleged atrocities by American soldiers in Vietnam. Much of the information Kerry presented to the Senate has been proven to be false. Kerry is on record saying American soldiers murdered over two hundred thousand innocent Vietnamese per year.

John Kerry is a person of low character and obviously unfit to hold public office. He's a natural choice for Secretary of State considering who's doing the choosing.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/...r_soldier.html

OK Joe, which Democrat Would you pick for state?