E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSIt’s not just Benghazi anymore.
One of the most controversial energy projects in the nation also has become a flash point in the drama surrounding who may become the next secretary of state – and it’s coming from the left instead of the right.
Back on Nov. 28, “OnEarth,” published by the Natural Resources Defense Council, dug into U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice’s financial disclosures and found that she and her husband have a stake in TransCanada, the company pushing for the Keystone XL Pipeline to be built.
NRDC officials say it's an important issue that must be discussed during the nomination process. But the timing of the report raises questions, as it is being surfaced by an environmental activist community that has previously given support to another potential secretary of state candidate – Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry.
NBC News' Mark Murray explains why the partisan divide over the potential nomination of U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice is intensifying.
The decision on whether to approve the pipeline goes through the State Department.
“If confirmed by the Senate, one of Rice’s first duties likely would be consideration, and potentially approval, of the controversial mega-project,” Scott Dodd at “OnEarth” wrote. “Rice's financial holdings could raise questions about her status as a neutral decision maker.”
Dodd noted that “Rice owns stock valued between $300,000 and $600,000 in TransCanada, the company seeking a federal permit to transport tar sands crude 1,700 miles to refineries on the Texas Gulf Coast, crossing fragile Midwest ecosystems and the largest freshwater aquifer in North America.”
Bill McKibben, an anti-pipeline activist, told the publication: “It’s really amazing that they’re considering someone for Secretary of State who has millions invested in these companies. The State Department has been rife with collusion with the Canadian pipeline builders, and it’s really distressing to have any sense that that might continue to go on.”
Susan Casey-Lefkowitz, the NRDC's director of international programs, sounded a less strident tone a day later: "What's most important is that she rid herself of her holdings in TransCanada and other tar sands-related companies, and we're confident she will do that ... What's most important is that we have a good, thorough review done.”
Danielle Droitsch, a senior attorney for the NRDC and director of the Canada Project, told First Read: “We think Ambassador Rice has the credentials to be secretary of state, but if she were nominated, and then appointed, these holdings would have to be addressed.”
She added that “high-level officials dealing with Keystone should not have any conflicts of interest.”
The likelihood is that, if nominated, Rice will have to divest herself of her TransCanada investment to avoid a conflict of interest.
Will new Obama appointments come this week? Is there a way to get both John Kerry and Susan Rice into the Obama cabinet? NBC News' Chuck Todd and Time's Joe Klein join the discussion.
The environmental group’s effort to shed light on Rice’s financial interest in TransCanada could be just an attempt, if Rice is nominated, to get a “thorough review” and make sure it has a staunch ally in trying to thwart the project, as Casey-Lefkowitz said.
But could it also be a signal that the NRDC prefers another candidate for the job – Kerry, the other of the final two candidates reportedly being considered for the post?
After all, environmental groups have strongly supported Kerry in the past and have a long working relationship with him. Like they would for most Democrats in a presidential election, for example, the NRDC and the League of Conservation Voters, among others, ran ads in the 2004 election boosting Kerry.
LCV even endorsed Kerry before the New Hampshire Democratic primary that year, although it has notably not spoken out about Rice.
Droitsch, however, would not address whom the NRDC prefers for the job.
“We’re trying to signal that the pipeline decision has to be conflict-free,” Droitsch said. “That would pertain to any potential nominee. The president has the prerogative to nominate the person he believes is best for the position.”
The Senate will then raise questions, however, she said. And “now is important to raise the issue ... We want to make sure that anyone who’s being considered would be free of those conflicts. That’s our primary interest right now.”
The NRDC, which has been very involved in efforts to block Keystone, is the environmental interest group most pressing the issue of Rice’s financials.
But others might not be as keen to see Kerry leave Capitol Hill. After all, consider that green groups already spent a lot of money trying to oust Republican Scott Brown from the Senate – and were successful.
But if Kerry becomes secretary of state (or even defense secretary), his seat would become vacant, raising the potential for a costly and competitive special election.
“Who cares if the U.N. ambassador has a TransCanada stock. Who cares if the head of the FDA has TransCanada stock,” said a Democratic strategist and ally of the administration who is a veteran of confirmation battles.
“If she [Rice] were to be nominated, she would go through a process by which we look for financials conflicts. Maybe this stock would be identified as something that posed a conflict, and she would sell," the strategist said. "But she hasn't gone through that process, because she's not a nominee to anything. If they want to say that if she is the nominee, she should sell the stock, that's fine. But you can't legitimately hit her for having it now. And that is likely why NRDC backed off and no other environmental groups have piled-on.”
What really is going on here likely has less to do with Rice and whether she should ascend to secretary of state, and more with the NRDC leveraging pressure on the president and the administration to make sure the pipeline is rejected again once it comes up for approval. And that could be soon.
The next step in that approval phase, in fact, could come as early as next week, Droitsch said. TransCanada has applied for a shortened pipeline in hopes of having that approved – something the NRDC strongly opposes. A Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement could be released by the State Department as early as next week, Droitsch said.
“It is critically important for there to be independent decision-makers, free of conflict of interest, who can take an independent view,” she said.
She then tied the administration’s decision on the pipeline to climate change, an issue that has regained prominence as a result of Hurricane Sandy. In the days following Sandy’s landfall, in fact, New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg endorsed President Barack Obama for his leadership on climate change.
How Obama decides on the pipeline “signals where the U.S. is headed in terms of importing dirty fuels, inconsistent with an administration that is committed to fighting climate change,” Droitsch said.
“We’re confident President Obama understands the seriousness around the issues surrounding this pipeline. Approving it sends the wrong signal about our country’s commitment to climate change. Yes, he’s under a lot of pressure, but the public is very concerned about this. It’s not a decision I know he’ll view lightly.”
Leave a Comment:
"But if Kerry becomes secretary of state (or even defense secretary), his seat would become vacant, raising the potential for a costly and competitive special election."
And therein lies the problem. The Republicans are foaming at the mouth for a chance to put Scott Brown into Congress. If we thought they'd spent a pile of cash in the last election, we ain't seen nothin' yet. This is a battle they are ideologically committed to and they will not surrender the chance. They're outnumbered in the Senate, even if Brown picks up Kerry's seat, but any advantage is one to be gained at any cost.
Does it matter if Susan Rice has stock in the Keystone project? Yup, sure does, but that doesn't mean that she's going to hold on to it if nominated. She will divest, immediately, if Obama does so and given his comments lately, he's liable to do just that. We might think that he's got nothing to lose if he does, but you may be assured that he's carefully picking his battles, even more so than in his last term. There are only so many resources and only so many chances available to him, even as a second-term Prez. If he nominates her, you can bet she'll divest anything that has even a taint of conflict of interest. You can cover that bet with one for his DEFCON 1 defense of her. He can win this one, but there will be a lot of collateral damage.
As for Benghazi... I pity McCain. He's gotten so old, so filled with bile and venom, and so borderline senile that any opportunity for him to salute Obama with his middle finger is irresistible. Poor old duffer. He doesn't yet recognize that his time is done, that he's not wanted anymore, and that he's so out of touch with reality, he might as well be living on a different planet. I think he does know that he's not going to leave his mark on the world, the country, or the GOP and all that's left to him now is spiteful revenge. (Come to think of it, that's pretty much a general description of nearly any Republican.) Benghazi? Bah. No lies were told, no cover-up conspiracy exists, no laws were broken (by Americans, that is), and Susan Rice did nothing wrong. Proof of otherwise will not be found because it does not exist. Injecting the so-called "element of doubt" into a serious discussion of foreign policy is the hallmark of a sore loser.
You lost, Big Red. You screwed up too many times and it came home to bite you in the ass. You lied and cheated and screwed too many people. Your party is fragmenting into three pieces: the Teabaggers, the Corporate Enablers, and (very much the minority) the moderates who are mostly giving up in disgust and going home. (Sayonara, Olympia Snowe and don't let the screen door hit your bony ass on the way out. I expected a more noble response from you to this tempest in a teapot.)
YOU LOST! What, do you need a frakkin' 3rd grade teacher to explain it to you simply enough?
You lost, so knock it off, or we'll step on you as if you were a nasty insect. (Come to think of it...never mind) You wanna cry tough? Bring it on. You'd better have more than rolls of quarters in those gloves cuz we got sledge hammers and we know how to use 'em.
If the republicans lost as badly as you claim, why did they retain a sizeable majority in the House?
By the way, a 'win' of 1 or 2 percent is hardly a mandate as you seem to think, especially as not even 50% of the eligible population voted.
As for pity - I pity the deluded fools that Obama hoodwinked into voting for him again.
Some democrats want Rice and some want Kerry to head sec. of state. Why not Colin Powell?
because Colin Powel is not black enough or Democrat.
I have no idea if he is "Black enough" but he is clearly Racist enough!
Time for the Marxist dictator Obama to dictate to his own... something like "Susan Rice get the H**L out of Washington, DC and New York City before you blow my whole ballgame of SOP deceit, lying and coverup intended to exterminate American governmental Constitutionalism, and before your actions bring impeachment onto me!"
Really feel for the self propelled screw yourself vice you are sitting in Obama!
To those who brought this matter into the light of day, "Thank you very much". Although I do not feel Ambassador Rice broke trust with the nation in her testimony regarding the Benghazi attack, I do think she has a glaring conflict of interest here that should disqualify her from any office where international interests affect her financial affairs. We would be fools to blindly support her under such circumstances. The President should look in another direction for a new Secretary of State.
Interesting! Completely lying to the American People and really the entire World, about the deaths of four American Citizens, one a serving Ambassador, isn't cause enough! However you better not own any stock, because that ,definately IS! The egregious outcome of the Election is becoming ever clearer!
Oh, whoever said only blacks, liars and military turncoats should serve as Secretary of State?
That would eliminate Rice, Powell and John Kerry!
So I guess we have no oil or gas pipelines crossing this country, which makes this pipeline from Canada unique. And this "dirty" fuel source, oil and gas, is not used by American industry or consumers now... correct? Otherwise, this pipeline would not be so reviled by the left. This pipeline is a corrupting and totally new intrusion on our life... Correct?
America is now an exporter of oil.. this oil (tar sand derivative) is destined for a foreign market. The Canadian energy industries have become very intrusive in our energy development taking huge profits back to Canada that need to stay here.
i.e. Encana as well as several Canadian based drilling companies and Canadian based service companies.
My question would be...
Why would a fervent Democrat be invested in a foreign entity involved in a controversial energy project that is being clearly held up by political means??
One might speculate that some type of insider information is being passed about to key players?
I feel that people and certain agencies of society and gov't, are being a bit unreasonable as well as unrealistic in some cases. Most politicians are tied to something that at first blush might have the appearance of impropriety. Such being the case, no one should ever be confirmed for ANY position in gov't. If Barack Obama has stock in a publishing company for instance; because he has now written a few books which have been published by SOME publishing firm; should that disqualify him from the presidency?
Americans tend to go overboard with the clean slate crap; we must always consider that all politicians are people too and sometimes have very active lives. The nation at large; seems to believe that holding public office makes one a god and no longer human; but they vote for humans, I think god already has a job, right? If we dig deep enough, there are plenty of skeletons to e found in every closet. I am not talking necessarily about Susan Rice or this particular instance; I feel that in general, Americans need to accept the fact that their own imperfections are shared by all. Discretion may indeed be the better part of valor; but it certainly is not the ONLY part!
Right on...
JCBreeze--Sorry, but Rice served for YEARS in the middle eastern desk of the State Department, where the MAIN topic of discussion is the OIL industry. Go look at Hillary Clinton's travels, and see how many are directly or indirectly involved in OPEC countries?
And if Barack Obama (Or George Bush) owned a huge NEWS mag, it WOULD be in issue. I SURE felt that the Bush Admin was skewed in favor of certain OPEC countries, and didn't like it. WHY would I give the Obama admin a free pass on the same thing?
It is no coincidence that many political candidates have chosen to put their money in blind trusts, managed by an outsider (Romney did this, for instance) to eliminate even the IMPRESSION that they were making political decisions based on their own holdings.
My PERSONAL concern with Rice is that she is either CRIMINALLY ignorant or negligent, since the killing of our Ambassador in Benghazi, after MONTHS of him warning the State Department that he was in danger and didn't have enough security, so CLOSELY Mirrors the incident in 1998, in which Rice herself was on the Middle Eastern Desk when ANOTHER US Ambassador ALSO warned that he was in danger and didn't have adequate security, and HE TOO was murdered.
When Sen. Diane Feinstein (DEM-CA) reminded Rice of that last week, Rice's reply was that her memory was 'hazy' on that incident and she'd have to go back and do some research. Could YOU EVER forget such an event happening on YOUR watch? Fault or no fault????
...and I disagree with your assessment of Amb. Rice, completely! It appears to me that white people in particular, are trying to find every possible reason to keep this black woman from being a couple of heartbeats away from the presidency. From the first mention of her name as a possible appointee, streams of pure crap has been attached to this lady's, (before now), otherwise spotless reputation. Suddenly, although she is a Rhode scholar, I've noticed just how many times she has been referred to as 'stupid' or 'incompetent'; no one gets to be a Rhode scholar by being either of those things but suddenly Susan Rice is a dummy within the white, racist, community.
You have your opinion of her which you are entitled to but Susan Rice is in no possible way responsible for ANYTHING that occurred in Benghazi. What I see going on here is that whites want one of their own favorite sons; yet another white male, John Kerry, whom I have nothing against other than the fact that I am sick and tired of NOT being represented in a gov't set up; into which I too pay taxes but have no voice! Blacks have waited long enough for a seat or a few seats at the table and in the case of Amb. Rice, I feel that she is more than qualified to be SOS, but as a black woman she is being overly scrutinized for being black more-so than being incompetent, incapable, or corrupt! In this racist America, being black alone is likewise considered as being corrupt! Susan Rice was briefed as well as debriefed, by the CIA as to what she could comment on but just like the likes of Daryl Issa, who fought to have another black falsely accused, railroaded and hung upside down; and held in the contempt of Congress, Atty. Gen. Eric Holder, was indicted for being appointed by Pres Obama more than any other crime he committed, the only attorney general to be so hanged ever before in the history of this nation; this is that same strange coincidence all over again and I am fed up with all this racial animosity being flung at blacks and coming from the White Right! Blacks do not suffer from over-night dumbness!!!
Right on...
Everything is NOT about race. Certain people like to use this outdated argument. Do you not have any questions about what she said ? If not, I accuse you of excusing her BECAUSE she is black so that makes you racist. I have trouble with what she and the president said. If they can't tell us the truth then don't tell a lie. They already knew the truth and all they had to say was "We are still gathering evidence".
EVERYTHING IS ABOUT RACE! Yes, I am a racist and tired of whites lying about not being racist when they know they are! Blacks did not create or start racism in America. Blacks did not hang whites in America. Blacks did not ever tell whites what restrooms they could use or where they could sit on a public bus or where they could eat or even where they could bed down for a night's rest!
A white girl carves a letter 'B' into her face and then accuses a group of black males, saying that they did it; but the police figured out that she did it because the 'B', (supposedly for Barack), was facing backward! She was too ignorant to know that the police could figure out her blatant LIE!
Newt, the Fruit, Gangrene; accuses Pres Obama of being, "The greatest 'food stamps' president ever and says he will go to a meeting of the NAACP and teach them how to get off welfare and food stamps and how to earn a paycheck!" That certainly wasn't racist; was it?
Rick, Sanctimonious, Santorum, states, " I don't want to give 'blah', (trying to correct his LIE), [but he said black people and everybody heard him], "don't want to give 'blah' people, other people's money!"
Ron Paul made the off-hand comment: "Black males as young as 13 should be treated by the courts as adults and sent to prison because they are so big by then." There's no racism in America though!
When the Affordable Health Care bill first passed, whites lined up outside the State bldg. shouting, "Niggars, Niggars!", as they spat on the black Representatives ONLY as they passed them to enter the bldg. Hmmm? No way that that incident might be racist! Huh???
Pres Obama is accused on numerous occasions of being either Arab or a member of the radical, terrorist group, the Muslim Brotherhood and demanded repeatedly throughout his first 4 years to produce and reproduce his birth certificate and his college transcripts, yet; no other sitting white president of this United States has ever been asked to produce theirs. Yeah, I am so far off base! REALLY???
Former Pres George W. Bush, LIED about WMD in Iraq which caused the consequential death of more than 4,000 American troops but now whites want to hang Susan Rice for the sake of 4 dead in Benghazi; and race has nothing to do with it? Give me a fu.cking break! No one ever accused Dubya of the murders he caused, 4,000 of them, but someone must pay now that 4 whites are dead and never mind the fact that Issa tried to hang Eric Holder for the death of one white border patrol officer in the 'Fast and Furious' scandal!
The Black Panthers arm themselves, (Under the law), and try to assist people of color in their own neighborhoods but authorities shoot and kill them, arrest and imprison them until that organization is wiped out. Tell me, how many members of the KKK were killed by police for hanging blacks and blowing up a church which housed three, little, black girls who were in attendance? HOW MANY DID THE AUTHORITIES SHOOT AND KILL? I believe the correct answer would be; NOT A SINGLE ONE! In more recent times, whites show up at a rally in Washington, DC; armed to the teeth and pray tell, how many of them were detained or arrested? Once again, I believe that answer would also be, "NOT ONE!"
I stand firmly by my previous statement and convictions; racism is at the heart of the matter with regard to Susan Rice, Eric Holder, Pres Obama, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, The Black Panthers, Dr. King, Rodney King and every other black person slain, prosecuted, imprisoned or bemoaned by whites, for standing up for themselves or other blacks; by a racist white society right here in the good-ole US of A! Whites can deny that racism is a prevalent or relevant part of being black in America but I believe that if we look at the record; all things become apparent to those who can see with the eyes of truth!
Right on...
Your treatise rings with truth and actual events. What more can be said? Too bad we are living in such a society and it is not isolated to the Black community but to the American Indian communities as well. We haven't come very far in two centuries except it is covert and not so overt these days. Many people are still in denial.
American Indians cannot police and arrest non-Indians on reservations who commit rape, outsiders who sell crack to our young and acts of murder in blatant sight. It is on record from the 19th Century that non-Indians cannot be arrested and tried in a federally certified tribal court of law. Go figure. The FBI are the only ones who have the authority to make arrests on reservations unless the reservation is a PL 280 state then the local authorities can make arrests. Is this not racist? Isn't it time for a change?
@Intellect, {Yah-tah-hay!}
In many ways we are family. I not only understand your frustration but our hearts also beat as one. I am one-half Shawnee on my father's side and am truly perplexed by how unfair the laws in America are toward the true children of the Gahé and ALL their descendents. LIED to in capital letters, my aborigine friend, and placed on reservations in your own land. Am I suppose to understand this? I DO NOT!
I can only wish that I could change things for your people and mine but the white eyes can speak beyond simple truth with a smile and a nod, a hand-shake and a false agreement until the cows come home; and never even blush in so doing! Maybe our people have sinned a great sin that the Great Spirit has allowed them to now occupy these lands as though they have such rights.
Be strong and please stay in touch: jc_breeze@live.com
I would love to communicate with you on any occasion and for ANY reason. When I was about six years old, my father took me to the reservation of his people to meet my cousins and we played together all summer long. It was near a town known as Broken Bow, OK but I can't recall exactly where it was. Do you know it? I am 62 now so that was many, many, moons ago, (smiling).
Peace be unto you and your house, forever and always. We are in agreement upon one accord.
Thank you for responding to my comment above. I am greatly honored!!!
Right on...
BTW:
My spouse and I laughed today at a flyer in a grocery store which proclaimed; "Buy one, get one free!" If you have to buy one in order to get one free; then how in the world is it free at all? If it were truly free, couldn't I just walk into the store, pick it up and walk out with it? They are the masters of double-speak!
This is how they gained this land, my new friend. How are we to trust a people whose every word is a twisted LIE? They can give you something and take it back, ALL within the same single sentence!!! Men of truth are lost in this gray society filled with LIES and having no honor. I wish that I could love them but I cannot love anything so completely corrupt!!!
Right on...
I find it ironic that the left wingers are oh, so concerned that an oil pipeline running across the surface will damage the Ogalalla aquifer under the plains states. Because, oddly enough, I haven't heard or read anything about them complaining about the fact that the plains farmers have been steadily draining this resource for over fifty years. In some places, the level of water has dropped over a hundred feet since irrigation pumping first began after the 1930's dust bowl drought. According to Scientific American, some areas are being drained by five or six feet per year while rainfall is refilling the aquifer at a rate of about a half inch per year. So all the Canadians have to do is wait a few more years. Then there won't be an aquifer to worry about.
Ridiculous - isn't it. They are utilizing the same farming techniques that contributed to the dust bowl conditions in the first place, and only the draining of the aquifer has kept it from happening again - so far. Once the aquifer gets to low to be of much use, the dust bowl conditions will return again. They are growing crops that require more water than the wheat that had been grown prior to the dust bowl - so the aquifer is being drained faster. A little common sense and that area would be productive for at least a few hundred more years, instead of the possibility of it becoming virtually useless within this century. Too many people simply don't use common sense and planning for the future.
Catzenjammer--OMG! I've been complaining about that at least since the EIGHTIES! Not only is the midwest draining the aquefer, we also are depleting our top soil by an inch every 10 years, and are dumping fertilizer run off into all our streams and rivers. When the 'Breadbasket of the world' is reduced to nothing but crumbs, does ANYONE think any other country will step up and strip THEIR resources to feed US???
One of my main beefs about our current levels of even LEGAL immigration (not to MENTION the illegals!) is that we have ENOUGH people in the US, and MORE.
And the current system of allowing so many POOR immigrants to come here, complete with their tendency to have TWICE as many babies as AMERICAN citizens do, is that we are overtaxing our ability to FEED all our people, provide safe drinking water, and infrastructure such as roads and bridges, electricity/natural gas, schools, etc, on the tax income we have.
ONE reason why the 'variance' between the so called 1%ers' income level and the income level of the BOTTOM sector is that the BOTTOM sector is MULTIPLYING at a much faster rate, not only by immigration, and by propagation. We need to STOP importing people whose ONLY 'qualifier' to come here is that they are poor. We cannot afford to be the WELFARE state of the world. And to encourage other countries whose population is BURGEONING with people they cannot afford to dump them off on us, merely exponentially increases the over population of the whole world.
And THAT, my friends, is a greater risk than the effects of this pipeline on 'global warming.'
You do NOT make everyone 'rich' by taking from the rich, you end up making everyone poor in the long run.
Just ask our school systems how 'lowering the standards' has worked to IMPROVE the education level of our kids? Instead, it has resulted in ALL our kids being less well prepared to face life.
Ask any college what percentage of their incoming Freshmen have to take REMEDIAL English, History and Math classes BEFORE they can even move into the TRADITIONAL 'beginning levels' of those subjects.
And just last week an article on MSN stated that studies show that a college graduate, with the SAME degree, and SAME gradepoint, will be 'less hireable', and over their lifetime, make MUCH less money, if they are PROFICIENT in those 'core' subjects than those who are not.
Has any one said anything about insider trading. Something that is illegal for us peasants. What is being uncovered here, or should I say on display again is government voting for themselves not us. Call the SEC.
Isn't it as usual all about money and hypocrits? Who'da known?
Kerry would be only a marginally better selection, but at least a better one.
Rices track record is terrible, in my opinion. This, possible stock issue, is the least of the problems with her!
While at NSA, during the Clinton Administration, she TWICE, rejected the Sudanese Foreign Ministers offer to arrest and hand over bin Lauden! BEFORE 9/11! During the Bush Administration she was insturmental in blocking the sharing of information, curiiously enough about, again bin Lauden, with Madeline Albright and the State Department. Coupled with the Benghazi incident and now this...well she really should resign from Public Office, not become the next Secretary of State!
Ted--AMEN--
and to misquote: Those who do not LEARN from the past History of their career are DOOMED to repeat the SAME mistakes over and over again, as witnessed by her blindly obfuscating on TV news shows about the death of STEVENS in an EERILY similar set of circumstance as happened to another Ambassador in 1998 under HER watch in the ME.
Our nations deserves much better than Susan Rice as our Secretary of State. However as Obama says "Elections have consequences and he won a second term as our President" So this means he can whatever he wants despite what many of us think about Susan Rice. If you think she has done an outstanding job as our UN Ambassador, and will make an our outstanding Secretary of State then maybe you are being duped. Plus her confirmation hearings by the US Senate can be extremely nasty with the Liberals accusing those opposed to her as being sexist and racists and those opposed accusing the Liberals as being too close to Obama
Kerry's nomination for Secretary of State of Secretary of Defense could very well be "Swift Boated" again. Many of those who opposed Kerry because of his actions and statements during and after Vietnam may not have let that go...And who could blame them???
kerry is the perfect fit for comrade obama's administration!!
He's never done anything except mooch off of his wife!!!!
I could have sworn that Sen. Kerry served this country in the Viet Nam war.
Who cares about her holdings. How is she qualified? Has she done an outstanding job at the UN protecting US interest? What are her major accomplishments and failures? The fact that she is a young black woman should have no bearing.
Our last two term president had 7 UN Ambassadors. Must be a tuff job to manage!
This story reminds me of the Bush administration when the then future vice president Mr. Cheney had to resign from Haliburton. Who then refused to list the people that were invited to his first energy summit. The same Haliburton that was found to have over charged the American tax payers and also padded bills by the G.A.O. Yet still are to this day awarded no bid federal contracts.
The GOP/Teabeggers do not care about Ms. Rice at all. They want Senator Kerry's Senate Seat. It is that simple America. The only individuals that should be under fire? Are the "Fourteen Teabegger Felon's." They 'conspired' on Janruary 20, 2009 at the Caucus Steakhouse in Washington D.C. They took their "Blood Oath" to destroy the US Economy, American Job Creation Legislation, fair taxes, and the Office Of The Presidency. The American People should be igniting a huge "Political Fire" under these "Teabegger Conspiratiors." No America! Instead the Teabeggers want to distract the public over Ms. Rice. All evidence clearly indicates that Ms. Rice did nothing wrong. The Teabeggers are living in the their "Teabegger Twilight Zone." Heck! Even Rod Sterling is laughing aloud. The GOP/Teabeggers entered the Twilight Zone in 1980, and they never left! That is fact. Hey! Hey! Ho! Ho! The Party of NO has got to go!
There are plenty of pipelines that exist all over the US, including the midwest. What's one more going to matter ? Google it...
They all have investments and investing in the company that would build the pipeline is perfectly acceptable so are Boehner and several other GOP congressional leaders. President Obama can pick Susan Rice and should so he can show McCain and Graham and the others just where they stand.
This woman deserves a medal for putting up with the most retarded politically motivated bs that Washington can conjure up.
Rice lied for our fool in the White House four good men dead US wepons given to rebel's \ Alqeada obama gave the order to stand down and let these men die many laws were broken . obama said he welcome this fight over Rice well obama start talking , start with the truth.
Ms Rice already owns investments in Iran. This woman is a walking conflict of interest
She is a walking Liar!
Take your pick of the two multi millionaire hypocrite, 1%er liars.
ANYBODY but Kerry as Secretary of State! He'd probably start off by apologizing to Vietnam!
Nothing wrong with that. As a Vietnam era vet, we and our entire country should not have even been in Vietnam in the first place. It doesn't lessen any what we did, but we should have never been there in the first place. We have gone from not thanking vets of Vietnam to going insane with thanking our vets from Iraq and Afghanistan. All of these wars are wars that should never have been fought. You can thank the individual for risking his or her life, but that doesn't require sanctioning the bad judgement of our politicians for getting us into wars in the first place. It is not unpatriotic to oppose war. As a 20 year vet, I have always opposed the wars I have been in. I did my job, but didn't agree with my government and that's my right to do so.
LP--no problem with anything you said--it was the way Kerry did it. It has nothing whatsoever to do with his right to do so. He cast dishonor on those of us who served there....thats my point. Has nothing to do with whether we should have beenin Vietnam, or any other place since. We served our country. He was, and is a politician--first and foremost.
Being a vietnam Vet, I don't really care what Kerry thought about the war he was only in for about 4 months as I can tell. He was a member of the VVAW. He did testify to the Senate Foriegn Relations Committee on the legality of the War. I have seen no direct pointing out that he personnelly threw his medals over the fence. Kerry and many other soldiers had the feeling that "US War Policy led to War Crimes" of the day. I cannot slight my Brothers for having this belief it is part of the freedom we have in this country. It is no different than having your own Brother, Sister or Child chaining them selves to a Tree or a Piece of Equipment to attempt to halt a damaging Enviromental Project. You don't love them anyless so don't love my brothers anyless either.
Republicans are scared, very scared. Kerry, the very same they swift-boated and villified is their choice now? The plot is to run Scott Brown and recover a senate seat. It won't happen, repubs. Your absurd policies, dirty tricks and your constant subestimation of our intelligence is rendering your party obsolete. Remember: the president won, you don't tell him what to do. He responds to the people and we spoke loud and clear.
Hey Maria---obviously you're not old enough to remember when Kerry came back from Vietnam, testified that we, his fellow Vietnam vets were baby killers, then threw his medals over the White House fence. What's that got to do with Republican party?
ahhhh....now it all makes sense why the Republicans want Kerry. They really are after his seat! Very good point! I knew the Republicans had an ulterior motive, and now I understand what it is. God they are sooooo predictable! I should have figured that out myself. Thanks for pointing it out to me.
I know Maria...I guess they heard them... They voted the Republican House back with the same Election......Ohhhh...you forgot about that didnt you.