GOD USES OBAMA TO PROMOTE SUSAN RICE
Rice had been considered a leading contender for secretary of state, but Republican-led opposition against her potential nomination spurred the ambassador to withdraw her name from consideration in December.
Critics faulted Rice for saying that the attack on the U.S. compound in Benghazi, Libya, originated from a spontaneous protest over an anti-Islam video. The Obama administration later said the violence was a planned terrorist attack. The raid left four Americans killed, including the U.S. ambassador to Libya, Chris Stevens.
Get complete coverage of breaking news on CNN.com, CNN TV and CNN Mobile.
(CBS News) People often ask me, “Of all the administrations you’ve covered, which was the most secretive and manipulative?”
The Nixon Administration retired the trophy, of course. Since then, my answer is, “Whichever administration is currently in power.”
Information management has become so sophisticated, every administration learns from the previous one. Each finds new ways to control the flow of information.
It’s reached the point that if I want to interview anyone in the administration on camera, from the lowest-level worker to a top White House official, I have to go through the White House press office.
If their chosen spokesman turns out to have no direct connection to the story of the moment, as was the case when U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice was sent out to explain the Benghazi episode, then that’s what we (and you, the taxpayer) get.
And it usually isn’t much.
But it shouldn’t stop there. The president needs to rethink his entire communications policy, top to bottom. It is hurting his credibility and shortchanging the public.
And to head the review, how about someone other than the Attorney General, whose department is so deeply involved? That makes no sense to me. [FULL QUOTE]
© 2013 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.
So, you have clipped the Carolina wings of an ultra-qualified black woman in politics. What have you gained more than a black mark on your own legacies. But, you don’t care for fairness in government. “No whipped cream on your apple pie, Susan Rice,” you tell your victim. Today the American people have more respect for the victim of your power-play than any success you may take delight in. Enjoy the bitter taste of such success as it macerates in your sorry mouths.
Note: Senator Graham’s first name is “Lindsey,” actually. Sorry.
As speculation continues that President Obama will nominate Amb. Susan Rice as Sec. Hillary Clinton‘s successor at the State Department, media are focusing on the Republican threats to block Rice from being appointed. But sadly, press are excluding the historic nature of Republican threats from their reporting. Eric Boehlert examines the record: http://mm4a.org/113pDR0
By Chris Matthews
Let me finish with this tonight.
It did something magical, healing any bad feeling between the two presidential rivals, uniting the Democratic party, setting a hopeful course for political maturity, giving not just the president but the country a top-drawer top diplomat to face the world.
Now, it’s up to President Obama to do it again. He’s won a second-term. Now he needs to make it great. Naming John Kerry to replace secretary Clinton fits that bill. Picking Susan Rice would be good, but picking Kerry would be better.
Since Thomas Jefferson, the post of Secretary of State stands alone in history. It’s by its nature a role holding the most stature but for the presidency itself.
Kerry won 252 electoral votes in 2004 against a sitting chief executive, a wartime president at that. A combat veteran in Vietnam, a leading critic of that war later, a five-time elected Senator, the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee has contacts around the world. He’s just the sort of heavyweight Obama picked the first time.
Isn’t it disappointing to hear Lindsey Graham, who so distinguishes South Carolina, would say that Ambassador Susan Rice was “a bit player,” yet join the chorus of Republicans who are sore that their poor and default nominee for president lost the election and gave President Obama a mandate? If Susan Rice disagreed with the talking papers based on findings from the intelligence community, from where would come her alternate, credible substitute information? What would be the outcome if a US ambassador went rogue and presented other than the official response to an important world event? Would you contradict your boss in making official statements? Wouldn’t a quick-firing result in such a scenario? Republicans should lay off this “bit player” and not use this incident to hinder the career in public service of Susan Rice who hails from Senator Lindsey Graham’s state.