Posted on 12/10/2012 7:39:39 AM PST by SeekAndFind
Why would the New York Times choose to publish an attack on Susan Rice ("a surprising and unsettling sympathy for Africa's despots") in its Sunday edition? The Times turned over prized op-ed real state to Salem Solomon ("an Eritrean-American journalist who runs Africa Talks, a news and opinion Web site covering Africa and the global African diaspora"), who signaled the UN Ambassador that a nomination to be Secretary of State would not be a bed of roses. Just in case she felt that going on those five Sunday shows and playing a meat puppet mouthing whatever she was told to say about Benghazi deserves some sort of reward.
I see it as a sign that President Obama has decided that confirmation hearings for Rice would be so politically costly that he would be better served by another nominee.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
He will find someone worse than her, if that is even possible. He is great at finding the absolute worst characters.
It is not a big tent. It is a big bus.
I always though Obama would nominate Rice despite Benghazi, but now that the NY Times has come out against her, I think that some ranking Democrat in the Senate is going to whisper that nominating her is not a good idea.
John F'n Kerry.
5.56mm
I say he goes with Alec Baldwin.
RE: He will find someone worse than her,
John Kerry is the other name being considered.
CLINTON-RICE 2016!!
Let’s watch the Old White Man’s Party try and beat that and the MSM once Benghazi has cooled down. Tea Time?
RE: Tea Time?
Where were they this year?
I still think he might nominate her out of sheer arrogance. Obama thinks he now has absolute power to do whatever he wants, and will see it as his way of rubbing the Republican's noses in it.
Under the Old White Man’s Party bus. ;)
“He will find someone worse than her, if that is even possible.
John F’n Kerry.”
1. Kerry appears to be tired of being in the Senate and would love all of the honors and travel and such associated with being Secretary of State.
2. Getting Kerry out of the Senate would allow Obama to put his pal Gov. Deval Patrick on the catbird seat to become Senator-for-life, since Patrick can name a placeholder until the special election to be scheduled on a date convenient for Patrick’s election to the Senate—or, even better for Patrick, the MA Democra legislature can repeal the special-election statute so that whoever is appointed to the Senate gets to serve until the next general election, which in this case would be until November 2014 (when the seat is up anyway), and thus Patrick can resign and let Lt. Gov. Tim Murray become governor and appoint Patrick to the Senate.
3. Allowing Tim Murray to become governor in January 2013 (but not prior to January 4, so that he would serve less than 2 years of Patrick’s term and thus be eligible to run for governor in both 2014 and 2018) would clear the field for Murray for the 2014 gubernatorial nomination and give him a leg up in the general against (probably) Scott Brown.
So it’s a Win-Win-Win for Democrats. the only losers would be the American people, but we know how little Democrats care about us.
0bama will choose Rice anyway. He enjoys doing what America expects him NOT to do (and vice versa).
Charlie Crist?
Because the left wants john kerry at UN, or State. He’s the worst possible choice. He has been an America-hater much longer than 0bama.
Sounds about right, send another homo into the world community, from a closet homo.
Sounds about right, send another homo into the world community, from a closet homo.
Louis Farrakhan is probably in the running
I’m sure the NYT would much rather have Kerry in that spot. Ya know the guy who was in vietnam and then trashed everything about this country.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.