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 ...
Comrade Alex or the lovely smash mouth racist of lefty diversity, Jamie Foxx.
Has Michael Moore gone to Abdul the Tentmaker for a confirmation wardrobe yet?
Hmmm...when was Omar replaced by Abdul?
A brilliant guy.
Looks like the VC hero is moving in for the impeachment placement.
At home trying on their magic rino underwear?
I’m not so sure he doesn’t have absolute power.
I am united with zee French. I am a surrender monkey too.
You don’t think Brown or another Republican could beat Deval either in a 2013 special or 2014? Certainly we have less of a chance at the Senate seat if Kerry is running for reelection.
I would much rather Brown ran for Senate again, the MA Governorship is next to useless as long as there is a filibuster proof rat legislature. The Senate OTOH is nationally critical.
If that seat is open new NRSC Chair Jerry Moran needs to go to Brown on hands and knees.
As for the next SOS, he or she will be a POS, that is assured.
I didn’t mean to imply that Scott Brown would have no chance against Deval Patrick in a Senate race, but Patrick would be the frontrunner, particularly if he gets the legislature to amend the Senate-vacancy law once again and empower the governor’s appointment to serve until the next general election (November 2014), which would allow him to resign and be appointed to the Senate by Tim Murray. Clearly, the bigger the turnout, the worse our chances are in MA, since there’s a large group of Bay Staters who mindlessly vote Democrat if they can be bothered to go to the polls. Brown’s best chance would be if there’s no change in law and there’s a special election in the spring, but even then Patrick could pick a date on which turnout would be optimal for Dems (e.g., he wouldn’t pick a day when college students are home for Spring Break).
As for your reasons why Brown should run for the Senate instead of the governorship, I agree 100%, but it’s Brown’s decision, not ours, and he may prefer to run for governor because (i) MA voters are more likely to elect a Republican to that office, where he can veto bills and make sure that stuff that 1/3 of Democrats find too extreme doesn’t become law, instead of the Senate, where a Republican could actually help pass conservative laws, and (ii) if Brown runs and wins a special election to the Senate, he’d have to run again in 2014 in a general election, and he’s seen that movie before.
I hope that the MA legislature doesn’t change the law again and that a special election decides Kerry’s replacement (I am pretty sure Obama will nominate Kerry as SoS and that he’ll get confirmed), and I further hope that Scott Brown runs for the seat. I can’t think of any Republican with a better chance of winning even a special Senate election in MA, and Brown is probably the least liberal of the MA Republicans with a chance. (Mitt Romney no longer has a chance of winning a statewide election in MA.)
Well 2013 turnout would be better than 2014 turnout but I think 2014 turnout will certainly be better than the 2012 turnout.
I question whether Warren could have won in a midterm (unless it was an anti-GOP year).
In a midterm against an incumbent Senator Brown, maybe not, but she’d be the favorite in an open-seat race just because if the D next to her name and her certain fundraising advantage (Brown wouldn’t have raised as much as a challenger—2011 was an aberration created by people thinking that the Dems needed a 60th vote for Obamacare instead of just railroading the House and using reconciliation to tie up loose ends).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FkQxB5IoLnE
Makes no difference; the GOP nationally has become as inept as the MA GOP.
GOP isn’t winning anything, period. It has become a non-nationally viable, territorial political party.
Hot off the interweb:
I love this:
“Then theres Steve Lynch. What would have once been his electoral strengths are now a toxic stew of liabilities Irish-Catholic, South Boston, heterosexual, former ironworker.
To more than half of todays Democrats, Lynch is a walking hate crime.”
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.