Posted on 01/29/2013 2:05:27 PM PST by Sub-Driver
Senate confirms Kerry for State in 94-3 vote By Julian Pecquet and Ramsey Cox - 01/29/13 04:32 PM ET
The Senate approved one of its own to become President Obama's second secretary of State in a near-unanimous vote on Tuesday.
Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) sailed through the chamber in a 94-to-3 vote, with Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) and Texas Sens. Ted Cruz (R) and John Cornyn (R) casting the only “no” votes.
Kerry's approval to replace Hillary Clinton was a foregone conclusion after Republicans urged Obama to nominate him in lieu of his ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice.
“I don’t know too many people who have oriented their whole life to be better suited for secretary of State,” Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), the top Republican on Kerry's Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said on the floor ahead of the vote.
Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), who is replacing Kerry atop the committee, echoed those sentiments.
“I can think of no one better to take on the challenges of this position,” he said. “John has already built strong relationships across the world. ... He will need no introduction to the world’s political leaders.”
The Senate vote capped a whirlwind day for Kerry, whose nomination was approved by his committee in a unanimous voice vote a few hours earlier. His colleagues on the committee he's chaired since Joe Biden became vice-president four years ago gave him a standing ovation and a committee resolution honoring his service as chairman.
The resolution “commends the long and distinguished service of John F. Kerry, whose exceptional skill as a lawmaker is matched only by his commitment to an America that is, in President John F. Kennedy’s phrase, not 'first but, first when, first if, but first period'; and extends its best wishes for his continuing service to the Nation.”
Kerry is the first cabinet selection confirmed in Obama's second term, but the rare showing of bipartisan support will not extend to the rest of the president's national security picks, however.
Six Republicans — including the three who voted against Kerry — have vowed to oppose former Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.) for secretary of Defense, and members of both parties have raised questions with the choice of John Brennan for CIA director because of concerns over his record on drone strikes as Obama top counterterrorism adviser.
Kerry could be sworn in as early as Friday, Clinton's last day at State.
lol......the things you learn on FR.
That is hilarious. Thanks for posting it.
I was an infantry officer in Vietnam when this POS traitor secretly met with Vietcong and nva communists in Paris to coordinate his anti-war tactics.. He now has a memorial dedicated to him in the National War Museum in Hanoi,Vietnam. He should have been prosecuted and hung for treason as he was still a naval reserve officer then.
They not only vote for the fraud, they praise him. Anyone up for a second party yet? Right now there’s only one. And it’s not democrat and democrat light. It’s all democrat.
He’s had a lot more than just Botox.
Try major jaw surgery.
No, I’m pretty sure Ted Kennedy has a bad day every single day. A very, very, very bad day.
Im sorry— you are correct.
“Come 2016 it is incumbent upon the GOP to field a candidate who can motivate the base or else we’ll see another Democrat take office.” Yes, of course you have that “right” and I have a right to call you out on it when you complain about the consequences of your actions. Because a few million lazy and ignorant “conservatives” sat on their ballots election day our cause was set back a generation. In a general election you vote for the republican or just shut the hell up. You lost your right to bitch about obama and the democrats when you didn’t lift a finger to vote him out of office. and Yes, hell yes, Romney was worth supporting in the final battle against obama, you can kid yourself but that is the truth!
-—”You are upset that conservatives didn’t fall over themselves to support Romney but the fact of the matter is that he did nothing to earn their support.”
Did nothing to earn their support??? I beg your pardon?? Look at what we have now (4 more years of a Bork Obunga Regime).
Romney DIDN’T NEED to do anything to garner your support other than not be Obama.
Nothing is worse than Obama. Romney actually understands capitalism. What part of this is difficult for you to understand?
Don’t you “useful fools for the socialists” (requoting ynotjjr’s post) get it?
You’ve been punked with your own smug “I’m not going to vote for the non-Obama candidate” chestbeating.
Cornyn is hilariously doing all he can to fend off a 2014 primary opponent. I know that was a “tough” vote for him.
Yes it is very sad.
I donated and voted for Paul when he was running for the Senate.
I have been trying to get on his web site for the past 45 minutes to get a contact number in D.C.
The site freezes but I did get his number from a different site. Called it and got a recording. I’m not letting this go.
That said, his office is about to get an ear full from an old 73 year old retired Navy airdale who happened to be flying in and out of Cam Rahn Bay in pig boats (P-5M) approx the same time Lurch was there.
Let me try that number again.
Thanks for the info - I had heard Cruz voted against the traitor but hadn’t heard Cornyn did as well.
Say what you want. Romney still lost because he did not motivate the conservative base.
You two act like whoever the old bastards in the GOP old boy’s club annoint as a candidate has a right to my vote. Sorry, no.
I know this upsets you and that’s probably why so many millions of conservatives are silent. Myself, I really don’t care if I offend you with the truth anymore than I care if I offend liberals with the truth.
I’m saying that in 2016 the GOP needs a candidate who can motivate the conservative base and you two seem to be of a mind that the GOP can put up another milquetoast RINO if they want. Bitch, whine, and complain all you want, I won’t vote for whoever that loser is, either.
The solution here is simple, give people like me a candidate we can support and we will.
. . . JFK's only redeeming quality is his laziness.
On topic is the call Rush Limbaugh got from a caller with his response:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2983608/posts
“CALLER: ...The Republicans didn’t lose because of Hispanics. The Republicans lost because they’re not conservative enough.
RUSH: I happen to think you’re dead right. I think that’s why so many voters, Republicans who did vote in 2008, didn’t in 2012. I think that’s why”
Dude, it boils down to this:
You are happier with Obama in office than Romney.
That says a lot about how stubborn you are.
And no, I’m not coming from the establishment GOP. I’m more Libertarian.
you said: -—”Romney still lost because he did not motivate the conservative base.”
No, Romney lost because some stubborn conservatives didn’t vote AGAINST Obunga. Very very short-sighted. Look where we are now and where we will be in the next 4 years. This isn’t an experiment. This is real life.
Romney didn’t need to motivate the conservative base when the choice between him and a fascist Marxist was clear.
I blame “useful fools” such as yourself for not preventing this. Granted, Romney wasn’t ideal, but you could have voted against Obunga but you didn’t. Shame shame shame on you.
Your default position is that the GOP has a right to my vote no matter who they run as a candidate.
Like it or not, that’s unacceptable to me.
-—”Your default position is that the GOP has a right to my vote no matter who they run as a candidate.”
No, no, no and no!
You’re again stubbornly missing the point and “leading the jury” incorrectly.
I don’t care who fronted Romney (GOP or not). Of course the GOP doesn’t have a right to your vote. But you have a responsibility to LOGICALLY choose what’s best for your country.
By not voting, you were essentially saying, “Obama is better for the country than Romney, so let Obama win.” What a total cowardly cop-out!
Just look at what a mess our country is in and will be in with Obama for four more years. He WAS the WORST of the candidates and you know it.
We only had TWO choices. You were a no-show to prevent this disaster, so I fault you and your stubborn ilk for what we’re stuck with.
Like it or not, Romney would have at least understood business and free markets. He also wasn’t nearly as vain & narcissistic as Obama, in spite of the media’s attempts at framing Romney as the vain one and not Obama.
Again, like it or not, the GOP needs to put up a candidate who can motivate the conservative base to vote for him/her.
You said that we had two choices this past year but the reality is that for conservatives we really didn’t have a choice at all.
Obama passed Obamacare.
Romney said he would pass Romneycare.
That’s not a choice to me.
Obama wants gun control and Romney is on record supporting gun control.
That’s not a choice to me.
Obama wants to cut the military and so did Romney.
That’s not a choice to me.
Obama wants more ‘stimulus’ spending and Romney, via Bain Capital, has personally profited from it.
That’s not a choice to me.
Really, when my choice is to vote for the Marxist socialist or for the market socialist then that’s no choice at all.
It’s like you’re asking me to choose between getting kicked in the teeth or kicked in the ass. Either way I get kicked and saying that one is not as bad as the other is STILL not a choice.
Now let the GOP pay attention and maybe in 2012 they’ll support a real conservative or else they’ll be irrelevant. The ball is in their court.
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.