Why do you think Kerry was left out in the cold?

[emilyg]

I'd like to hear some ideas.

[ruggerson]

1. Because he has seniority in the Senate

and he probably wanted to stay there.

[karynnj]

31. He is in a great position

chairing the SFRC and being a senior member on both the Finance and Commerce committees - three Super A committees (Senate rules were waived in 2000 or 2001 when he joined the Finance committee, because Senate rules allow only 2 Super A Committees)

He will be heading the Congressional delegation to Poland on global warming and he will report on it to Obama. He was an essential player at Bali, though he was not on the official team. They are moving to a goal of a new treaty by Dec 2009. The SFRC will be the first committee that takes it up - Kerry very likely will be the person who will lead on getting it through the Senate.

He will still have input on Foreign policy - if Obama agrees with him, it will not matter if he is SoS or Chair of the SFRC; if they disagree, he will be an independent voice. That seems a win to me. Obama also had Kerry and Durbin argue his position on Lieberman to their peers - this shows that he is thought to have influence over his fellow Democrats in the Senate. (He also was clearly one of the most trusted during the campaign - giving an unvetted speech at teh convention and doing the last MTP)

Kerry is very well positioned to be a very important legislator - and he has his senior Senator as an example of someone who likely has a better legacy than any Democrat in government for the last 3 decades.

He may also feel that MA will need him when he sadly will become a senior Senator.

Since the election, Kerry has had two town halls and appeared at an energy forum - all in MA. In addition, he has posted a Huffington Post diary about the LA race that will be the last of this season today and mentioned in it he is putting one out on foreign policy tomorrow. There is no top politician who has interacted better on Daily Kos and elsewhere in the blogosphere than Kerry. There will be a huge need for grassroots support of the legislation that will be needed by the Democrats. Kerry may be far more valuable in the Senate than he could be in any cabinet position.

Kerry answered at least several hundred times that there the job he was wanted was the one he had and that there were few things that could make him give up the seat. He denied very early after his name circulated that he was seeking a position - first through his spokesperson, then personally.

[beachmom]

79. No, I think he would have taken the SoS position if asked.

And yes, giving up his Senate seat would have been a big thing to give up. But John Kerry is a true patriot, and would have served the President in a second.

However, if you do look at seniority, it was a better deal for Clinton than Kerry, since she would not have had a committee chairmanship to give up.

[No Elephants]

105. I agree. I think Kerry really wanted that slot.

[Bake]

118. Has anyone here ASKED Kerry if he wanted the job?

There are a lot of people here assuming to speak for him.

Bake

[beachmom]

119. If asked, he would not answer. All of this is speculation.

Somebody speculated that he wouldn't want the job. I disagreed. If you take away speculation, then there would be nothing to talk about frankly. But I base mine on Kerry's answer to questions about taking a cabinet position, which I think left some wiggle room (not a lot, but a little).

Anyway, it doesn't matter now. I think he only would have taken the SoS position.

[quakerboy]

137. If Asked.

But what would his honest answer have been if asked if he Wanted to be asked? I doubt any of us on this board know.

[Peacetrain]

113. We can't gut the senate of its best and its brightest if we want to make some progress

That is my feeling on the subject. With his seniority he can become the new lion of the senate.

[DesertFlower]

2. there are still some

positions that need to be filled.

[karynnj]

32. He would not take those positions

He is a 5th term Senator, chairing an important committee, doing work on many extremely important issues.

[tekisui]

3. He is just about the most prominent Senator in the U.S.

That doesn't seem too out in the cold to me.

[Mass]

4. Because people do not understand that Chairman of the SFRC is an important position when it comes

to defining foreign policy for this country.

[Thrill]

5. I doubt Kerry wanted in. So I doubt he was left out.

He's about to be the Chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

6. Maybe he wanted to stay where he was.

Or maybe Obama didn't want to take any more Democrats out of the Senate.

[Skittles]

7. my guess: his choice

can't think of another reason

[MichiganVote]

8. Kerry is doing just fine where he is.

[bdamomma]

67. Yes, he is a powerful force in the Senate.

[Kdillard]

Because he has seniority and is needed right where he is at the moment.

[DFLforever]

9. Because he will be Chairman of the Foreign Relations Comm.

That's a top position.

[Mass]

10. "Left out in the cold" is a title from Fox News. But it is not the truth.

[Olney Blue]

11. Obama knew he would have an ally in the Senate.

[tekisui]

16. A great ally in the Senate.

And, his foremost Democratic opponent by his side.

[politicasista]

54. Yep.

and as posted below, be an independent voice but a "counsel" to President Obama. :)



Doesn't sound like being left out in the cold.

[mwei924]

12. Foreign Relations Committee is probably what he wanted.

[FrenchieCat]

13. He just won re-election, and as Chairman of one of the most important committees

in Government, he believes he can do some good there? We are, after all, fighting two wars.

[ingac70]

14. Thanks for your concern.

[emilyg]

18. You added nothing.

[ingac70]

20. I don't add things...

to regurgitated FAUX News talking points.

[emilyg]

24. Good for you.

Never admit you didn't have a thought.

[Skittles]

43. WOO EMILYG!

SNAP!!! :7

[WillyT]

96. LOL !!!

:rofl:

:evilgrin:

[Engineer4Obama]

15. Personally

I think it was because Obama wanted Kerry as a powerful ally in Congress. And as the new SFRC chair he will be a very powerful Senator.

[awoke_in_2003]

52. Also, with the senior senator from Massachusetts...

in questionable health, we may need a strong senator to take has place as the voice of the left. Welcome to DU.

[Zynx]

17. Kerry as Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee is hardly something to sneeze at.

There are also only so many jobs in the administration he would have wanted.

[Unsane]

19. The guy is friggin SFRC Chairman. I'm not feeling too sorry for him.

[emilyg]

21. Thank you all. Makes good sense.

[PBS Poll-435]

22. He is now the top Senate Democrat on the Foreign Relations Committee

Chairman.

Of the Committee that he loves.

I think he is very pleased.

[Colobo]

23. Emily- We need Kerry in the Senate.

[emilyg]

25. Katz - you're right but I was

feeling a little sorry for him. :hug:

[Colobo]

26. I understand, but I'm hoping he is happy with his current position.

[Mass]

27. Why? Because he got a great position in the Senate with a lot of power which is probably the one he

wanted?

[karynnj]

38. He seems incredibly energized to me

In last 8 days, he was at an Energy forum in Boston, and did two town halls at two colleges in MA. (Here's video from teh energy forum - http://www.jkmediasource.org/node/173 ) He has spoken to the media about the upcoming talks in Poland to prepare for the Copenhagen talks. Kerry is the lead from Congress and will brief Obama (who is not sending anyone) Kerry's committee will be the first to deal with any global warming treaty that comes out of it.

He also did a post on Huffington concerning the last election in this cycle - a LA run-off, where he said he spoke of writing one on foreign policy tommorrow. It will be fascinating to see what he intends to do with the committee.

Watching C-SPAN2 in the lame duck session, he was happily shaking hands with his peers after it was clear that he was to be the chair of SFRC. He also introduced major legislation on rail (and he is a senior member of the Commerce committee which has jurisdiction)http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/11/25/95822/061

He will have as much input on foreign policy as SFRC chair as he would in any position - and if he disagrees, he has his independence.

[awoke_in_2003]

53. Yep, he is in a good position...

and if a cabinet position was offered (which we have no way of knowing) I bet he would have begged out of it.

[politicasista]

28. Have stayed out of the cabinet talk, but I don't think

he was left out in the cold. The gossip whore media wants people to think that Obama snubbed him for Hillary, but Obama is going to need a significant ally in the Senate (especially given Uncle Ted's health situation :().

Like others in this thread have said, he'll be a powerful senator and SFRC Chair. He will also be able to craft foreign policy and other important legislation.

And he'll be his own boss. That's cool. :)


P.S. This is coming from someone who thought that Kerry could do more as a cabinet member in an Obama Administration.

[paulk]

34. I think the Kennedy situation was significant

in the decision to stay in the Senate. With Kerry out of the Senate and Kennedy's health so perilous, MA would then have two Senators with no seniority.

[politicasista]

35. Yep and...

he can do more in the Senate as long as Reid stays out of the way.

[Wetzelbill]

29. He gets Biden's chairmanship on Foreign Relations

I think that's what he wanted, he gets to be a major player on that front with Obama as president, Biden as VP and Hillary at State, that leaves Kerry as the big Dem foreign policy voice in the Senate. He's in a historic position, just another one of the chips that are falling into place, expect big things from this foreign policy team.

[karynnj]

39. Not only that it places him as the top voice on any global warming treaty in the Senate

- he already was the leader on this, but that was just because of his knowledge and experience.

[Sebastian Doyle]

30. Is there any chance that some Democrats in his state party asked him not to leave?

Unfortunately, we all know they will have to replace one long term Senator before too long. They probably don't want to replace both.

[karynnj]

41. I know many of the papers who endorsed him

either implicitly or explicitly did - including the right wing Boston Herald. Just judging by Mass people on this board, I assume that many people strongly wanted him to stay - and judging from all the informal videos this year of the Kerry on your corner events, he enjoyed talking to everyone. He spoke often of loving Massachusetts and his country.

If Kennedy asked him, that might well have been a factor. But, it is hard to see how leaving the position he has would be better for him. (Clinton was not in the same position - she doesn't have the same seniority)

[PM7nj]

33. Because Obama hates him, obviously.

:sarcasm:

[ProSense]

36. Senators with the kind of seniority Kerry has aren't left out in the cold

He's going to be SFRC chair with a strong Democratic majority and a Democratic President. Biden served as SFRC chair for only two years and had neither. It is why I suspect Biden stated that he would not leave the SFRC for any other position except VP. Kerry is in an enviable and powerful position: seniority in the U.S. Senate, chair of one of the top Senate committees and his Party's dominance in both the legislative and executive branch.

[Cha]

140. I bet Kerry is excited and

happy about doing the best job he can in the position that we all worked so hard to make possible.


Thanks for the link, ProSense.. Kerry will be perfect as Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

[OhioBlue]

37. We NEED him where he is.

Big picture.

It isn't about leaving anyone in the cold... it is about having the best people in the RIGHT positions for our Country. We NEED Senator Kerry to remain where he is especially with Joe Biden leaving the Senate and Ted Kennedy's health problems.

[YvonneCa]

97. I agree. This campaign for our country has been about...

...putting our country first, over political ambitions. We need ALL our best people...carefully placed where their strengths will be utilized... to pull the country out of the ditch that Bush has driven us into. Obama is doing an EXCELLENT job of building his government team.

Kerry would have been a strong candidate in many cabinet positions...heck, he would have been a strong President :) ... but this is about putting the BEST people in the RIGHT positions in 2008. For the good of the country. And, right now, the country is a mess.

[sohndrsmith]

40. I have to agree with those who mention seniority/effectiveness in

the Senate. I'm also guessing that this was Kerry's choice, not Obama's lack of consideration. Kerry was one of the earliest, first, high-profile supporters of Obama and I think they share a close, highly respectful relationship, be it personal, political (or hopefully) both.

Obviously this is pure speculation, but I imagine the two of them discussed different possibilities and how best they could work together. Thus, the current result. Kerry and Dodd are both Obama endorsers, (as are others) and there is nothing insignificant about having their seniority function as leading members of the Senate (from Obama's - and their - perspective). Having that support publicly known is most definitely not a bad thing, either...

Being a Senator, particularly one who can promote and effect positive legislation that makes a difference in this country, is grossly underrated (in my view). I, personally don't see it as being left behind... I think Kerry cares about making a difference, and wants to be in the best position to do so. In a cabinet post, the risk of this personal potential being sidelined is very real.

The position of Secretary of State, for example, doesn't operate as an independent entity based on personal passion or conviction - unless I misunderstand the job entirely. Because of Clinton's relative lack of Senatorial seniority, it makes more sense that she'd consider taking the SoS position. Then again, I don't entirely understand her accepting the post for other reasons. Clinton seems ambitious (often to a fault, in my view) and I don't see the SoS as being a historically career-bolstering resume bullet. Now I have to go do some research on that...

If I'm way off, someone please set me straight : )

[JI7]

42. still upset that Kerry endorsed Obama and Hillary lost the nomination ?

Kerry wasn't left out in the cold anywhere.

[emilyg]

45. Oh boy - another useless comment that adds nothing

to the discussion.

[JI7]

50. as your OP was

[karynnj]

77. I thought it was pretty relevant

Your motive on this, given your posts in the last year, is pretty transparent - I think J17 hit a nerve there.

Your hatred of John Kerry shows through in many posts:
"In 2004, on the eve of an expected Howard Dean landslide, John Kerry started to make the "electability" argument, viz. that he could defeat President Bush and Dean could not. Dean was too confrontational, he said, too angry. Never mind that this was exactly the line the Republicans had been cynically proffering -- Dean's anger as disqualification to lead -- Kerry went on to victory on the heels of a charm offensive. He was a nice guy. He had great teeth. He had friends on both sides of the aisle. (He even asked his "friend" John McCain to be his running mate!) Democratic primary voters bought it, and nominated a smile in a Brooks Brothers suit to run against the Republican meat grinder. I won't bore you with the rest of the recap."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=4656281

This is an angry rant of a disappointed Dean supporter - that was understandable to post in 2004, ridiculous in 2008. First of all, Kerry never said that Dean was too confrontational or angry. There was no reason or benefit possible in doing so. The media did - and they did it using video where Dean looked very angry. Second of all, being a nice guy, which Kerry is, having a nice smile, which he does and the fact that he really has worked across the aisle - are all positives - but they certainly are not even close to summary of what Kerry offered. (It should be noted that DEAN worked with the Republicans in VT when he was a centrist Governor.)

As to repeating RW smears, you can beat "a smile in a Brooks Brothers suit"

After he endorsed Obama, you spend over a month making many posts that Kerry was a war profiteer - even though people posted the facts that your link included stocks in Pepsi, J&J, IBM, Microsoft (that the Senate disclosure showed Teresa had) in companies with military contracts. This further ignored that in that time frame KERRY (with Feingold) WAS LEADING THE EFFORT TO GET OUT.

[No Elephants]

108. Wow.

[Barrymores Ghost]

124. I somehow doubt you'll get a response on this.

Nice catch!

[karynnj]

133. Thanks,

I actually didn't expect one. :)

It amazes is me that the HRC people, who whined of her mistreatment, and who now are declaring any - even mildly negative Clinton comments, out of bounds - are still pursuing vendettas against the people who endorsed Obama.

DU advanced search is really handy - and I had remembered some of the dozens of times she called Kerry a war profiteer. There are many things that comments that can be overlooked on any politician - but calling someone with Kerry's history that is sick.

[Jennicut]

44. With Biden being the VP we needed a good SFRC chairman

Kerry is it. He will be great there. He would have been a great SoS as well but I believe Hillary will be good as well. I also agree with what others said about being a powerful ally to Obama in the Senate. Obama will certainly need Kerry there.

[CK_John]

46. IMO, his wife told the vetting committee thanks but no thanks. n/t

[ProSense]

47. Not likely. Kerry was fully vetted as the Democratic candidate in 2004. n/t

[blm]

88. She was already THOROUGHLY vetted in 2004. You KNOW that, but repeat your spin anyway.

You also refuse to acknowledge that Teresa runs a foundation that is endowed and her job is to DISTRIBUTE MONEY to worthwhile causes.

[BluegrassDem]

48. Because Mitt Romney would've ran for Kerry's open seat

And might've had a shot at winning it. In Massachusetts, if there is a open Senate seat, a special election is held. The governor doesn't make appointments.

[rox63]

93. Mitt Romney is pretty roundly hated here in MA

He left the state with a $1.3 billion deficit, and he destroyed what was left of the state GOP. So it's unlikely he would have even gotten the GOP nomination. MA has become bluer since the last time Romney ran for Senate. So I don't think he would get very far.

[No Elephants]

106. Glad to hear that. Both my son and I think Mass. is a redder than most people think, even in.

Boston proper. And, yes, Romney (and his predecessor, Swift) left Massachusetts in terrible shape in more ways than one. However, the RW will blame Gov. Patrick for it.

[zulchzulu]

49. Obama will have a fantastic connection in the Senate with Kerry

I'm glad John is still in the Senate (although he should have been President) and will do a great job with Foreign Relations and working with Obama from the Senate.

It's all good.

[apocalypsehow]

51. I hereby praise this thread.

Please alert. Thank you.

[RollWithIt]

55. He was never left out in the cold.... it was all based on rumor

Kerry has huge seniority in the Senate.

[Occam Bandage]

56. Being given Chairmanship of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee is not "left out in the cold."

[Whisp]

57. when did you talk to him?

[Danger Mouse]

58. Bullshit. What next? "When did Obama stop beating his wife?"

[Wetzelbill]

60. I swear if some goofy RW blog

picks this up and uses it as proof Obama beats his wife, I will blame you forever. :rofl:

[stillcool]

59. Did you mean the 2004 election?

if you meant the Obama Cabinet, then I'm not sure why you would think he wanted a cabinet position. Being from Massachusetts, I am very pleased he is where he is. There are not enough Senators like my two in the Senate.

[rvablue]

61. I have two ideas....First, he wanted to stay in the Senate

as sadly enough Senator Kennedy is getting old and has health problems and he will be a longstanding Senator finally with Senior status (please don't flame me, I'm not saying this in a cynical but a factual way)

And, secondly, something that is never brought up here but no one had a seconds reservation saying it again and again and again about Bill.........Teresa would have had to be vetted, including her vast investment portfolio and business dealings......a fact that leaves a big question mark dangling around.

[Mass]

63. And he gets the place he wants, chair of the SFRC. I am sure Hillary would have stayed if she got

something as high as that in the Senate. The other hypothesis is utterly stupid given that they were fully vetted 4 years ago. But thanks for questioning her business dealings. I am sure she goes around and gets money from dictators using her position as former US president.:sarcasm:

[SwampG8r]

99. SNAP

[Fabio]

68. already been vetted.

[karynnj]

82. self delete

[blm]

89. ANOTHER lie about Teresa - she was ALREADY VETTED THOROUGHLY in 2004 and she doesn't

TAKE money the way Bill Clinton does - she runs a foundation that was ENDOWED long ago.

You SHOULD be concerned about Bill Clinton's money because he's been banking PLENTY from the very same people who were protected when he deep-sixed BCCI matters for Poppy Bush throughout the 90s.

Trying to smear the HONEST funds Teresa has distributed ethically for over a decade by comparing it with the FILTHY LUCRE Bill banks from Dubai and Saudi royals is a window into YOUR sense of morality.

[dkf]

62. Kerry wasn't hawkish enough for SOS.

I honestly don't know where Obama is going with this. Tweety thinks that picking hawks allows Obama to put through more dovish policies. I hope he is right, but I'm not sure.

[polichick]

64. Well, it gives him cover to do what he wants without the other side...

...attacking him for being "weak on defense" ~ I think that's also why he said we have to have the best military on the planet. Sure, but he'll use it very differently.

[dkf]

71. As long as he is less hawkish than pretty much everyone around him

Problem is you don't know what being surrounded by people like these will do to him.

It is strange because in this case he is the odd man out.

[polichick]

85. It's good that he's replacing many of the guys under Gates...

...and also surrounding himself with trusted (non-cabinet) advisers who are on the same page.

I'm not worried ~ Barack knows who he is.

[WolverineDG]

65. Kennedy is very ill

& Kerry would have a lot of power with being the senior senator from MA as well as all the seniority he has on his own.

dg

[polichick]

66. I wonder how Kerry feels about it.

[onefreespiritedchick]

128. Kerry was lobbying for SOS

From what I read anyway..not sure if it was true or not. I would have to browse old articles at Politico.com to find this particular article.

[Mass]

129. Correction: the DC media pushed a rumor (unsourced) saying he was lobbying.

I know the article you are talking about. They repeat rumors, and there is no way to know whose sources those are (as far as we know, it could be GOP staffers or other sources like that!).

[onefreespiritedchick]

135. Agreed. n/t

[PassingFair]

69. He's not DLC. n/t

[AllentownJake]

70. Ted Kennedy

Sadly may not be with us much longer and the Senate needs an experienced lion to help us get things through.

[pipi_k]

72. As a resident of Mass,

I like what he's been doing here, and I imagine he must be pretty happy with the job he's been doing as well.

So he probably made it known that he'd rather stay on in the Senate...

[Marrah_G]

73. He was not "Left out"- He is a very powerful Senator

People are acting as if a cabinet position is somehow more important then a Senate seat.

Also, for note, Massachusetts is losing Sen. Kennedy, to lose Sen Kerry at the same time would not be a good thing.

If you take all our powerful Senators and put them in the administration then it just makes our side weaker and less gets accomplished.

[SwampG8r]

74. he has a real job in the senate

he doesnt have to go begging for crumbs

[TexasObserver]

75. With Obama, Biden and Clinton to be replaced, we still need Kerry in the senate.

I think John is a great senator. He'll chair a top committee.

[mtnsnake]

76. All I care about is that Kerry will continue fighting for the environment that Bush raped for 8 yrs

The environment needs him to continue the good fight so fuckwads like Bush and Palin don't run rampant over our lands and wildlife again.

[beachmom]

78. Peter Beinert has an interesting theory as to why Obama staffed up his nat'l security team w/ hawks

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1862446,00.html

It's precisely because Obama intends to pursue a genuinely progressive foreign policy that he's surrounding himself with people who can guard his right flank at home. When George W. Bush wanted to sell the Iraq war, he trotted out Colin Powell--because Powell was nobody's idea of a hawk. Now Obama may be preparing to do the reverse. To give himself cover for a withdrawal from Iraq and a diplomatic push with Iran, he's surrounding himself with people like Gates, Clinton and Jones, who can't be lampooned as doves.

...

To grasp the logic of this strategy, start with the fact that Obama's likely national-security picks don't actually disagree very much with the foreign policy he laid out during the campaign. Jones is on record calling the Iraq war a "debacle" and urging that the detention center at Guantánamo Bay be closed "tomorrow." Gates has also reportedly pushed for closing Gitmo and for faster withdrawals from Iraq. He has called a military strike against Iran a "strategic calamity," urged diplomacy with Tehran's mullahs and denounced the "creeping militarization" of U.S. foreign policy. (You don't hear that from a Defense Secretary every day.) For her part, Hillary Clinton during the presidential campaign embraced an Iraq-withdrawal position virtually identical to Obama's. And although they fought a sound-bite war over sitting down with the leaders of countries like Iran, the two candidates' actual Iran policies were pretty much the same. Both wanted intensive diplomacy; both wanted to start it at lower levels and work up from there.

Kerry has some baggage. GOOD baggage, IMO. He helped end the Vietnam War, AND he crafted the Iraq plan that Obama is now going to implement to end that war, too. Another words, Kerry is an out front dove. He has shown courage to do these things, and everyone knows this is who he is. So .... I think it best that he continue to stay in the Senate and craft foreign policy which he can later on whisper in President Obama's ear, who will then tell Jones, Gates and Clinton to implement.

I didn't like the way Kerry was treated during this whole SoS episode. But if you look substantively, this may have been an ingenius move by Obama. Only time will tell.

[Alter Ego]

80. Because Obama hates white people.

Or, maybe it's because Kerry just got a plum Senate spot--chairman of the SFRC.

[Tom Rinaldo]

81. All things considered Obama thought Clinton was a better choice for SoS than Kerry

Of course that can be debated, but it is Obama's top job to form the best and most effective government possible, not to reward past loyalties in the face of that imperitive. John Kerry didn't get "left out in the cold", he simply didn't get the SoS position and there is no other position in an Obama Administration for John Kerry to fill that would make more sense than him remaining in the Senate and becoming Chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee. If all Kerry bottom line wanted was some cabinet slot I am sure Obama would gladly have found a different one for him so as not to "leave Kerry out in the cold".

[beachmom]

83. She was the better choice politically and symbolically.

But there is no way you can argue she is the foreign policy expert Kerry is. Kerry has 24 years of experience, and was largely responsible for normalization of relations with Vietnam. He has a grasp of foreign policy issues Hillary does not yet have. She is smart and capable, but not of the caliber Kerry is on foreign policy. Nevertheless, I think he is in an excellent position in the Senate, and that she will serve Obama well as Secretary of State.

[ProSense]

84. That assumes Kerry preferred SoS over SFRC chair.

I think he would have considered it had he been asked, but he may have wanted to stay SFRC chair.

[WI_DEM]

86. He's not left out in the cold, he is a very powerful ally and Senator.

[uponit7771]

87. This question seems "right wing"-ish

[BlooInBloo]

98. Of course it is.

[MoonRiver]

90. Personally, I don't give a damn why.

No offense to anybody who does though.

[ProSense]

91. You gave a damn enough to comment here. n/t

[MoonRiver]

92. True. So, I stand corrected.

[anigbrowl]

94. 'cause he's a winter solider. Cold is his natural element.

Also, Obama wants to be the tallest person in his cabinet.

[karynnj]

109. "Winter Solier" being a person willing to stand up for what he believes in even if doing so has a

huge cost. I agree with you Kerry is a winter soldier. He will not stay silent when he thinks things are wrong. Kerry likely would have been President had he NOT had this very admirable quality. Helping marshall public support behind ending the Vietnam War was a very patriotic thing to do but it is one root of the RW hatred of Kerry. Then when elected, he fought the popular President Reagan's illegal funding of the Contras, investigating when no one else would. He stood up a third time against both parties on BCCI. (Less well known, he spoke against Clinton using Iranian arm merchants to covertly arm persecuted people in the former Yugoslavia. Good motives, but a bad way to do it.)

Senator Kerry is, more than anyone else of our times, the person who has been willing to communicate unpleasant truths - and someone needs to do it. It is a tribute to how talented a statesman he is that, even with these three examples of being a winter soldier standing up for the values we claim to have, he nearly became President. Had he become President, we would have elected a man, who pretty consistently had called for a major real change in our foreign policy. His history of speaking out when it was likely to severely hurt his political future - as all three of those actions (each of which were multiyear commitments) - argue that he would offered a very different foreign policy - even if on the surface it looked similar. (That is because it would more closely match the rhetoric that didn't match the reality in the last 40 plus years.)

I hope that Obama will make the changes that he spoke of and that we elected him to make. I hope that Kerry, chairing the SFRC, will be a strong ally and a voice (one of many) that Obama will listen to. While it leaves Kerry independent and more able to speak out publicly if necessary, it also leaves him as a political force in the Senate and in public to push ideas and programs through that will likely be part of Obama's agenda. Kerry was an incredible advocate for Obama during the primaries and the general election, but there is not one thing I ever heard him say that was not consistent with things he was proposing in 2006 - and on most issues - in 2004.

[ProSense]

114. Exactly.

Kerry's outspokenness coupled with his position as an effective and powerful Senator is why detractors in the media continue to try to mock him with silly rumors and innuendo. It's not unexpected, they've been trying to do this for years. The ridiculous implication is that a fifth-term Senator, who won a decisive victory in November, is someone "left out in the cold" or "snubbed." Notice that most of the media have included him on the short list for almost every cabinet position? Isn't it ironic that while some are mocking him, all deem him qualified for several cabinet position: AG, Defense, Energy, Interior, SoS, Veterans, etc.? He's one of the few people who is over qualified for most of these positions, having been the Democratic candidate in 2004, a Lt. Gov, prosecutor, small business owner, environmental activist, a Veteran champion for Veterans and someone deeply immersed in policy as a Senator.

Also, lack of Senate seniority is the primary reason cited for Hillary's willingness to give up her seat. Kerry not only has that seniority, but he is also uniquely positioned, in stature and visibility, to push the Democrats' agenda.

The media detractors who try to imply that Kerry was snubbed fail miserably when they have to concede that he is now the powerful chairman of the SFRC. They never explain why a senior Senator would leave the Senate for any of these positions, giving up independence, power and the opportunity to craft, impact and pass legislation at a time when the balance of power is stacked in the Dems' favor.

[blm]

121. No one lawmaker of the last 35 years has been as big an obstacle to the fascist agenda than Kerry.

And he did so as a civilian and a senator.

[trayfoot]

95. He is where he wants to be!

[Beausoir]

100. Because he didn't go kamikaze all-in like Richardson did.

Jaysus.

Kerry is twice the man Bill Richardson is....but Kerry refused to prostitute himself to get a cabinet post.

Richardson on the other hand....what a pathetic joke.

[Beacool]

103. I agree with you.

Kerry is a much better man than Richardson. Kerry endorsed Obama early on and was discreet about letting it be known that he was interested in the SOS spot. Richardson betrayed a friend and had no qualms in lobbying to get the job. It is highly ironic that the offer was made to neither one of them and the job went to Hillary. Kerry is probably not too torn up about it, the chairmanship of the SFRC is none too shabby. As for Richardson, karma is a bitch.

:D

[marlakay]

101. My husband told me he thinks Obama looked at all the people

including the republicans and took the people with the strongest good points for each job. He thinks that if he can keep them on point with their strengths they will stay positive for him.

Kerry's strength is in the senate now. After he lost I noticed he started speaking out more and taking more chances than he used to. I think Obama knows leaving Kerry in the senate would help him pass his policies while leaving Hillary there might have been hard on her to go back and she might have wanted to do things her way instead of his, like on health care.

[No Elephants]

107. Why would it be harder on Hillary to go back than it was on any other Senator who ran

for the Presidency and went back? Kennedy, Biden, Kerry, Dodd--all of them went back and did well for their country and their party.

[beachmom]

120. Because Hillary is very low on seniority in the Senate.

[karynnj]

134. Because she is H*I*L*L*A*R*Y

She was a celebrity First Lady when she entered the Senate and the plan was to be First Lady. This is not to say she didn't do her job - she did. She did not, however, have any major thing that she did or lead on. Few do in there first term. (Kerry was very unusual in having done the Contra and BCCI investigations by the time he had the seniority that HRC does now.)

Neither Biden or Dodd ever got close enough to have really expected to be President - in any of their attempts. This year both returned to their important Senate positions - until Biden was called to be the VP nominee.

Kennedy and Kerry are the two who were similar to HRC. Kennedy in that like HRC he was seen for at least a decade as a likely President and Kerry because he came very very close. When Kennedy lost, the MA papers did question whether he would not run again in 1982 when his term was up - instead he went on to be the greatest legislator we have.

Kerry came closer to being President than HRC - even if you assume the Democrat was guaranteed to win. HRC reached that point having started with enormous support in the party and the media. The difference is that, contrary to the spin, Kerry was and is focused at least as much on the issues and serving his country as his personal goal to be President. (HRC would never have taken on BCCI which angered many powers that be) He returned immediately to the Senate and nearly as fast he used his email to beg people to stay involved. He has spent the last 4 years working as hard as he could to put Democrats back into power and to pursue the goals he had in 2004. Without that effort and his excellent 2004 platform, the loss in 2004 could have thrown the Democrats into the process the Republicans are addressing now - figuring out who they are. Instead, nearly everyone ran on many things Kerry said in 2004. Though he gets little credit for it, if you look at where Democrats are positioned now, Kerry was the more successful leader in the last 4 years - even though he had to fight the official leadership.

At this point there are many long term efforts of his that could finally be achieved. Kerry will likely lead the effort on getting a global warming treaty passed - and given just his work at Bali - he would be one of the people who made the treaty possible. He is leaving next week to go to preliminary talks in Poland. He also just introduced a landmark high speed rail bill - an issue he pushed since 1982 when he was a lt Governor in MA.

Hrc, on the other plan, had likely never thought past winning the 2008 nomination and then the Presidency. It took her over a month after she conceded before she returned to the Senate. She has a major problem in that the media and people see her as a very powerful figure - yet, in the Senate she had relatively little power and had not really ever led on any issue. There was no role that the Senaet would give her that she would thing "big" enough for her.

When Kennedy returned, he had 18 years of seniority and had already had issues he had long worked on. Kerry had 20 years and he was seen by more and more people as having been right on nearly every issue vs Bush. He had been the standard bearer of the party - and he took on the role of fighting back against the Republicans.

[blm]

117. Uncovering and exposing IranContra, BCCI, CIA drugrunning were most dangerous 'chances' a lawmaker

could take. Putting up the FIRST gay-friendly legislation in the senate was a risk back in the 80s. Putting up the first public financing of campaigns legislation in the senate in the 90s drew more targets on Kerry.

Those who think he's taken more chances now since 2004 need to examine their nation's recent history more closely...more closely than what the corporate media puts out there to define our TRUE HEROES, our best and brightest lawmakers.

[yellowcanine]

102. Because cabinet appointments should not be political prizes?

Obama needs to be given the latitude to pick the people he feels are the best for each post. Let him govern please.

[No Elephants]

104. Don't know, unless he wants him as Secretary of Defense when Gates goes. Kerry

gave Obama his big break by choosing him as keynote speaker in 2004 and Kerry was one of the first really big SD's to endorse Obama over Clinton. That's on the "owe ya" side. On the merits side, Kerry is damn smart and decent. So, it's a puzzlement.

[karynnj]

111. It might be because "Kerry is damn smart and decent"

In addition to all you mention - Kerry was the best surrogate that Obama had - especially right after he endorsed Obama. Kerry was the person who was able to counter Bill Clinton's revisionist history on Obama's positions on Iraq. Kerry had the moral standing to speak of how being a former President does not give you the right to abuse the truth.

Kerry was, I think, the first to refer to Obama as a "transformational" President and the one who first and best created the concept of "candidate McCain" being different that the pre 2000 "Senator McCain". (This was nearly as soon as McCain was their nominee.) He was the first to use "erratic" and to list all the foreign policy areas where McCain was just wrong or not knowledgeable. In doing this Kerry repeatedly spoke of Bush and others coming to Obama's positions - on NK, Afghanistan and on setting a timeline on Iraq - never once pointing out that these were all Kerry positions that Obama moved to.

It may have come down to knowing a dissatisfied HRC, a junior Senator in a body that runs on seniority, was more of a potential problem than a disappointed, if he was disappointed. Kerry will use his awesome intelligence, his passion and his real diplomatic skills to fight for all the things he always believed in - including being the leader in the Senate in getting a climate treaty passed. (SFRC will hold hearings on this and Kerry is going next week to Poland for the preliminary talks.)

On foreign policy, Obama seemed influenced by many Kerry ideas and even used some Kerry rhetoric during the election. If this is real, Obama is very likely to value Kerry's opinions going forward - as one input - to his decisions. I don't see that he would have any more influence as SoS - other than that he would be at the table and he is persuasive. But, Kerry has the real possibility of becoming a very important legislator. The same diplomatic skills that would have made him an incredible SoS could make him the strongest Senator we have in the future. His committee assignments give him the position to work on nearly every critical issue - and he has the creativity and the brilliance to do so.

That position is owed to no one except the people of Massachusetts, who elected him 5 times. (He doesn't even owe the leaders of the MA party - he won his Senate seat the first time, as he did the LT Governor seat, over their favorite candidate.)

[JNelson6563]

110. Maybe he will be extremely helpful in the Senate??

Maybe that's where he wants to be??

Julie

[EstimatedProphet]

112. We need him in the Senate

[Tom Rinaldo]

115. With Clinton and Biden leaving, and with Kennedy ailing and aging...

There is a grwoing vacuum inside the Senate for visible high profile leadership. Kerry may end up being the next Senate Liberal Lion, an unofficial position that comes complete wih an unofficial national soap box to stand on.

[Beacool]

116. I'll miss Biden and Hillary in the senate.

Biden got a better gig, Hillary I'm not sure.

:(

[Name removed]

122. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Barrymores Ghost]

123. More importantly, why do YOU seem to think he was "left out in the cold?"

Your subject header implicitly implies some nefarious motives, a purposeful intent to shut Kerry out of the new Obama administration.

Was that your intent -- to chum?

[beachmom]

125. This was a Fox News headline.

I remain amused by the thread, but the whole premise is a right wing frame.

[Barrymores Ghost]

126. It would seem that way.

Some folks apparently don't give two shits about where they get their talking points from, just so long as they fit their preconceived notions and biases.

[emilyg]

138. My intent was to get an answer to a

question. 90% of you are paranoid.

[Barrymores Ghost]

141. Your intent was to stir the shit.

Let's not insult the intelligence of those 90% in this thread who recognize this fact.

[ZeitGuy]

127. Why do you think NOBODY has rec'd this OP?

:eyes:

[emilyg]

130. They are all waiting for you to be first.

[ZeitGuy]

131. No, actually, I think Barrymores Ghost nailed it. (nt)

[Catherine Vincent]

132. He may not have wanted any position.

Unless they really needed someone but in the meantime, he'll stick with beign a Senator.

[LittleClarkie]

136. 1. Maybe he wasn't. 2. Maybe he didn't want to leave Massachusetts without a senior Senator

since Teddy is so ill.

3. To expand on number 2, perhaps being a chairman who will be influential is not what one might consider being left in the cold.

[ClarkUSA]

139. Meow. Your primary holdover grudge attempt to make Obama look bad has failed miserably.

What, isn't Capital Hill Forum any fun these days? :rofl: