Secretary of State Kerry?

[rox63]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24860223/

[beachmom]

1. Thanks for posting the article, but man I don't like this kind of talk in the middle of his

re-election campaign. That is really what is most important now. I kind of liked the idea of Biden & Dodd getting cabinet positions, and Kerry being the chairman of the SFRC. I also think with Teddy being sick, it is important that Kerry stay in the Senate. However, IF Obama won the presidency (which is going to be a tough, tough fight), and Obama really felt Kerry was the man he wanted in the job, then of course, I would totally support Secretary of State Kerry. But right now, I liked what David Wade said:

"Senator Kerry is running for re-election to the U.S. Senate, where he was recently ranked the twelfth-most powerful member," said spokesman David Wade. "He looks forward to continuing to chair the Middle East subcommittee, where he's focused on the war in Iraq and security in the region. The only job he has his sights on is the one he already holds and he plans to stay right there."

Nevertheless, I enjoyed this paragraph:

Yet an Obama spokesman kept a respectful distance from questions about a potential Cabinet appointment.

"Senator Obama appreciates his close friendship with Senator Kerry, his service to this country and his early support for our campaign. It is obviously far too early to even speculate about the makeup of an Obama administration — as we are still in a nomination fight — but with his depth of expertise, especially on issues of foreign policy, Senator Kerry would be on the short list for anyone's Cabinet," said spokesman Bill Burton.

[rox63]

2. I know - He needs to concentrate on his reelection campaign

And I would hate to lose him in the Senate. But we all need to know that the talk about this is out there. I am glad to see him being recognized for his skill and talent in foreign policy and diplomacy.

[WildEyedLiberal]

3. I can't agree

I don't think the full extent of Kerry's talents can be adequately exercised in the Senate - between the rigid parliamentary procedures and the inevitable hamstringing that the "leadership" inflicts on him (and lets be real, an Obama presidency isn't suddenly going to turn Reid et al into Kerry's best friends), he couldn't get a fraction as much accomplished as he could as a Cabinet member. Secretary of State would be nice, but to be honest - Kerry would make one of the nation's best Attorney Generals of all time.

There is NOTHING more important in this country's immediate future than restoring the rule of law and holding to account the neo-fascist incursions of the Bush Administration. If action is not taken in the first 100 days of the next administration to right those wrongs, American democracy will be forever changed for the worse. We NEED a tenacious, fearless patriot like John Kerry as AG, and he is tailor made for the job. It would be far, far more important than anything he could do in the Senate. And (puts on flame retardant suit)I really don't think the rest of the Senate or the state of Massachusetts really appreciates him anyway.

[Luftmensch067]

5. My two cents?

I see your point about the frustrations and obstructions of Senate work and, in my opinion, JK would be an AG or SOS of unparalleled skill and effectiveness, but I think, short of the Presidency, only the Senate permits him to promote and create policy that covers every aspect of his political mission. He is ideally positioned now to exercise enormous influence not JUST on foreign policy in some of the most troubled areas of the world, but ALSO environmental policy and the threat of global warming, the economy (of which small business is the lifeblood,) veteran's affairs, health care, civil/citizen's rights and governmental integrity/transparency. To name but a few!

A brief concentrated in only one of those areas would mean a tremendous loss for our country of his skills in all the rest. And I agree with Beachmom -- MA needs him more than ever now in the coming years, even though we pray Teddy will be with us for a good long time. As a MA voter, I am only willing to relinquish John Kerry to the Presidency! :-)

Still, it would be awful fun to see him bringing all those criminals to justice or negotiating with foreign heads of state on behalf of the President!

[WildEyedLiberal]

8. Haha, yeah, I can appreciate the Mass folks here who want to keep him

But I dunno. I do maintain that JK's skill set is better suited to an executive position than a legislative one; especially given that the Democrats in Congress tend to be an impotent bunch anyway. JK has tried to get a great deal done in the past 4 years, and with few exceptions (on the really big-deal stuff anyway), he was stymied every time. There will always be a liberal legislator who can vote "our" way, especially from a state like MA; it takes a really special and courageous hero to take a dramatic stand. I don't think JK will ever have the opportunity to change the country dramatically from the Senate, but he absolutely would as AG.

Of course, I would much, much rather see him as president (and who knows...)

:hi:

[beachmom]

7. Ted Kennedy proves that a Senator can affect more lives than any cabinet member.

I agree Kerry would be great as an A.G., but in the end, he would have a boss -- the president -- whereas, in the Senate he is more autonomous (and I think Reid and others in the leadership now highly respect him and trust his instincts).

But, of course, this is a "friendly fight", WEL. John Kerry is such a great public servant -- where is he best suited?? So many possibilities! :)

[WildEyedLiberal]

10. You give Reid, etc far, far more credit than I do

If the past few years have taught me one thing, to paraphrase, it's that you can't go broke underestimating the Democratic party's respect for JK. Reid undercut him at every turn; the entire Clinton wing of the party would very much love to have him out of public service altogether; and most of the rest are either too wrapped up in their own ambitions or too timid to care. I think Kerry's autonomy in the Senate is extremely handicapped by the "leadership" and I absolutely don't think that Kerry will ever be accorded the kind of respect from party poobahs as Teddy has been. Ted is an indelible link to the most iconic family in the Democratic party's history, and thus his rabble-rousing unabashed liberalism has gone relatively uncontested. But Kerry doesn't have that kind of "prestige," even though you and I know that by all rights he should because he's the creme de la creme. I DO, however, think that Obama DOES respect him immensely and trust his instincts, and while I'm not sure Obama is as courageous and iconoclastic as Kerry is, I do think he's one of the few rare Democrats who would honestly allow Kerry to stretch out and exercise his full range of talents. Bottom line, I trust Obama far more than I trust Reid or any of the various DLC snakes in the Senate.

Sorry to rain on anyone's parade, but I can't convince myself that the Senate is the best place for Kerry. I wanted him to be president so damn bad I could taste it, and I still do. There is NO ONE who comes close. But since that isn't going to happen (this election season at any rate), I nevertheless can't just pretend that he's better off in the Senate anyway, because frankly, he's not. His talents are tailor made for the executive branch and one of the biggest reasons I'm pulling for an Obama victory is the hope that he'll be a senior Cabinet member.

Of course, you are right, John Kerry would be excellent anywhere. :hi:

[Luftmensch067]

11. And you are right, too

Good points!

[Mass]

15. I agree. Of course, I do not like to see things like that in the media right in the middle of the

campaign because it gives ammunition to the GOP, but otherwise, I totally agree on everything.

[beachmom]

19. Oh, absolutely, I trust Obama a million times more than Reid.

But my views of power in the Senate doesn't always rely on Reid per se. I think that Senators create their own power, and then the leadership has no choice but to grant them more. I think Kerry proved that in 2006 and 2007. It is true that him possibly running for president, and then deciding not to changed the dynamics. Harry Reid has created a very clear policy of not allowing presidential candidates, from 2007 onward, to lead on the most important issues of the day, like Iraq. He would not allow their bills or amendments to be marked up and voted on. So, in that regard, Kerry not running for POTUS opened up opportunities for him he wouldn't have had before. However, that would not have been enough. Something else had to have happened and it did: his ideas on Iraq -- the Kerry/Feingold amendment -- ended up being used by Democrats across the country in the '06 mid term elections. Not only that, the bipartisan Iraq Study Group ended up being very influenced by John Kerry and adopting many of his ideas, which in turn Obama came forward with his Iraq plan based on the ISG. There is no way Harry Reid could avoid Kerry anymore. Kerry proved to be right on everything relating to Iraq, and suddenly gained more power as a result.

There are two other areas where Kerry shined, had the right ideas, and therefore was given larger prominence from Reid: global climate change and the "Roadblock Republicans". Once again, I doubt Reid originally thought Kerry would be doing so much. But then Kerry talked about the climate crisis in a fantastic way that was good politics AND he came up with the Roadblock Republicans narrative that also could not be resisted.

In conclusion, Reid did not GIVE Kerry the power on these issues. Kerry TOOK the power. So in that way, I do not feel the leadership is as big an impediment as others do. There is a dynamic in the Senate, where senators can move up even if the leadership wasn't looking for that senator to increase his/her influence.

In the cabinet, there is one boss: the president. It is true that a cabinet member may be given a lot of latitude, but in the end it must be subservient to the president's agenda. Kerry sure can contribute to and help create that agenda, but once it is in place, or if crisis occurs, and it must be changed, Kerry will need to follow the lead of the president. Now, obviously, there are exceptions, most notably the bizarre infighting situation in the Bush administration, where the SecofDef made major power grabs, running things normally done by the State Dept., but I do not think that dysfunctional administration is at all a predictor of what an Obama administration would be like.

So there is my long winded theory of why I think Kerry has more options in the Senate. I do agree with you on the trust factor; I just think Kerry can work around Reid and other less reliable Democrats in the Senate.

[beachmom]

25. This post really backs up what I am talking about concerning a Senator being his own boss:

http://jamesfallows.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/05/belated_comment_on_jim_webb_as.php

Having first met Webb nearly thirty years ago -- and having co-written an Atlantic cover story with him, and having broken my rule against giving money to political candidates two years ago when he began his Senate run -- I can't imagine a job he would enjoy less than the vice presidency.

Jim Webb has arranged his life so as to maximize his intellectual and personal independence, and minimize the things he "has" to do and the bosses he must answer to. Novelist, essayist, journalist, movie-maker -- through the two decades before his Senate race he's been his own boss as much as possible, and has clearly relished saying exactly what he believes. The federal government office that most nicely matches his previous life is the one he now holds: as a U.S. Senator. Especially a Senator of the model Webb has described as his ideal: Daniel Patrick Moynihan. There are still lots of things Webb "has" to do -- fundraising, constituent service, party efforts -- to maintain this role. But in the big scheme of things, not that many.

As senator you can really do a lot more of what you want than a Sec. of State. Now Webb & Kerry are obviously different in many ways, but I do sense some similarities, especially when it comes to wanting to speak their minds, share new ideas, etc. The Senate is the place for that.

[Inuca]

29. About Webb

I saw him a couple of times having to answer the VP question, and I really got the feeling that he is just not interested. Very subjective interpretation, of course, but it seemed more than yet another variation on the typical coy response most politicians give to such a question.

[politicasista]

4. Or VP? (unlikely)

Won't link the thread because, it's just mind boggling. If not baffling.

[beachmom]

6. Oh, the people here can take it. It's nothing new.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x6160591#6162302

I mean, the detractors need to come up with some new material. And I am opposed to him being a running mate because then he couldn't run for re-election to the Senate.

[politicasista]

9. True

Yes, most of the material has ran it's course. :) And that means he would have to choose. I am for him being re-elected to the Senate.

I have been reading TayTay's post about this being the in-between period and the trash talking taking place now that BO is getting closer to clinching the nomination. I thought about posting it again because it deserves it's own thread.

It's just baffling to see some (not all) of O's supporters not see that the media bias was in place in 2004 and form their own opinion of the good senator. Like you and others here, I am supporting Obama, and I am glad Kerry has been a nice surogate for him and appreciate that, it's too bad that they don't. At least Obama himself and the campaign knows who has helped them out and been there for them.

[JI7]

12. just so you know, the person who made the thread is a Kerry basher

he is not a supporter. i remember that poster from 2004 and he was not supportive of KErry. just look at the stupidity of the OP and how empty it is. i think it was just looking for responses that bashed Kerry.

i was going to reply but don't want to add another post to the thread.

[politicasista]

13. Oh, ok

Thanks for that info. I am so glad I wasn't here in 03/04. That had to have been nasty (maybe not as nasty as this primary). Been trying to practice the "Let It Sink" strategy. I think Obama himself would be appaled reading that one his best surrogates is being smeared. Luckily, DU isn't the real world and not representative of the average voter aka average Obama supporter. :)

[Mass]

14. Ignore them. Just some of the same idiots that repeat the same thing again and again.\nt

[politicasista]

16. Thank you

Your responses in that thread were cool.

Poli bangs head for bringing this in the K group. :banghead:

[Luftmensch067]

17. Ow, stop that!

That looks painful! :-)

[politicasista]

18. Oh, don't worry, I am not doing that in real life

:)

[BlueIris]

20. Not the worst idea ever, but I feel his talents are best utilized in the Senate just now.

And I confess, the idea of a Kerry vice-presidency makes me ill.

[Inuca]

21. Not more info, but

a very nice picture :-) http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_stump/archive/2008/05/28/secretary-kerry.aspx#131734

[Mass]

22. Comments are sickening, but it is TNR, so I should not be surprised.

Their idea of a good candidate in 04 was Lieberman.

[karynnj]

23. Though I understand the concern that this is mentioned as he faces re-election, it would be worse

no one mentioned him. One of Kerry's strengths is foreign policy and he would be as obvious a choice based on his international credibility. If Obama wins, Kerry likely will be a voice on foreign policy that will be heard, whether as Senator or Secretary of State. That he can be influential from his position as Senator can be seen from the fact that it is true even now with the Democrats out of the WH. One signal that he might prefer staying in the Senate was that near the time when he opted not to run, speaking of the SFRC staffer who left after 20 plus year, he spoke of her college thesis - on how much influence a Senator could have.

Consider that at the Bali conference - even with a Bush administration in power - Kerry had considerable impact that the Bush people acknowledge - though only in Senate meetings. Read Kerry's speech before the Bali conference and the agreement reached - he had a major impact. Consider that the Baker/Hamilton committee recommendations matched Kerry's positions more than anyone else's. Also, when Brown became PM, it was said that the American he was closest to was Kerry.

Every Democrat running this year, when speaking either on alternative energy/global warming or on national security/foreign policy was influenced by Kerry from both 2004 and afterwards. I know I am biased, but I hear far more echoes of Kerry's proposed policies, words and phrases and ideas than I hear of Bill Clinton's. Beyond words, Kerry is likely the person who is now the most influential Democrat on foreign policy. The mainstream Democratic position is pretty much Kerry/Feingold - with even HRC speaking of setting deadlines and the regional summit that Kerry proposed since 2003 and which was passed as the sense of the Senate resolution in 2006. Also consider Biden's comments said after Kerry signed on to his amendment on soft partitions in Iraq (after Biden made the changes that corrected the problems Kerry had a year earlier that kept him from supporting the original Biden proposal). Kerry's support meant a lot in the Senate and internationally.

People hear have quoted that Kerry said he and Obama seem to have the same foreign policy DNA. From Kerry's comments on Obama and the need to understand the complex cultures of foreign countries that Obama was likely with Kerry on needing the change on the Biden resolution to vote for it. The change was hardly mentioned in the media, but it transformed the resolution from one which would seem to have colonial overtones to one that respects the need of the Iraqis being the ones who draw the lines. From Biden's and Kerry's comments, that change may have the price for getting Kerry as co-sponsor. (The ability to get that large a concession is a measure of real influence - not to mention Warner chose to take that time to point out that this was not the first Sense of the Senate resolution calling for a regional summit - Kerry's was.) So, on the military (K/F) side and the diplomatic side, a President Obama has the party already unified behind positions that also have some Republican support even now. When Kerry said he wasn't going to run, he spoke of the things that needed to be done between then and 2009 so the President in 2009 was in a better position - on Iraq and global warming, Kerry has made huge contributions even though the media paid little attention.

This article is nice - even if it takes things that are similar to work that Kerry has done for decades and acts as if it is a new found talent Kerry has. (One would think they might remember that he was even more brilliant in retrospect in the foreign policy debate than it seemed at the time.) If Obama were to offer him the SOS postion, it might be a tough decision. On the one hand, he could then be the chief diplomat in Iraq and elsewhere and the chief US and possibly world voice in determining the successor to Kyoto. It is hard to imagine anyone who would be better or two issues closer to his heart. On the other hand, he could be a strong voice from the Senate.

(Some comments have mentioned that others (Reid, clinton etc) have undercut him. But, with a Democratic President who respects him and will often agree with his position, those acting "politically" will see that this is not the right strategy. Consider how many Senators in hearings etc have shown enormous respect for Kerry's ability and insightfulness. I suspect that much of the Clinton clique following HRC was based on the view that they needed to stay in her favor and fear or retribution. As their power declines, that should be diminished.

[beachmom]

24. I think if Obama offered Kerry the SoS cabinet position, Kerry would accept it.

Because when you're asked by the POTUS to serve, you just do it. That is who Kerry is, someone who has served his country his entire life. I will say though, that Obama would not offer it, if he thought Kerry didn't want the job.

[MonteLukast]

26. I've always thought it was a wonderful idea.

But JK needs to be where he can have the greatest effect. And that might just be as Senator.

If not JK, definitely Joe Biden. Or anybody else with a mile-long list of foreign policy creds.

[beachmom]

27. Kerry responds to this rumor in Springfield:

http://www.cbs3springfield.com/news/local/19341324.html

"It's not coming from me. I have an interest in serving in the United States senate and I'm not looking for any other job. That's what I'm doing," Senator Kerry says.

At a Springfield Fire Department, Senator Kerry confirms he intends to be Senator for now, but an Associated Press article printed Wednesday, questions that.

...

Many say Kerry's endorsement established Obama's campaign. Now that he appears to be the Democratic front runner, Obama isn't ruling out adding our Senator to his cabinet. Spokesman for Obama says, "with his depth of expertise, especially on issues of foreign policy, Senator Kerry would be on the short list for anyone's Cabinet."

But as a former presidential candidate himself, Kerry's not showing his hand.

...

Pushing rumors aside at a Democratic Dinner at Red Rose Pizza, the Kerry campaign went on. Supporters of the Senator say they'd embrace Kerry as Secretary of State too.

"Position of Secretary of State he'd have the ability to have an impact on world events and world conditions and Senator Kerry has the experience to deliver on that," Ludlow voter Robert Wilson says.

A recent Washington poll ranks Kerry as the 12th most powerful Senator, losing out to #2, Ted Kennedy. Now, if Kennedy's health prevents him from serving his full eighth term, Kerry will fill the shoes of our state's go to guy.

Hmmm ... a rather coy response IMO. I like what the Ludlow voter said. Hopefully, that is the sentiment in Mass. overall.

Watch the video at the link.

[beachmom]

28. This denial from Kerry is even stronger:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/06/02/politics/politico/thecrypt/main4147285.shtml

Kerry Dismisses Secretary Of State Rumors As "silly Talk"
By Daniel W. Reilly

Jun 2, 2008

Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) dismissed media reports that he is angling to become America's top diplomat, saying Monday that rumors linking him to the secretary of state post in a potential Obama administration were nothing more than “silly talk.”

With Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) edging closer and closer the Democratic nomination, speculation has already begun in the quadrennial beltway parlor game of picking the next presidential cabinet.

Asked Monday if he had any preliminary conversations with Obama about a potential cabinet post, Kerry said; “Are you kidding? Of course not.”

Kerry--the Democratic nominee in 2004--said any talks at this stage of the race “would be inappropriate.”

Over the weekend, Kerry hosted former British Prime Minister Tony Blair for a two-hour lunch in Nantucket, Mass, prompting the AP to headline a story “John Kerry: Is he angling for secretary of state?”

So here is my question at this point: WHO generated the AP article? Where did it come from?

[wisteria]

30. Personally, I think he is deserving of more than being a Senator.

I would like to see him as SOS. Not that there is something belittling just being a senator, but Senator Kerry could have and should have been our president. I think that makes him more than qualified to lead this country in one form or another.
Sorry people from Mass, I feel he is deserving and destined for more that just Jr. Senator from Mass.
I hope the offer is made and he seriously considers this position.

[politicasista]

31. How about Ambassador to France?

http://www.ebonyjet.com/politics/national/index.aspx?id=7615

[Mass]

32. Why would he want a position like that except as a retirement position?

[politicasista]

33. Good question

I ask the same thing. It was a fantasy Obama's cabinet draft.