Following up on Rachel's report on last night's show, it appears some high-profile figures are being considered for top posts in a second-term Obama administration. In both cases, the political implications are significant.
President Obama is considering asking Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) to serve as his next defense secretary, part of an extensive rearrangement of his national security team that will include a permanent replacement for former CIA director David H. Petraeus.
Although Kerry is thought to covet the job of secretary of state, senior administration officials familiar with the transition planning said that nomination will almost certainly go to Susan E. Rice, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations.
John O. Brennan, Obama's chief counterterrorism adviser, is a leading contender for the CIA job if he wants it, officials said. If Brennan goes ahead with his plan to leave government, Michael J. Morell, the agency's acting director, is the prohibitive favorite to take over permanently.
Let's take these one at a time. If Kerry departs from the Senate for a cabinet post -- any cabinet post -- Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick (D) would appoint a temporary replacement before a special election could be held to fill the seat until 2014. Democrats would run the risk of losing the seat to, among others, outgoing Sen. Scott Brown (R).
Complicating matters, Patrick himself is rumored to be under consideration for a cabinet post, and for all we know, he might also be considering Kerry's Senate seat for himself.
As for Rice, Republicans, most notably Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), are inclined to blame the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations for sharing incomplete information the week of the Benghazi attack. President Obama reportedly doesn't care about the GOP sniping -- why Graham would be so intent on punishing Rice over this is unclear, but Republicans have become rather unhinged when it comes to the deadly terrorism in Benghazi -- and would apparently go to the mat for her nomination.
"The question is, does the president want to launch a major fight with Congress over his choice of secretary of state?" Aaron David Miller, a longtime diplomat who is vice president of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, told the New York Times.
Except, from Obama's perspective, there's no need for a major fight since Rice has done nothing wrong. And if there's filibuster reform, Republicans may have limited options to stop a possible Rice nomination.
Leave a Comment:
Sorry this is off topic from this post, but I was thinking about an alternative to "fiscal cliff" and I thought "Austerity Cliff" much more accurate and appropriate. It also sums up the progressive argument that austerity is bad for an economy in recession...
TPM > Kevin Drum > Fiscal Staircase
It's not a cliff, it's just a curb. Let.it.burn.
This is fine if you want Newspeak. It's about as fair-minded as if Republicans started calling it a "spending cliff" (which I would also object to). The fact that the term sums up the progressive argument is exactly what is wrong with using it to describe something about which there is legitimate dispute.
Besides, it's not accurate. Not unless you want to say that the only thing that has caused our fiscal troubles is insufficient government spending.
Too bad Clinton is leaving - I see a real chance for her to cement a legacy of accomplishments second to none. And I hope she is not eyeing 2016 - Her time for that has passed.
SCOTUS is a good option.
I agree, she would make an excellent supreme court justice!
Nominating Rice would cause a discussion of the filibuster and the "secret" holds. Good, it's about time. Do it. As for Kerry, NO-O-O-O-O-O-O!!! Massachusetts has had enough Senate races for a while now. And they guy who threw his ribbons over the White House fence is not the right guy to end the Afghanistan war or to continue the war.
Either way, Kerry wants a cabinet post, and Obama wants Kerry.
Massachusetts presents a golden golden opportunity for a great communicator to enter the political stage. A Massachusetts resident we are quite familiar with who understands politics as a pundit but who is as much a novice as a practitioner as Elizabeth Warren is.
Someone who probably hasn't the least interest in political office but knows she could make a contribution and fight the good fight against the likes of the Scott Browns, Mitch McConnells and Jeff Sessions. We need to start up the #TRMSCampaign (The Rachel Maddow for Senate) Campaign to let Deval Patrick know who we need in the Senate.
I saw this T shirt worn by an Occupy protester that went something like,
Dr. Maddow is great as an explainer in chief. She could have a long and successful career attempting to give the public at least a surface understanding of some of the challenges facing the nation. There is a value to it, there is poetry there, and the prose of governance may seem quite unappetizing to a poet of punditry. She needs to decide if she will be content to simply talk and guess about what is going on versus entering politics and doing something about what is going on. It takes acting to a higher level than simply exercising a public persona for the purpose of communicating.
It connects the acting sense of theater needed for compelling communication, to the broader sense of acting. The sense of taking actions which have real governance results on the political stage. This is the ultimate stage. The tragedy is that it has been populated by too many small minded men driven by their egos, bigotry and desire for personal gain. It's time for a chromosonal upgrade to this institution.
Not for everyone, but it is for a champion who is capable of the challenge.
Who may have the longest list of reasons why becoming a Senator is the last thing she wants to do, but has a profound sense of duty.
Rachel. Think about it.
As for the rest of us, especially MA residents. She will need an army of supporters.
Dan . . . My thoughts exactly about Kerry. There's no upside to this from the Dem standpoint. If Obama puts Kerry in the cabinet, Massachusetts will once again be down to one Democratic senator, because Scott Brown will end up with that seat. That's exactly what we don't want. We just spent loads of money getting rid of him.
When picking people for cabinet positions, Obama has to be careful not to lose governorships or seats in Congress. Remember what happened when Janet Napolitano went from Governor or Arizona to Secretary of Homeland Security. Jan Brewer took her place in AZ. What a mess that caused.
Kerry had his chance at the presidency and he blew it. Obama should find someone on the way up. Providing a higher profile allows an up-and-comer to establish credentials that lead to success for the party down the line.
Kerry was right about everything he said, and there are important initiatives that only a seasoned observer of Washington machinations can make. Kerry would be excellent in either position. It is stupid to succumb to the Washington tendency to disqualify from all future contests the person who comes up short in a particular electoral contest.
I challenge the preposterous proposition there is only downside for the Dems. A Senator Maddow would be a downside?
IMHO, she needs to be a Senator for a while, then become our President. Someone (no disrespect to the president) from the true Left.
I think #Maddow4Senate is a more in your face hashtag than my earlier suggestion. Anyone have a better one?
As someone who stood with John Kerry in throwing ribbons and medals over the White House fence in 1971, I think this is the best reason to have him there as Secretary of Defense. We need someone there who will confront these "military minds", who isn't one of them, and who isn't a cheerleader for the Empire. Someone who actually knows what it's like to volunteer to serve your country and get shot at in a bullshhitt imperial war for no good reason (when was the last time we ever had a SecDef who had actually served in combat?). Someone who knows what it's like to lose friends for no good cause.
Really? Since you live in LA, by any chance did you show up in 85 or 86 when he did a JF Kerry for President exploratory party in Hollywood? It was way early and he was playing around with some themes he later used. Boy did some of them seem corny to me at the time. He struck me as having that larger than life feeling you get around public figures so I thought maybe he had a chance. His politics seemed right, but was super stiff. A nice and decent guy in a suit, but with a persona that didn't serve him well for what is now called retail politics.
Why are we having this discussion now, today? This is not the agenda that should be the focus of our attention. This is a distraction from getting the Jobs Act passed and the economy moving. This is a distraction from focusing on the housing crisis which is still holding back this economy. This is a distraction from a national discussion about voting in national elections and standardizing procedures while the long lines and voter suppression efforts are in our vision. This is a distraction from discussing our economic priorities in dealing with the sequestration, the tax code, deductions, etc. MSNBC needs to not make Petraeus and potential changes in the Cabinet the lead stories of every program. Cover them later in the programs, but focus the discussion on what's really important. And, for heaven's sake, talk about changes to the Filibuster in the Senate before talking about how the Senate will block this President's nominees. It's the economy, stupid, is still the mantra and all issues are economic at their core. Think "taxation without representation", think "voter suppression", think "Forward".
Judy- it's because everything happens simultaneously. Kerry being appointed means there is a Senate vacancy. Deval Patrick has to name a replacement.
That is a real order of business. There will be a Dem senator replacement for Kerry voting for this legislation, so the question is who.
#SenatorMaddow is who.
John - I get the idea that one dominoe falling moves others. If that had happened, it would be timely. The fact that neither position is currently open, nor have the current appointees submitted resignations or been asked to resign, makes such extensive discussion a distraction today. To act as if it were about to happen within minutes is playing uproar. If this is being floated by the administration , I think it's poor timing on their part. If it's some other group, hmm? FOX conspiracy alert! Masters of deception and distraction. Whoever you are, stop it.
Maybe, if it does happen, the governor will consider your suggested appointee, John. What an interesting perspective it would give our favorite host upon her return to broadcasting.
Judy. There are lead times, and if no preparation work is done, some default Dem loyalist next in line will get the Kerry slot. THAT would be a repeat of the same disaster that put Coakley in Kennedy's seat, and allowed the turnover to Scott Brown.
As for portraying this as speculative, it is highly likely Kerry is going to be in the cabinet. I find that it is not advantageous to react to events at the last minute, but anticipate and prepare for multiple scenarios. In this case, the scenario of an MA vacancy is a near certainty. So your admonishment that we ought not get tooo far ahead of ourselves strikes me as not especially forward leaning.
BTW- what do you mean, return to broadcasting?
You don't get it.
I want her to be President.
Also, she is not my favorite host. Due to their brevity and the audience, her treatments are too fluffy for my taste.
Chris Hayes is my favorite, though I an old guy and so would prefer a more mature nuanced voice- someone like Katrina vanden Heuvel. But Hayes acquits himself well. I suppose Maddow would be much more interesting to me if she could do more long form type segments.
Kerry and Rice are both such blatant liars will fit in with Prez Zeros plan
John: Senator Maddow sounds great!! My first thoughts when I heard Kerry may be on his way out was, oh no, not SCOTTY AGAIN.
I remember back in 1989, I thought I was a conservative and campaigned against John Forbes Kerry for a man long forgotten, Ray Shamie. Shamie was exposed as a closet Bircher and lost the race. What was I thinking? I was too young and unknowing? Ya, and what else...
SENATOR MADDOW...YEAH.
If asked, she undoubtedly has no interest. The trouble is, her nation needs her.
We need her badly, and we need to express this to her sincerely, requesting that she consider taking on this responsibility. This is not fan nonsense, or an expression of emotional support or flattery.
She would make an excellent Senator, and we need her.
For what it's worth, I'm a right-leaning libertarian, not normally a reliable dem voter, and I would consider voting for Maddow. She'd stand up for civil liberties and intellectual honesty, something badly needed from leaders in both parties.
I have been saying that if The Dems picked up a few seats in the Sen, that Kerry would end up in the Cabinet, but Rice as SoS, seriously? Not that I have anything against the woman, but considering all the flak she is taking about Lybia, it's just asking for more reason for the right to not even attempt to get along with this Admin.
I admire the President willing to stick by his people, to show he isn't willing to toss them aside, or fight for them. But some fights you just should never start to begin with, rather if you can win them or not.
This country as a lot to get accomplished, but another fight, whether it's warranted or not, isn't one of them. Like I said, nothing against Rice, but the time that will be spent fighting over her being appointed. Is time better spent on far more important things.
I don't think President Obama cares whether they approve or not. He seems to be the kind of guy who just wants to do what he thinks is the best for the country no matter what anyone else thinks about it, so maybe there is a lot more to her than just the "damage" the Benghazi incident may have done.
Huntsman should be SecState. He has all of the quals, especially considering America's moving toward the Asian theatre.
That is so evil it might be perfect . Even .
NO Dem Senators or Governors for Cabinet posts!
What Obama SHOULD do is name Mitch McConnell as Secretary of State! That would not only get him out of the Senate, but also much of the time out of the EFFIN' country as well.
Plus, the confirmation hearings would be a hoot!
Yertle for SoS? Surely, you can't be serious?
It could be good for the economy too . With the courteous , accommodating and super humility of a SoS McConnell we could easily be in a war or three .
The thing Reagan was good at was creating a huge imbalance in the world by his very actions. And as Reagan and his Republican sheep cronies proceeded with this imbalance, Reagan never took into account what his actions would cause. The very few things that he did any good on never really had any real good behind it. But Reagan did succeed in helping to devastate this world with pollution, harsh work conditions, and an increase in poverty that lead to abuse, misery, despair, and death. If Reagan has any legacy it certainly has led to in the end evil, since he never did consider all the factors in what he was doing and have the proper laws to enforce a better world. Reagan in the end was a failure and has not succeeded in doing what would be a better world, except a destructive path where greed, craving power, hypocrites, arrogance, corruption, and deceiving ruled the day. And now we are dealing with the affects of that very stupidity.
The hushed reverential tones framing the sanctity of yon Saint Reagan , may also have inadvertently contributed to a reluctance to elect a person obviously struggling with Alzheimer's .
And that is what really adds to the scam of it all FRP+4Characters, Reagan having Alzheimers. Oh Reagan don't you recall you agreed to screwing over the American people? Reagans reply, oh I did, oh ok where do I sign that again? And what do I say now?
I came here to write exactly what Dan-p wrote. Scott Brown Running again? NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!! Please NOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!
I think I'd rather see Kerry at State and retired General Wesley Clark at Defense.
Oh, FFS Barack, stop raiding the Senate for your cabinet! You did that in 2009 and it hurt you during the legislative fights of the 111th Congress.
As a former Marine Corps officer, all I can say is, ANYBODY but Kerry. He has absolutely zero respect in the military.
Thank you for your comment. I served twenty years as an enlisted member of the military, yet somehow was never gifted with "knowing" how everyone else in the military felt. Strangely, however, I do have the impression that you weren't either?
Jon Corzine for Treasury secretary. He's very good at stealing other people's money.
What a drop in quality.
No doubt Obama will re-stock his cabinet with the good, bad and ugly. Herman Munster and the Liar Rice are a great start.
Sen Kerry compared our soldiers who risk their lives for our freedom every day to the raping, torturing, pillaging, murdering hords of Ghengis Khan? The man is UNFIT to be Sec of Defense. If Obama appointed him to that post he would be spitting on every man and woman who ever served in the military. As for Amb Rice. She went on national TV and knowing LIED to the American people about the scandal and murders of those poor Americans on 9/11 by Al Qaeda. She's LIED and participated in a compiracy to cover up what really happened. WE KNOW that there is no way that Obama and she didn't know that there was never a spontaneous protests. We had real time video of the attack, and an email from the terrorists bragging that they launched the attack and murdered those Americans. She LIED, and she is as unfit for high office as Sen Kerry!
"She LIED, and she is as unfit for high office as Sen Kerry!"
Obama lied as well and that is why the liberal Media covered up by refusing to report those facts or investigate. Obama is unfit for the Office and always has been.