Bullies Won…Susan Rice withdraws her name for nomination

John McCain is probably crowing with glee. He suceeded at driving Susan Rice out of consideration for the nomination to be Secretary of State. McCain has been nursing his hurt from 2008 like it is still a fresh wound, and his vendetta against Rice was ongoing and unfounded. This was personal, and sadly today McCain and his band of bullies scored a victory at the expense of a qualified black woman. The irony is she had not yet been nominated but she and the president knew her confirmation would be brutal and she did what was best for the administration she stepped aside.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.


  • Spanish Inquisitor  On December 13, 2012 at 9:33 pm

    The only reason he didn’t want her nominated is because he wants Obama to nominate the second choice – John Kerry. He wants that because Kerry would have to resign his Senate seat, and that would open up another Senate run to fill the vacancy, which give the Republicans another shot at getting Scott Brown back in.

    Obama should simply nominate a Republican Senator in a state with a Democratic Governor who would appoint the replacement. That’ll show him.

    • musesofamom  On December 14, 2012 at 12:34 am

      Bill, Surprise you don’t agree ith me. Rice relied on the talking points from the CIA. They were wrong, this was not a concerted effort to deceive as the Republicans say. She has had her ability, intellect and integrity questioned and she was never officially nominated. She was bullied as the headline says. Benghazi was a tragedy but it has not been found to be a cover up. So please feel free to disagree with me but let’s not question my political acumen.

      • Bill  On December 14, 2012 at 1:27 am

        What does it suggest about her immense intellect and ability to go on national television proffering erroneous information that her own security clearance gives her access to? Do you think she was just too indolent to bother to do a bit of research in preparation for those appearances or was she just carrying water for the administration? I’m just asking.

        If I had questioned your acumen I would indeed apologize for that. But the fact is I only expressed the effect that observation of the product of your acumen has on me.

      • Spanish Inquisitor  On December 14, 2012 at 2:22 am

        Well, if she’s disqualified for the job because she got her facts wrong (“facts that have yet to be confirmed even today) then there are a lot of people in Washington who should lose their jobs. Lets start with McCain, then Graham,, Cantor, Ryan, Reid, Pelosi, etc. sack ’em all! and work our way down every person who’s ever been on Meet the Press.

        Lets not be hypocrites about this.

  • rs  On December 13, 2012 at 11:57 pm

    She lied. She should step down. Demanding integrity is not being a bully.

  • Bill  On December 14, 2012 at 12:07 am

    I really don’t mean to be harsh but I find your political acuity perplexing. You might find the performance of the U.N. Ambassador going on five Sunday news programs proffering provably untrue information about the slaughter at Benghazi as UNFOUNDED opposition, but I find that risible. She told a story that even conflicted with the president’s claim about the incident.

    Make this an issue about racism if you like but Susan Rice would not have been the first woman in the position of Secretary of State nor would she have been the first African American. So why don’t we give the racism angle a pass on this one.
    Based on your headline here, you seem to think she voluntarily withdrew her name from a nomination which she had yet to receive in the best interest of the Administration. I agree with the premise that it was in the best interest of the administration but it was hardly voluntary. There was no way that the president was going to allow the nomination to proceed permitting real scrutiny into the facts of the Benghazi scandal. It would have been squandering of political capital with no potential for upside gain.

  • Bill  On December 14, 2012 at 3:38 am

    SI I am not suggesting that Susan Rice should have been disqualified for the job because she got her facts wrong. I raised the issue of her erroneous facts in response to EM’s charge that McCain’s opposition to her appointment to Secretary of State was UNFOUNDED. I don’t believe that she got the facts wrong because she had direct access to the information. I believed she just flat out lied. But we can agree that virtually all of those charlatans should be sacked because they’re all liars.

  • elogam  On December 14, 2012 at 4:29 pm

    Yes EM, we can take the easy route and jump to the conclusion that this was purely a personal vendetta of an evil white male scheming to keep a sista down to poke the eye of a brotha who beat him at the polls. Or, we can take a more comprehensive look at things…

    Susan Rice is not ready for prime time. This is an opinion shared by many people who have dealt with her professionally. She was too blunt in dealing with people, using terms like “that’s cr*p!” in talking to other diplomats. I expect the Chief Diplomat to conduct themselves better in high level discourse. Additionally, she lacked what I consider basic knowledge for a diplomat at her level. Initial reports said the ambassador was attacked by “rocket propelled grenades and mortars”. Most people know what an RPG is. Let me tell you a little about mortars. A mortar is a crew served weapon that consists of three main parts that have to be put together. You need a minimum of two, usually three people to operate it properly. If you are firing it indirectly, meaning you cannot see your target because there’s a building between you and the target, you need a spotter to adjust your fire. This takes a radio or telephone and training. In other words, you cannot just whip a mortar tube out of a trunk, fire it accurately, and throw it back into the trunk of your car and drive off. That means planning, and that means no “spontaneous assault” on the ambassador. This was carefully planned. I don’t expect you to know this EM because you don’t have a military background. I DO expect someone who’s a senior diplomat working on national policy to know this. Either Rice saw the initial reports (which she had access to) and didn’t know this, or she saw this, knew this, and ignored it. Either way she isn’t ready for promotion.

    John McCain is probably one of the most fair people in the Senate. He expressed initial concerns about her and agreed to hear her out. He heard her out and he was STILL concerned. Even Senator Susan Collins, poster child for what Democrats think a Republican should be, said she was ‘troubled’ with the notion of her being promoted. So she had her chance to explain her situation over Benghazi in private, without cameras or soundbites, and she failed to impress. The next step was to tell her story in front of cameras reporters and politicians, and if she couldn’t do it behind closed doors, she didn’t stand a chance in the light of day. John Kerry is far more imminently qualified, and he is probably the best choice of ANY senator, bar none. You know my creds, I’m basing it solely on his background and demonstrated skills. Give McCain and others the benefit of the doubt.

%d bloggers like this: