How Washington Rejected Susan
Rice<
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2012/12/14/how-washington-rejected-susan-rice/>
Seth Mandel <
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/author/seth-mandel/> |
_at_SethAMandel <
http://twitter.com/SethAMandel> 14.Dec.2012 - 12:05 PM
I wrote<
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2012/12/13/the-left-vs-susan-rice/>yesterday
that Susan Rices decision to withdraw her name from
consideration to be the next secretary of state was as much the result of a
steady campaign against her from the left as it was a result of John McCain
and the GOPs campaign against her from the right. I wrote that the GOP
side hadnt been really driving this campaign for a while now. The Atlantic
Wire offers a timeline<
http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2012/12/john-mccain-susan-rice-secretary-of-state/59976/>that
backs this up.
The timeline shows McCain shifting his criticism as early as November 20.
But as I noted, by that time *Democrats* had latched on to the fight and
the bipartisan effort doomed Rice. But events also make a convincing case
for what I wrote<
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2012/11/28/washington-insiders-focus-on-rice-to-protect-their-own/>a
couple of weeks ago, in defense of Rice: this was D.C. insider
politics
on a grand scale. Rice didnt just lose to McCain or Hillary Clinton; she
lost to Washington. Its worth recalling, then, just how the elements of
the capital worked against her.
*Barack Obama*. We should start with the president, since some have been
suggesting that Rices withdrawal proves Obamas weakness. It just isnt
so. If Obama wanted Rice to be his secretary of state, thats what hed
get. But the president got quite chummy with Bill Clinton just as the
former president agreed to try and save Obamas reelection hopes by giving
a keynote address at the Democratic National Convention and then
campaigning in swing states for Obama. After the attack in Benghazi,
Hillary Clinton had some serious explaining to do. After all, it was her
State Department that messed up by not providing enough security to the
ambassadors team and then denying requests for additional security.
Yet Clinton was conveniently enabled to avoid the press, the cameras, and
in general the spotlight. Susan Rices mistakes after Benghazi pale in
comparison to Clintons mistakes before Benghazi. Susan Rice took Clintons
place on the Sunday shows, got herself in some trouble, and Obama decided
he didnt want<
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-decided-that-political-capital-better-spent-elsewhere-than-on-battle-over-rice/2012/12/13/ea450546-4579-11e2-8061-253bccfc7532_story.html>to
spend the political capital to protect her the way he protected
Hillary.
*Hillary Clinton*. Clinton made her opposition to Rice
known<
http://www.suntimes.com/news/sneed/16724826-452/hillary-clinton-doesnt-fancy-rice.html>as
soon as the latter landed in hot water over the Benghazi controversy.
Clinton told her allies on the Hill and in the press that she preferred
John Kerry for the job. Message received.
*Liberal opinion journalists*. Maureen Dowd and Dana Milbank happily
obliged, making the fight against Rice obnoxiously personal. Dowd
said<
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/18/opinion/sunday/dowd-is-rice-cooked.html>Rice
rented her soul. Milbank
said<
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/dana-milbank-susan-rices-tarnished-resume/2012/11/16/55ec3382-3012-11e2-a30e-5ca76eeec857_story.html>Rice
was pushy and rude. Lloyd Grove
said<
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/12/12/susan-rice-s-personality-disorder.html>Rice
had a personality disorder. The vicious attacks from the leftists in
political media changed the dynamic of the controversy.
*Senate GOP*. The role of Republicans in the Senate is obvious, but its
worth drawing attention to one element of it in particular. President Obama
wasnt the only one protecting Hilary Clinton from the glare of the
Benghazi fallout; so was John McCain. McCain and Clinton are friends and
were fellow senators before Clinton took the job at Foggy Bottom. McCain
protected<
http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=240CAB57-AAE8-4E3F-9205-C2C717167710>his
friend, and was helping another longtime senator as well: John Kerry,
who was expected to be the presidents second choice after Rice for
secretary of state. McCain wasnt the only one. I think John Kerry would
be an excellent appointment and would be easily confirmed by his
colleagues, Maine Republican Senator Susan Collins not-so-subtly
said<
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/kerry-senate-confirmation/2012/12/13/id/467726>last
month after meeting with Rice. Id rather have John Kerry, retiring
Senator Jon Kyl had said.
*Senate Democrats*. John Kerry stayed quiet throughout the debate, and
wisely so. He had his fellow Democrats in Washington to critique Rice and
complement Kerry. Sen. Kerry is under consideration for a high position
because hes talented, has tremendous integrity and respect he also
happens to be a senator,
said<
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1112/83771_Page2.html>Maryland
Democrat Ben Cardin. Part of your responsibility in the
administration is your relationship with the Senate and House, and
obviously Sen. Kerry has an incredible relationship. I think colleagues on
both sides of the aisle will tell you that. Translation: if the White
House wants full cooperation from the Democratic-run Senate, Kerry would be
a wise choice.
Additionally, Kerrys nomination would open up a Senate seat in
Massachusetts, and Governor Deval Patrick has apparently already
reached out<
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/12/counting-their-mixed-blessings-the-note/>to
Vicki KennedyTed Kennedys widowto consider taking that seat.
In the end Rice had few allies on either side of the aisle in Washington,
and the opposite was true of Hillary Clinton and John Kerry. A culture of
clubbiness that borders on tribal loyalty was just far too much for Rice to
overcome.
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2012/12/14/how-washington-rejected-susan-rice/
Received on Sat Dec 15 2012 - 11:30:40 EST
