Five strikes against Susan Rice
2. Clinton — like the GOP — reportedly prefers another candidate
There’s another reason Senate Republicans want to block Rice — they want Obama to tap his second choice, Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.), says Michael Tomasky at The Daily Beast. Why? Defeated Sen. Scott Brown (R-Mass.) could probably win Kerry’s seat, and “one less Democrat in the Senate would make for a nice little cherry on their sundae.” But it’s not just Republicans who want Kerry, says Michael Sneed at the Chicago Sun-Times. Clinton prefers to be replaced by her former Senate colleague, too, according to a White House source. “Hillary is not close to Rice, who is tough — but is not the friendliest person,” the source says.
3. Rice is a big investor in the Keystone XL pipeline
Environmentalists are pretty unhappy about the idea of Rice taking the top job at State, too, say Joshua Hersch and Sam Stein at The Huffington Post. On Wednesday, OnEarth, a publication affiliated with the Natural Resources Defense Council, dug through Rice’s financial disclosure filings and found that she and her husband own large stakes in several Canadian oil companies, including Transcanada, the firm lobbying for approval for its controversial Keystone XL pipeline. So what? “As secretary of state, Rice would have to oversee the review of that project,” making those investments an obvious conflict of interest. Another oil company that the wealthy Rices have a stake in did business with Iran until recently — “but Rice is not alone.” One of her co-investors is none other than John McCain.











Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
1) She’s a liar.
2) And a pimp for Obama’s lies.
3) And a liar after the fact about her own lies.
4) And a defender of Obama’s lies to her about Benghazi.
5) Which makes her a fool, or a weasel, or a chimaera of both.
profitsbeard on December 3, 2012 at 1:54 PM
Somehow I think bho will still nominate her. He would be saying to those deciding if she gets the job those should ‘go after me’ and that would not happen in dc? And it would also say, I chose rice and now she doesn’t have my faith in her? bho NEVER says/thinks he is at fault, NEVER. The only thing that might happen to get bho’s hind end out of a sling, rice would not decide to be sos?
L
letget on December 3, 2012 at 1:58 PM
All this stupid Susan Rice stuff is obscuring the real questions. Why was Amb. Stevens in Benghazi on 9/11? Who sent him there? And who turned down the requests for security? Amb. Rice drew the short straw that determined who got to lie to the American people and it has been quite effective of changing the conversation.
Cindy Munford on December 3, 2012 at 2:07 PM
Yes, Scott Brown may win a special election to replace Kerry…until the next general election, when he’ll be beat by whatever generic Dem they throw out there. That’s not, in my mind, a good reason to support Kerry.
changer1701 on December 3, 2012 at 2:10 PM
If the Repubs had a savvy bone in their collective bodies, they’d pull a rope-a-dope on Obama. Make enough noise to the effect that she seems to be imminently qualified for the position, and tone the rhetoric down on Benghazi. Then, when she comes up for confirmation, give her a very public dressing down and call Obama out on the whole fiasco. Find a way to work Fast and Furious in, too. Make it all a huge deal, in a way that the MSM can’t ignore (even though we all know they’ll try).
If I had any say in the matter, that’s exactly what I’d do. Of course, they’d get eviscerated by the press and rest of the Left, but they will anyway. They might as well get something for all our pain. Conservatives will never get the love or adulation the Leftards get. We don’t need it. But if we’re going to get vilified no matter what, we may as well publicly humiliate the enemies of the state as much as possible.
nukemhill on December 3, 2012 at 2:12 PM
The Susan Rice fight is a convenient way of burying the Benghazi scandal. As soon as her candidacy is dropped the media will have an excuse to never mention Benghazi again.
agmartin on December 3, 2012 at 2:21 PM
That’s actually a point in her favor.
rbj on December 3, 2012 at 2:28 PM
Why would a state stupid enough to vote for Fauxahontas over Brown in the first place, reelect him? Probably give the chick he beat the first time the nod.
Cindy Munford on December 3, 2012 at 2:36 PM
Yeah. But, why haven’t we heard about this before? It’s almost as if the press doesn’t care about the left’s hypocrisy.
besser tot als rot on December 3, 2012 at 2:39 PM
The writer of this article makes the mistaken assumption that bad judgement, hypocrisy and corruption would disqualify someone from working in this administration.
UltimateBob on December 3, 2012 at 3:14 PM
She is either stupid or willing to act stupid for the sake of her political career and more importantly Obama’s.
I can’t think of a better Sec. of State for the Obama administration.
Joey24007 on December 3, 2012 at 4:15 PM
I still find it hard to believe that some journalists (the few without an agenda) cover the Obama administration as if he isn’t just a guy doing whatever he wants when he wants.
Joey24007 on December 3, 2012 at 4:17 PM