Kerry vs. Clinton

I have never understood Collins' ridiculous opinions of John Kerry, but the above quote is appalling even for her. Apparently, she forgets that Kerry had little media or party support in December 2003, but won big in Iowa. Iowa, the state of retail politics – where people meet face to face with candidates. I suspect many even had coffee, tea or even a beer with him – and went on to vote for him. In fact, Hillary Clinton had more difficulty with this and it was one reason why she came in third even though she was the media and party favorite at that point.

Collins also has very little ability in designing a contest that would get the real answer. As designed, everyone would vote for the Senators they like least on the other side. Only prominent ones would get substantial votes because few know the names of the less well known Senators – so while Kerry might be in the top 10, it is likely Hillary Clinton would head it. A better question is to ask who would you most want to have coffee with – and I assume Kerry would be there as well. I think Collins needs to watch more Senate hearings.

Collin's piece was more than over the top- it was over -kill. I would like to know why she found it necessary to write such words about Senator Kerry in order to bring attention to Clinton's merrits for the position? How honest you are in assessing how the media has long treated Mr. Kerry unfairly. Why? I can't figure out unless, they don't like him because he is rich, articulate, intelligent and a true patriot. In other words- he just isn't fun. And, I also can't figure out the facination with Senator Clinton whose charms escape me. Sure she is smart, but she doesn't generate a whole lot of warmth as far as I am concerned. And, I will also add that I think it is extremely unfair that she get a free pass on the fact that she is who she is because her husband was President. I often wondered why if she was such a independent woman, why she doesn't use her maiden name- Rohdam?
As for qualifications and who is deserving of this position, I have to side with Senator Kerry. He is a true war hero and has been involved in foreign policy for over 20 years. And, he is well respected overseas- not for who he is married to, but for what he has been able to accomplish through the years and the knowlege he has aquired the hard way- by hard work and learning. In my book you can't even compare the two- Clinton and Kerry. He is by far the more qualified for this position and he is the one who could do great things with it. That is why I think Ms. Collin's had to try so hard to degrade and down play Kerry's merrits, so that Hillary could at least look almost deserving and qualified.

I met John Kerry while I was working on the Hill and I'll tell you what, I'd much rather have a cup of coffee with him and Clinton. I was in a meeting where he single-handedly forged a great compromise on an environmental bill. Gail Collins needs to get over herself because she obviously knows nothing about the man. He should DEFINITELY get state! I CANNOT see Hillary negotiating with foreign leaders – she seems quite ascerbic, and one of the main reasons I didn't support her in the primary was because she just seemed awful on foreign policy. I don't get why they wouldn't give her HHS or Education if he wants her in the cabinet.. She would not be a good choice for state.

John Kerry!

To compare John Kerry and Hillary Clinton and to judge who is better is really a subjective equation. But the best way to ascertain their public speaking qualities and substance they exposed during primary Presidential elections would be an intelligent assessment. In 2004 Presidential elections if you compare what John Kerry did and spoke during the debates between the finalists and compare to what Hillary did in 2008 her speeches and debate ability will clearly tell you that Hillary is much more refined and experienced and expound the image that she is Presidential quality. It is a cheese to chalk comparision. Who would you chose to represent America when meeting with international diplomats? The obvious answer will be Hillary. That is my opinion!

It is nonsense to think in any way that Hillary is better fit than John Kerry in any sense for the post of Sec. of State, because we all know that John Kerry is a far suitable candidate for the post, and Obama himself knows this very well. In addition, John Kerry's views on foreign policy and most other issues are are much more in agreement with Obama's, which is very important for the president-elect to have a good chance of implementing his own programme successfully. Even Hillary's husband and ex-president, Bill Clinton is careful in endorsing his wife for the post by adding the CONDITION that “they do it together” then she will be an excellent Sec. of State. If Obama eventually picks Mrs. Clinton it would be because of his judgement in trying to win over foes, knowing his TRUE FRIENDS would be more understanding to accept the sacrifices they are required/expected to pay for helping him to succeed. Let no one forget that it was John Kerry that used his own candidacy in 2004 to help in no small measure to project Obama to national limelight at the 2004 Democratic National Convention. And Kerry endorsed Obama very early in the primary race when Mrs. Clinton was still considered the inevitable candidate for the Democratic Party. Obama's priority seems to be directed at HEALING THE DIVIDE that had for a long time constituted a COG IN THE WHEEL OF PROGRESS for the nation. John Kerry has the same mind, and thus is likely to go along with Obama to try to win over and make the Clintons as well as other influential opponents, like Lieberman, McCain, etc. to have the same mind for the good of the nation. So, it is advisable for shallow-minded and ignorant people like Gail Collins to please stop expressing their folly publicly in such a way that will creating new wounds as efforts are being made to heal the old ones. If indeed John Kerry is interested in the secretary post and it is being offered to Hillary Clinton, it must be a sacrifice on the part of Obama and Sen. John Kerry working as close pals to heal the divisions that had hindered the progress of the nation. John Kerry, or any other ally of Obama should be praised and not be ridiculed for being willing to make such sacrifices for the good of the nation!
I am Abbarick, and I approve this message!

John Kerry would be so reassuring, prepared, and capable as Secretary of State- it's not even funny!

It really appears as though Obama is being preempted by the Big Money/Zionist/Bush-loving faction of Fed. govt…. sad, but true!

So much for Obama as the self-proclaimed agent of change, the candidate of the people,
a man of integrity working to forward the nation….? I question that now.

(Granted, he may be getting threatened, so what do you expect?)

To close, there's absolutely nothing wrong with Kerry's “sociability.” He'll never be a fake suck-up, but that doesn't mean he doesn't have an excellent and winning personality. I've personally met some of his lifelong friends and they LOVE the guy, for life. He apparently is a terrific, true friend and frankly, that is what the U.S. NEEDS right about now!

nice article! nice site. you're in my rss feed now ;-)
keep it up