Murdoch floats John Kerry as last-minute Dem 2016 candidate

[UglyGreed]

News Corp. boss Rupert Murdoch is floating Secretary of State John Kerry as a Democratic presidential nominee as Hillary Clinton’s candidacy “sinks.”

“Watch Hillary’s candidacy sink and sink,” Murdoch tweeted Saturday morning. “Nobody buying and more big trouble coming on emails. Dems looking for a replacement. John Kerry?”


The Fox News owner donated to Clinton’s presidential primary campaign in 2008, and said in 2014 he could see himself supporting Clinton in 2016 depending “on the Republican candidate totally.”

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/268482-murdoch-floats-john-kerry-as-dem-presidential-candidate

[corkhead]

1. Why doesn't he just be a high roller and float Joe Lieberman or John Edwards.

[PoliticAverse]

2. That's the best he could come up with? n/t

[Rosa Luxemburg]

53. Murdoch is playing with fire

[UglyGreed]

3. Nice to see

Murdoch supported a candidate in 2008 who was outside of the establishment........

[stillwaiting]

4. How embarrassing for John Kerry. nt

[UglyGreed]

6. What about Hillary?

He donated to her in 2008 and may back her this time around.

[stillwaiting]

11. If he's backing Hillary now then yes that's VERY embarrassing for Hillary Clinton too. nt

[blm]

38. He isn't. Murdoch does this EVERY election and some Dems are still falling for it.

I'm a Sanders voter, and, it gives me no joy to see that fellow supporters are so easily manipulated by horseshit stories like this being floated by the King of Horseshit.

Murdoch ALWAYS makes a limited donation to Dem campaign to shield himself, then he uses billions of dollars in airtime to target that same candidate.

If you'll swallow whatever Murdoch sez you'll swallow ANYTHING.

[ejbr]

5. Kerry would get

TONS of progressive votes with Murdoch's backing.

[Motown_Johnny]

7. We have not elected a former Sec. of State since Buchanan and he sucked.

Kerry is not a viable option (although I like the guy).

[6chars]

8. who remembers when there were candidates too young for full ss

Clinton, Sanders, Biden, Kerry - nothing against any of them, but it is strange that the one spring chicken in the mix - O'Malley - went nowhere. Dems should already be thinking about 2020 or 2024.

[merrily]

52. I'm guessing everyone here remembers 2012.

[Ferd Berfel]

9. Perfect - Murdoch endorses Kerry

But it does reflect the Oligarchy (both parties - they are the same people) game plan of anybody but Bernie.


oh yea - I'm going to support the Murdoch candidate because his interests and mine are the same

[blm]

18. Utter horsesh!t…Murdoch plays this game every election and naive newbies think he's sincere.

Or…they are part of the misinformation campaign pushing the 'both sides are the same' meme.

[Ferd Berfel]

24. Nonsense

At the oligarchic level of Murdoch, "centrist" candidates just as good because they will take money from Wall Street and be beholden to them, and still do Wall Streets bidding.

[blm]

29. That's baloney - you must have a very narrow view of Murdoch and his intentions. You also know

NOTHING about Kerry.

His lifetime record was to the left of Dennis Kucinich when he ran in 2004, and any REAL Democrat could tell you that there isn't anyone in DC today with a stronger record against corruption - it was Kerry's dogged efforts that uncovered and exposed IranContra, BCCI, S&Ls, and CIA drug running. This is why the REAL establishment types have hated him for decades and undermine him even today on a consistent basis.

They sure played you and a few others here, so, you prove them right to continue with their bullish!t moves.

[Ferd Berfel]

123. Once upon a time Howard Dean

................

[blm]

124. Try playing someone who DOESN'T have an encyclopedic memory of the last 4 decades - you have no

power here. I don't DO corporate media propaganda swallowing. In my view you're a player.

[Ferd Berfel]

125. are you saying Dean Is NOT now a lobyist shill ?

Hell I was going to vote for him back in the day.

And I agree, that I have no power here. Just my 2 cents.

[mylye2222]

121. You are wrong.

Kerry' s demeanour though all his accomplishments show he' s NOT a GOP-lite.

[redstateblues]

10. He would have a better chance than Bernie

In the GE.

[ViseGrip]

14. Not true. What Bernie has John Kerry lacks. The YOUTH VOTE! Kerry did not inspire them. 1.4%

came out for him. Bernie bests Kerry by far. Corporate Amurika is running scared. We the people are winning!

[Ed Suspicious]

30. Get a grip, man. Read your beloved polls.

[redstateblues]

110. If Bernie wins the nomination

He will be toast. The last Dem that ran on raising taxes was Walter Mondale. Do you remember how many states he won? A grand total of 1- his home state. Everybody, including me, thought it was so bold of him, just like Sanders supporters think he is a Savior now. History will repeat its self. The Republicans would love to run against Bernie and his unworkable schemes.

[no_hypocrisy]

12. That's rich. The owner of FOX News picking the nominee for the democrats and their voters.

[blm]

25. He's interfering deliberately to draw a target on Kerry's back so that ignorant lefties will shoot

at it in hopes of generating backlash against Kerry while he is working overseas. Everyone knows Murdoch and the establishment types hate Kerry and have for decades.

So….how many ignorant lefties will he successfully claim?

[farleftlib]

32. .

[ViseGrip]

13. Kerry lost in 04, in part due to only receiving 1.4 percent of the youth vote. Did he forget this?

The younger voters were not inspired by Kerry and did not come out. Certainly not like they are not for Bernie. This is the Dem party's fault for not farming candidates, and all that is left is the old and stale. When someone does receive dem party help, they are D.I.N.O's for sure!

[Ed Suspicious]

31. He didn't forget, he just was wildly different goals than you.

[karynnj]

37. utter nonsense, he got something like 8 million more votes

Than Gore did. He also carried the young voters getting far more than 1.4 percent.

[speaktruthtopower]

15. Al Gore...

would win. The people would feel he's owed.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

27. Sorry, nope.

That was the FIRST thing wrong with Clinton. That she felt she was 'owed' the election.

[Kentonio]

16. After giving it ample consideration..

I'd like to propose that Rupert Murdock go fuck himself.

[reformist2]

17. What more proof do we need that Hillary is "their" horse in this race, and they need a replacement?

[GoneFishin]

55. A good point.

[Smarmie Doofus]

19. "“The past is never dead. It's not even past.”

-Faulkner.

Good quote.

But....we're taking advice from Rupert Murdoch now?

The Sanders campaign is about BREAKING with that PARTICULAR past: i.e. war w/o end and historic levels of social inequality.

Sound like we got 'em on the run. Or at least nervous.

[NV Whino]

20. You mean the same John Kerry who wimped out in the Ohio debacle?

[GoneFishin]

56. Screw that. I travelled to work his campaign. He conceded before my flight home landed.

[blm]

70. You mean the longest wait for a concession in modern history, don't you? Or is that not something

you are familiar with?

[blm]

21. Pretty STUPID of all those to trust Murdoch's interference like this. Murdoch hates Kerry and

he only plays the donate to both sides game to keep low-information voters confused. Works every time. Sanders supporters will now spread their attacks onto Kerry and based on their mighty ignorance of his record.

Then Murdoch cheerfully goes back to his 24/7 task of aiming his entire media weaponry at Democratic party.

My impatience with ignorance is rising to match the intense loathing I have for the RW media machine that keeps people ignorant.

[Vote2016]

22. We already have an establishment candidate with more foreign policy cred than domestic policy cred

[HooptieWagon]

23. LOL, I'm loving this!

The Oligarchs are beginning to realize they have a problem. In their little DC/Wall St bubble they think they can solve the problem with repackaging. They simply don't get it that it's their crappy product we're not buying.

[blm]

34. What a shame that after all these years this is what you think Murdoch is doing here.

Guess he's right….the left can be as easy to manipulate as the right.

[Jackie Wilson Said]

26. Fox, Murdoch, Rove and others have been working nonstop to destroy Hillary Clinton for

so long now some might see her still being the leading candidate as strength.

If she can survive these horrible and disgusting excuses for human beings, imagine how tough she can be as president.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

33. 'Still being the leading candidate'? You mean after a single caucus, at the very beginning

of the race, after having started out with a 61 point lead over her nearest competitor a year ago and 99% name recognition?

With 2 brand new polls out that have her 'leading' within the margin of error over an avowed Democratic 'socialist'?

She may be 'tough', but voters don't seem to be interested in 'tough' this time around.

[Jackie Wilson Said]

35. True, her detractors, here at DU and at Fox, are successful in harming her, but she is still

fighting.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

36. You don't have to 'harm' Clinton. You just let her be herself.

Play video clips of her saying what she believes to voters, and suddenly they're no longer interested in voting for her.

[Jackie Wilson Said]

41. I was thinking about what this country will look like after 8 years of a Cruz Presidency

combined with a GOP House and Senate.

I wonder if we will be able to discuss this stuff on DU?

Anywhere on the internets?

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

43. Fear politics?

You might want to leave that sort of campaigning to Republicans.

America is the home of the brave, not the home of the cowardly.

[Jackie Wilson Said]

45. How does that meme play out under President Cruz? You see my position is unique I guess,

I see this election as a choice between some progress (either of our candidates) and regression into hell on earth.

So I take what they call a "bigger picture" view of the whole thing, but then this isnt my first rodeo either and as excited as even I am about Bernie's ideas, I am also a realist.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

49. I don't know, since he'll never be President.

As a realist, I don't ignore actual polling that tells me that Bernie beats the Republicans better than Hillary, but still pretend that I'm worried about electability in the general while supporting Hillary.

[Jackie Wilson Said]

54. I dont ignore them either and in fact they are encouraging. They will change, that is a fact

once a nominee is chosen and the Koch bros put one billion dollars into negative campaign ads, but there is a very good chance he could still win.

[UglyGreed]

39. .

The Fox News owner donated to Clinton’s presidential primary campaign in 2008, and said in 2014 he could see himself supporting Clinton in 2016 depending “on the Republican candidate totally.”

[Jackie Wilson Said]

42. I have no doubt billionaire assholes like him would want her over Bernie, but that isnt

what we are looking at right now, is it.

[bigdarryl]

47. Well so far there exceeding with DU also trying to destroy her as well

This site should be c add led republican underground

[Jackie Wilson Said]

48. My concern is this burn it down attitude, that if they cant have Bernie then the hell

with the system and everybody in it.

Doesnt work that way, if they drop the cause, the rightwing will pick it up, wont they.

[bigwillq]

28. No, thanks

Been there, done that. And he lost to a Bush.

[merrily]

40. If Murdoch picks the Democratic candidate, stick a damned fork in this country.

BTW, why is he not happy to see Hillary's candidacy sink? I thought Republicans were terrified of her.

And, since no one but Bernie fans allegedly think he is electable, why is Murdoch so anxious to make sure Bernie is not the Dem nominee?

Cognitive dissonance?

[blm]

44. He isn't. He's fvcking with Dems and long timers here should know this act, by now.

.

[UglyGreed]

60. Google

is your friend. It seems that there is a strange relationship between Murdoch and certain candidates.

[blm]

62. It seems you are more gullible than you care to admit. When you can name ONE person in DC with

a more stellar record against government corruption than John Kerry, please post it, OK? Google is your friend. PS - I already know what the propagandists have had to say - I stick to the facts.

[UglyGreed]

63. Google donations

from and to who they went to for senate runs and foundations.......... And I'm not talking John Kerry BTW

[blm]

67. I do know - and if you read anything you'd see there is no surprise because Murdoch's been

doing this for two decades now so he can claim evenhandedness as his entire media empire targets Dem candidates, ANY Dem candidate with billions of dollars worth of airtime.

What part of that do you not get?

[UglyGreed]

69. Claim even handedness

OK thanks for the replies and of course your tremendous insight to the inner workings of the .001 percent

[blm]

71. Apparently, Murdoch's efforts aren't wasted on you. Are they?

.

[UglyGreed]

73. Hillary's effort

to make people believe she is a progressive isn't wasted on you is it?

[blm]

77. I'm a Sanders voter. And one that is far too smart to fall for tactics from RW propagandists

even when they have succeeded in wending their way like a tick into the political battles of the Dem party.

[UglyGreed]

78. Good to hear

perhaps you should calm down a bit since we already have the rep of being "overbearing" BTW not saying it is true just in case that is what you think I'm saying.

[blm]

81. You should hesitate to offer your opinions if they are based in anything Murdoch has to say.

BTW - Purchase a mirror - every home should have one.

[UglyGreed]

82. There ya

go again...........

[UglyGreed]

74. Odd how

Bloomberg will run if Hillary does not get the nod. Odd how the Democrats will try to get Biden in the race if she loses enough ground. And now Kerry's name is mentioned even though Bernie's numbers against the GOP are very good.....whatever.

[blm]

79. LOL - So, is ignorance as blissful as some say? Because you sure are certain that Murdoch means

what he says, and no way is just fvcking with Dems, right? Certainty that Murdoch is being earnest translates to practicing ignoramus, in my book.

[UglyGreed]

80. I don't trust anyone

that is why I'm for Bernie

[blm]

85. You trusted Murdoch enough to post this crap and vouch for it continuously in this thread.

I don't appreciate the lack of discernment you showed in this thread, even if you do say you share my choice for primary.

[UglyGreed]

87. No I found it odd

that Murdoch has donated to Hillary and his son has donated to the foundation that's all....... and I don't appreciate your manner in which you choose to conduct a discussion so we are even.

[blm]

90. LOLOL. Good luck with that. I've been here too long and thru too many election cycles to care

what someone so lacking in discernment and judgment, as proven by this exchange, thinks of me.

THIS is what you wanted me to find on 'Google' and it speaks to me exactly who you are:

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/01/29/fox-is-one-of-the-biggest-donors-to-the-clintons/

You're 'afraid' to post it, my ass.

[UglyGreed]

91. I never ever

went to that web site in my life nor other right wing sites like that. I read it on Talking Points Memo but nice try........now I'm starting to see what Hillary supporters are saying..........

[blm]

96. LOL…switching it up now, eh? 'now I'm…seeing what Hillary supporters are saying'...

not even a nice try to make it seem like now it's my vote for Sanders that prompted me to counter your baloney.

I've been very careful to not join in the vitriol being fomented here, and only pop in when utter bullshit is being thrown at DU to increase division.

You made it pretty easy with this thread.

[UglyGreed]

97. LOL

are you having fun with your constant attacks?

[blm]

100. Nope - just doing my duty.

UglyGreed (4,472 posts)
91. I never ever

went to that web site in my life nor other right wing sites like that. I read it on Talking Points Memo but nice try........now I'm starting to see what Hillary supporters are saying..........


You sure you support Sanders, UG?

PS - No real Dem would 'fear' posting a link to Talking Points Memo, now, would they?

[UglyGreed]

103. I was already

alerted on posting articles from Mother Jones, CNN and today The Hill. Content is what I was talking about. But course you knew that already. I'll be waiting for your next attack since it is like water rolling off a duck's back. Wait......I hope you can not twist that phrase somehow to prove who or what I am..............

[UglyGreed]

92. Smear tactics

vitriol and slander, are you sure you support Bernie?

[blm]

98. Your words, UG. YOUR WORDS.

Delete them if you don't want others here to see how you switched it up.

[UglyGreed]

99. I did nothing wrong

here. It is you that has smeared, labeled and attacked me...............

[blm]

102. Anyone reading this exchange is welcome to judge us both by our posts.

Here is your post exactly as written:

UglyGreed (4,472 posts)
91. I never ever

went to that web site in my life nor other right wing sites like that. I read it on Talking Points Memo but nice try........now I'm starting to see what Hillary supporters are saying..........

[UglyGreed]

105. You are

acting like what many Hillary supporters say of those who support Bernie act like. Keep up your good work digging deeper and deeper.

[UglyGreed]

101. Also you are the one

who is posting Breitbart........

[tularetom]

107. Grow up

So the poster failed to acknowledge your superior insight into the evil schemes of Murdoch. So fucking what? Do you honestly believe Murdoch has an ounce of credibility with anybody who posts here?

You've turned this entire thread into an argument about nothing and probably pissed off a lot of people.

[blm]

108. I'm not the one believing Murdoch...

and that is apparently what you have wrong. Yes, I honestly believe some posters here are believing Murdoch's act, and their posts reflect it. Why pretend otherwise?


It's black and white - it's in more than a dozen posts here. And, surely you don't think, after all these years, tu, that I care if I piss off people with poor reading skills, do you?

[UglyGreed]

109. Neither

do I but keep your line of attack going........I will not let you try to walk all over me with your smears and labels.

[blm]

111. You're the one peddling smears to DU, courtesy of Murdoch.

Try another dose of Feign-Feign.

[UglyGreed]

112. I'll direct you these two posts of mine

And I'll kick my thread for you also

Bernie Sanders rejects donation from drug company CEO

WASHINGTON — The man who has become the public face of rising drug prices says he has donated to presidential candidate Bernie Sanders — who has been bashing Big Pharma on the campaign trail — to try to get a meeting so the two can talk it out.

Sanders isn’t interested. His campaign said Thursday that he’s giving the money to a Washington health clinic instead — and the drug executive isn’t getting the meeting.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2015/10/15/bernie-sanders-rejects-ceo-martin-shkreli-campaign-donation/FcSKxu1VIr7pubg9cI3CQN/story.html

I know this is old news but I just wanted to make the point that politicians and foundations can REFUSE donations from certain individuals because of morals and standing by their beliefs. Sometimes that is more important than money.

And

Wonder if Bernie would accept donations from the likes of Rupert Murdoch, lloyd Blankfein or his wife??? Just because you are offered money it does not mean you have to take it. I wish other politicians would learn a lesson from the way Bernie Sanders handle this situation.


Funny but your theory about how Murdoch tricks and fools people like myself by donating to democrats or their foundations could be all but crushed if politicians refuse donations from unsavory individuals like Murdoch. Greed and power is just too tempting to some it seems. Keep on kicking and digging in deeper.

[blm]

115. It's not theory it's reality. His use of show dollars to Ds to claim he's Fair and Balanced

Last edited Sat Feb 6, 2016, 05:36 PM - Edit history (1)

does not now and will never equal training billions of dollars of media airtime and ink against the very same Dems he 'donated' to throughout the years.

That you pretend otherwise is your show of who you are. You can point to posts you made till the cows come home, but, this thread is a failure to make a sale.

[UglyGreed]

118. Don't take the money

problem solved and Murdoch's plan of tricking people which you feel I have fallen for fails. It seems you think they are forced to take this money or you just choose to avoid such a logical solution to Murdoch's master plan. I can not help your mindset in that respect. Bernie proves my stance with this amazing run by not taking any money from special interest groups. I respect and admire him more for it each and everyday................

[UglyGreed]

64. I'll ignore

your name calling BTW

[karynnj]

46. absolutely not what JK will do. He is working very hard

To do things that will make a better world as SoS. BLM has it right upstream. This is Murdock mischief likely designed to hurt Kerry more than HRC.

Last year, JK was the essential American other than Obama who approved them on both getting a climate pact in Paris and the Iran deal, which likely avoided a war. Without considering anything else he ever did, this is an amazing legacy.

Bernie or HRC will be the nominee.

[blm]

88. The gullibility being shown on this thread is proof enough WHY Murdoch continues to pull

this same stunt election after election.

Dumb@sses.

[Go Vols]

50. results

On Sat Feb 6, 2016, 11:38 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

Murdoch floats John Kerry as last-minute Dem 2016 candidate
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511156319

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Who the fuck care's what Murdoch wants? Why on earth bring this shit here.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sat Feb 6, 2016, 11:44 AM, and the Jury voted 0-7 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: You're both overreacting.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I agree. Who cares about Murdoch?

As for the alerter, I don't care what you think either. Why bother people with jury service over this? It is absurd for you to take this personally.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I agree that this is fairly irrelevant but I don't see a reason to hide.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: lol

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[UglyGreed]

57. .

thanks for posting. I did not think bringing this up would be anywhere near being alert worthy. Glad to see this was a 0-7 vote.

[blm]

59. It's not alert-worthy, at all. It's a big NOTHING sandwich, though, and it is sad

that so many are lining up to takes bite out of it.

Embarrassing, actually.

Murdoch certainly knows how to jerk chains.

[UglyGreed]

61. Check out my other reply and use

Google. I would write more but I'm afraid to do so.

[blm]

65. LOLOL. Like I should replace my 4 decades of reading REAL government reports, documents,

and legitimate investigative journalism with whatever propaganda you came up with when you googled?

That might play with some, but, I don't think you have a clue who you are trying to 'guide' with this crock of crap you're posting.

Why don't YOU google and see why corpmedia set its sights on Kerry so blatantly in 2003-4?



FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
June 2, 2003
Kerry Seeks to Reverse FCC's "Wrongheaded Vote"
Commission decision may violate laws protecting small businesses; Kerry to file Resolution of Disapproval

Washington, DC - Senator John Kerry today announced plans to file a "Resolution of Disapproval" as a means to overturn today's decision by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to raise media ownership caps and loosen various media cross-ownership rules.

Kerry will soon introduce the resolution seeking to reverse this action under the Congressional Review Act and Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act on the grounds that the decision may violate the laws intended to protect America's small businesses and allow them an opportunity to compete.

As Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, Kerry expressed concern that the FCC's decision will hurt localism, reduce diversity, and will allow media monopolies to flourish. This raises significant concerns about the potential negative impacts the decision will have on small businesses and their ability to compete in today's media marketplace.

In a statement released earlier today regarding the FCC's decision, Kerry said:
"Nothing is more important in a democracy than public access to debates and information, which lift up our discourse and give Americans an opportunity to make honest informed choices. Today's wrongheaded vote by the Republican members of the FCC to loosen media ownership rules shows a dangerous indifference to the consolidation of power in the hands of a few large entities rather than promoting diversity and independence at the local level. The FCC should do more than rubber stamp the business plans of narrow economic interests.

"Today's vote is a complete dereliction of duty. The Commissioners are well aware that these rules greatly influence the competitive structure of the industry and protect the public's access to multiple sources of information and media. It is the Commission's responsibility to ensure that the rules serve our national goals of diversity, competition, and localism in media. With today's vote, they shirked that responsibility and have dismissed any serious discussion about the impact of media consolidation on our own democracy."

[UglyGreed]

66. I was not talking about

John Kerry......................

[blm]

68. Doesn't matter - Murdoch does exact same thing EVERY election cycle. His donations are an

effective counter he can point to when he is rightfully singled out for using his entire mass media network to target Democratic candidates and undermine Dem presidents and Dem policies.

Sheesh. Is a little REALITY too much for some to bear?

[UglyGreed]

72. Effective counter????

the alert failed sorry.....

[blm]

75. LOL - If you think I alerted then you prove you don't know one thing about me. Which

matches what you know about Kerry. And what you know about Murdoch and his standard ops.

[UglyGreed]

76. Well sorry

I just thought since you were getting personal by calling me gullible instead of just stating your position you might be upset.

[blm]

86. My position is crystal clear. Perhaps the fog needs clearing on your end.

.

[UglyGreed]

89. Perhaps you should

move on and cool off.... here have some ice cream

[blm]

93. Don't bother. Pretty sure breitbart is more to your taste.

This IS what you wanted me and others to 'find' on google, isn't it? You know, the one you were too fearful to post? The one you've been repeating without attribution.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/01/29/fox-is-one-of-the-biggest-donors-to-the-clintons/

[UglyGreed]

94. Keep going you are on a

roll.............

[UglyGreed]

95. Hope you don't

catch anything going to such websites............

[Trajan]

51. What I learned on this thread

Everybody is STUPID

Thanks blm!

[Rosa Luxemburg]

58. Murdoch can float all he wants

face down in a pond

[SusanCalvin]

83. I care as much about Murdoch's political statements

As I do about Nader's political statements.

Difference is, I don't care about *any* of Murdoch's statements.

[Nanjeanne]

84. If Murdoch says it - it must be true. Kerry shouldn't demean his great job as SoS by such a stunt

[restorefreedom]

104. kerry wil not allow himself to be used

for tptb's prurient purposes. neither will biden.

more tripe to try and discourage the revolution

weak and pathetic tea

[karynnj]

113. nothing in his past suggests he would and it would leave No SOS

There is no way that anyone would be confirmed and who would want the job for a half year. Not to mention, Kerry is doing exceptional work that he has his heart in that would suffer.

Not to mention, Teresa is very likely not up to it.

[restorefreedom]

114. too bad about teresa, and agree that he is doing amazing work as sos.

he seems quite invested in his work, and i believe he is the best sos i have seen in my lifetime.

[blm]

116. Completely agree.

And it is is sad that Teresa has been dealing with health issues….I miss her integrity, her voice, and her passion.

[restorefreedom]

117. yes. all the best to her. nt

[karynnj]

119. His work as SoS is such that he has a better legacy

Than most Presidents. I seriously doubt that he and Obama would sacrifice the possible things they can do together over the rest of Obama's term.

The Iran deal and the Paris Climate deal both are landmark accomplishments that reflect the two of the three biggest causes of his entire career. The first avoided a war that was getting close to inevitable. The second came out of decades of work on climate change. That he shared the latter one with Teresa likely made it all the sweeter.

His Davos speech spoke of corruption working against god government in many countries - and in that speech as well as his farewell Senate speech, he included our campaign finance system.

[restorefreedom]

120. i was thinking the same thing

about him having an amazing legacy, perhaps more so than if he had been hamstrung by an obstructionist wacko congress as president.

[zappaman]

106. No. n/t

[mylye2222]

122. In fact RM' s last low is more designew to discredit JK than HRC.

Remember 2004 ... and Faux Noise.

[arcane1]

126. Great, another "Yes, let's invade Iraq!" candidate.

Just what we need