WBEZ | Susan Rice http://www.wbez.org/tags/susan-rice Latest from WBEZ Chicago Public Radio en The shameful take down of Susan Rice http://www.wbez.org/blogs/achy-obejas/2012-12/shameful-take-down-susan-rice-104388 <p><div class="image-insert-image "><img alt="" class="image-original_image" src="http://www.wbez.org/system/files/styles/original_image/llo/insert-images/RS6825_AP071218016963-scr.jpg" style="height: 413px; width: 620px;" title="Susan Rice and Barack Obama during his first campaign; Rice was one of Obama's earliest backers. (AP)" /></div><p>U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/susan-rice-withdraws-as-candidate-for-secretary-of-state/2012/12/13/17ad344e-4567-11e2-8e70-e1993528222d_story.html?hpid=z1">will not be the next Secretary of State </a>after asking President Barack Obama to withdraw her name for consideration from the post.</p><p>And, frankly, I&rsquo;m kind of relieved. This means that time and energy won&rsquo;t be wasted on a fight the GOP was determined to have to once more gridlock everything in Congress so that the president will have as thin a legacy as possible. (Good luck with that, given Obamacare.) It&rsquo;s absolutely certain Rice would have had the votes for confirmation but it&rsquo;s also absolutely certain that wouldn&rsquo;t have stopped Republicans from doing everything possible to drag the matter out.<br /><br />I&rsquo;m also incensed at how this deal went down: a truly cheap shot on the part of a couple of senators and the right wing blogosphere having a tantrum over Obama&rsquo;s continued presidency and needing to strike out at someone -- <em>anything</em> -- that could hurt him. This is spite and nothing else.<br /><br />I have no idea whether Rice would have been a good Secretary of State -- her tenure at the UN suggests she might been exemplary, perhaps even eclipsing the current Secretary, but her financial interests in energy companies, particularly Canadian <a href="http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/11/28/1165483/-Susan-Rice-s-issue-is-not-Benghazi#">tar sands</a>, would have complicated her nomination with progressives, and certainly, if confirmed, would have left her open to conflict of interest charges in terms of her duties.<br /><br />But what I do know is that Rice was hounded out of the nominating process by a handful of Republican senators because they needed a target for their anger and resentment over Obama&rsquo;s seismic election victory. And Rice, a high-level appointee with close personal ties to the president, made for a perfect target.<br /><br />Because the GOP&rsquo;s number one goal for the last four years has been not to create jobs, not to ensure the nation&rsquo;s security, not to fix the economic mess created by one of their own, but to deny a Obama second term -- to fix the 2008 electorate&rsquo;s historical error, if you will, and return things to how they presumably used to be.<br /><br />The audacity of the president&rsquo;s 2012 triumph is that it has left this sad crop of white men with no purpose whatsoever. Obama&rsquo;s victory wasn&rsquo;t merely personal -- a stiff middle finger in the face of all those who insisted he was alien and and un-American -- but a full-on view of the future: an America that is more diverse, more of color, more <em>democratic</em> than it&rsquo;s ever been.<br /><br />The 2012 election was the very last time a political party will be able to <a href="http://www.politico.com/story/2012/12/will-gop-notice-electorate-has-changed-84485.html">depend on white votes</a> for a national victory -- which means that all those extreme regional wins (Texas, Mississippi, Kentucky -- I&rsquo;m talking to you) will ultimately have to be moderated as well.<br /><br />Is Susan Rice guilty of <a href="http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/12/susan-rice-withdraws-state.php?ref=fpnewsfeed">some kind of cover up</a> about the goings on in Benghazi? Pretty unlikely. Is she guilty of partisanship in her television appearances that fateful Sunday morning? Perhaps.<br /><br />But what&rsquo;s galling is that the two senators behind the campaign to kill her promotion were <a href="http://www.buzzfeed.com/zekejmiller/graham-and-mccain-defended-condoleeza-rice-over-ira">two of the loudest voices</a> protecting former Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice after she was caught out and out lying about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq -- a lie that wasn&rsquo;t promulgated on Sunday TV shows but in congressional testimony, a lie which did not influence Sunday TV viewers before an election but which lead us into a war that has cost nearly <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Iraq_War">5,000 American lives and more than 110,000 civilian lives</a>.</p><p><em>For shame, gentlemen, for shame.</em></p></p> Fri, 14 Dec 2012 12:03:00 -0600 http://www.wbez.org/blogs/achy-obejas/2012-12/shameful-take-down-susan-rice-104388