John Kerry

It is funny how many of them just do not get Kerry - or Clinton, for that matter.

Even when not mentioning Clinton, there are strange things like Matt Viser pointing out Kerry went up the stairs to board the plane without turning back to wave. Yet, had he waved, I suspect that would be commented on as if it were a problem as well.

I remember well the hoopla of the early Clinton trips - with the hyped articles on how valuable her star power was and the deliberate ignoring of the faux pas that did - as they would for anyone - happened.

One article spoke of how Hillary had used social media and suggested that this was not something Kerry was likely to do -- ignoring that he had used all these things well as Senator. It looks from the links that his London press conference and other events went very well. The German event with young people seemed to go as well as similar meetings he had with young people in Massachusetts. If the media were honest, this is something Kerry does as well - if not better than Clinton.

I really liked reading the transcript of his comments at the embassy. ( http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/02/205183.htm ) What struck me is how well he really did understand their lives because of his own youth.)

I also thought many strange in making it seem a bad thing that they thought Kerry would tackle big issues and that his models were people like George Marshall, not Hillary Clinton. That they make this comment as they imply, but often do not say, that HRC was not one of the greatest SoS seems odd. He is a very different person, with different skills and a different history.

The good thing is that NONE of the meaningless criticisms have much to do with Kerry doing his job. One thing that is probably true is that if Kerry were to have 4 years similar to Clinton's, the media would be pretty negative and say he did not live up to his expectations. Yet, given the praise for HRC, what does this mean?