Not to mention, I was really pleased to see how personable and down to earth Kerry was in speaking to the House Foreign Relations Committee - even though the committee reflects the highly gerrymandered districts. No one could fault him for not being respectful of them or the process. (The same could not be said for some of them!)
It is interesting that from both hearings the right got very little which with to attack Kerry. One thing the right has tried to use - though it may bother us - I think backfires. That is Kerry speaking of Netanyahu predicting the Iran war would be good. The right has had a field day pointing out Kerry's vote --- but they have NO video or audio of Kerry saying anything remotely like what Netanyahu said. Not to mention, it doesn't change the point that Netanyahu was very wrong and it brings up the specter of war. In fact, in their desire to attack Kerry, they gave huge coverage to what Netanyahu said then and also what he said re the interim agreement.
The other was a little aside near the end of a hearing speaking of all the chaotic problems, noting the fact was that the world has less violence today than it averaged in the last century. He did say this was counter intuitive. I heard Steven Pinker, who has carefully measured the probability of dying due to violence, speak at a UVM speech - http://archive.burlingtonfreepress.com/article/20131009/NEWS0213/310090017/UVM-guest-speaker-Steven-Pinker-theorizes-about-the-decline-of-violence It is an interesting perspective and it does put in context the idea that what we are currently facing is far worse than anything in the past. (even looking at the Bush years vs now, the number of people killed in the middle east was obviously higher the days of shock and awe and 2006/2007 civil war than now - though the ISIS barbarity gets more coverage.) The RW has had a field day with this - misinterpreting it to be speaking just of terrorists.
= new reply since forum marked as read